One reason why you should add a way to view space-time curve

What did you draw?
User avatar
robly18
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 2:03 pm

One reason why you should add a way to view space-time curve

Post by robly18 »

Lagrange points in r^0

Please.
Convincing people that 0.9999... = 1 since 2012
User avatar
testtubegames
Site Admin
Posts: 1148
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 7:54 pm

Re: One reason why you should add a way to view space-time c

Post by testtubegames »

Space-time Curve? Do you mean that in a general relativistic sorta way? Or are you just talking about drawing the topography of the gravity wells?

By the by, I couldn't find much in the way of "non r^-2 LP discussion", but a quick back-of-the-envelope check showed me that there *are* indeed Lagrange Points in r^0, and perhaps unsurprisingly, they're much easier to find than in the case of r^-2. Fewer squared denominators makes life easier. Maybe I'll check my math by seeing if I can get them to work in the simulator...
User avatar
robly18
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 2:03 pm

Re: One reason why you should add a way to view space-time c

Post by robly18 »

testtubegames wrote:Space-time Curve? Do you mean that in a general relativistic sorta way? Or are you just talking about drawing the topography of the gravity wells?

By the by, I couldn't find much in the way of "non r^-2 LP discussion", but a quick back-of-the-envelope check showed me that there *are* indeed Lagrange Points in r^0, and perhaps unsurprisingly, they're much easier to find than in the case of r^-2. Fewer squared denominators makes life easier. Maybe I'll check my math by seeing if I can get them to work in the simulator...
Yes, the topography of the wells. Didn't quite know what to call them, and that wouldn't fit in the title anyway.
Convincing people that 0.9999... = 1 since 2012
A Random Player
Posts: 523
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:54 pm

Re: One reason why you should add a way to view space-time c

Post by A Random Player »

robly18 wrote:
testtubegames wrote:Space-time Curve? Do you mean that in a general relativistic sorta way? Or are you just talking about drawing the topography of the gravity wells?

By the by, I couldn't find much in the way of "non r^-2 LP discussion", but a quick back-of-the-envelope check showed me that there *are* indeed Lagrange Points in r^0, and perhaps unsurprisingly, they're much easier to find than in the case of r^-2. Fewer squared denominators makes life easier. Maybe I'll check my math by seeing if I can get them to work in the simulator...
Yes, the topography of the wells. Didn't quite know what to call them, and that wouldn't fit in the title anyway.
I think gravitational potential would work. But that doesn't fit.
$1 = 100¢ = (10¢)^2 = ($0.10)^2 = $0.01 = 1¢ [1]
Always check your units or you will have no money!
19683
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 12:15 pm

Re: One reason why you should add a way to view space-time c

Post by 19683 »

testtubegames wrote:Space-time Curve? Do you mean that in a general relativistic sorta way? Or are you just talking about drawing the topography of the gravity wells?

By the by, I couldn't find much in the way of "non r^-2 LP discussion", but a quick back-of-the-envelope check showed me that there *are* indeed Lagrange Points in r^0, and perhaps unsurprisingly, they're much easier to find than in the case of r^-2. Fewer squared denominators makes life easier. Maybe I'll check my math by seeing if I can get them to work in the simulator...
General Relativity would be cool too.

Please. ;)
Binomial Theorem: ((a+b)^n)= sum k=0->k=n((n!(a^(n-k))(b^k))/(k!(n-k)!))
User avatar
robly18
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 2:03 pm

Re: One reason why you should add a way to view space-time c

Post by robly18 »

19683 wrote:
testtubegames wrote:Space-time Curve? Do you mean that in a general relativistic sorta way? Or are you just talking about drawing the topography of the gravity wells?

By the by, I couldn't find much in the way of "non r^-2 LP discussion", but a quick back-of-the-envelope check showed me that there *are* indeed Lagrange Points in r^0, and perhaps unsurprisingly, they're much easier to find than in the case of r^-2. Fewer squared denominators makes life easier. Maybe I'll check my math by seeing if I can get them to work in the simulator...
General Relativity would be cool too.

