EVE Search - Physics in EVE Online (University assignment, please answer!)

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Physics in EVE Online (University assignment, please answer!)

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Plim Gallente Oursulaert Technology Institute	Posted - 2008.11.06 13:46:00 - [61] The purpose of the scientific method is to develop an understanding of the thing laying infront of you, by subjecting it to examination, rather than subjecting it to vague gibberish. Much like this thread has been. In responce to the OP, gameplay should not be sacrificed for realism. So many of the design choices where ingame physics don't compare to real world physics seem to make sense. EVE 'Megacorp or STFU' Online
Mithfindel Gallente Gariushi Foundation	Posted - 2008.11.06 13:52:00 - [62] Also noteworthy on the subject, real-time games are actually games with short turns. If you spin it enough you might be able to tie it with quantum theory (smallest possible change: in EVE, time isn't continuous even if it appears so). This ties in with speed: If you have something going very fast, and trying to get it within a radius of another moving object (say, interceptor and a FAST missile), in a non-continuous time the distance moved during the smallest quantum of time may actually cause the missile to continuously overshoot the target, making it run out of fuel. This reveals also a problem with superfast missiles in the EVE physics model: Assuming that only the individual points at the discrete time points are calculated, it could be possible for the missile to overshoot even a stationary target if the missile would be fast enough. This problem would be negated, however, by calculating whether the target object was at the line travelled by the missile. This method isn't applicable in the case of the moving target, since if we assume that the hypothetical ultrafast missile was flying exactly towards the target, a fast target would move away from the line the missile traveled before the missile would reach that point.
Space Fascist	Posted - 2008.11.06 14:05:00 - [63] Focused afocal maser.
Kendon Riddick	Posted - 2008.11.06 14:14:00 - [64] without a speed limit: imagine a freighter undocking and then going AFK just after DT... he comes back 10 hours later to find his freighter zipping along at 25km/s. might as well log off instead of trying to slow down ;p
Omarvelous Caldari Destry's Lounge	Posted - 2008.11.06 14:54:00 - [65] Originally by: Chaos Incarnate You mean to say my internet spaceships are really internet submarines?! Aww That made me laugh Sup brosef! Destry's Lounge is looking for a few good drunks - contact me in game.