Please. ;)
Perhaps with the ability to use clocks on bodies, make stars emit photons and give you a higher range of mass. I want to make a star so massive that light can't escape. This would actually be a nice way to study black holes.
Convincing people that 0.9999... = 1 since 2012
19683
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 12:15 pm

Re: One reason why you should add a way to view space-time c

Post by 19683 »

robly18 wrote:
19683 wrote:
testtubegames wrote:Space-time Curve? Do you mean that in a general relativistic sorta way? Or are you just talking about drawing the topography of the gravity wells?

By the by, I couldn't find much in the way of "non r^-2 LP discussion", but a quick back-of-the-envelope check showed me that there *are* indeed Lagrange Points in r^0, and perhaps unsurprisingly, they're much easier to find than in the case of r^-2. Fewer squared denominators makes life easier. Maybe I'll check my math by seeing if I can get them to work in the simulator...
General Relativity would be cool too.

Please. ;)
Perhaps with the ability to use clocks on bodies, make stars emit photons and give you a higher range of mass. I want to make a star so massive that light can't escape. This would actually be a nice way to study black holes.
Stars could have "lifetimes", so that after a certain time has passed, they explode and collapse.

You could also put "life" on planets, then see how long it survives.
Binomial Theorem: ((a+b)^n)= sum k=0->k=n((n!(a^(n-k))(b^k))/(k!(n-k)!))
User avatar
robly18
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 2:03 pm

Re: One reason why you should add a way to view space-time c

Post by robly18 »

19683 wrote:
robly18 wrote:
19683 wrote: General Relativity would be cool too.

Please. ;)
Perhaps with the ability to use clocks on bodies, make stars emit photons and give you a higher range of mass. I want to make a star so massive that light can't escape. This would actually be a nice way to study black holes.
Stars could have "lifetimes", so that after a certain time has passed, they explode and collapse.

You could also put "life" on planets, then see how long it survives.
Andy, you have two options unless you want us to break into your house:
Start coding this. Now.
Or teach us how to code because I WANT THIS DONE

Also, I wonder if moons would live longer than their planets, seeing as they are in constant movement.
Convincing people that 0.9999... = 1 since 2012
A Random Player
Posts: 523
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:54 pm

Re: One reason why you should add a way to view space-time c

Post by A Random Player »

robly18 wrote:
19683 wrote:
robly18 wrote:
Perhaps with the ability to use clocks on bodies, make stars emit photons and give you a higher range of mass. I want to make a star so massive that light can't escape. This would actually be a nice way to study black holes.
Stars could have "lifetimes", so that after a certain time has passed, they explode and collapse.

You could also put "life" on planets, then see how long it survives.
Andy, you have two options unless you want us to break into your house:
Start coding this. Now.
Or teach us how to code because I WANT THIS DONE

Also, I wonder if moons would live longer than their planets, seeing as they are in constant movement.
They would probably either get eaten first (assuming stars will enter red giant phase) or get flung from their orbits, lasting quite a long time, if not forever. Unless they're smashed first.

To code: Get pygame, and learn about Python with its awesome tutorial. (you never said in what language!)
Last edited by A Random Player on Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
$1 = 100¢ = (10¢)^2 = ($0.10)^2 = $0.01 = 1¢ [1]
Always check your units or you will have no money!
19683
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 12:15 pm

Re: One reason why you should add a way to view space-time c

Post by 19683 »

robly18 wrote: Andy, you have two options unless you want us to break into your house:
Start coding this. Now.
Or teach us how to code because I WANT THIS DONE

Also, I wonder if moons would live longer than their planets, seeing as they are in constant movement.
I don't think moons would live longer, because they are moving against the planets orbit half the time.

If you want to learn coding (so do I), Andy uses action script 3. I'm as frustrated as you are about how slow the programming is.
Binomial Theorem: ((a+b)^n)= sum k=0->k=n((n!(a^(n-k))(b^k))/(k!(n-k)!))
Post Reply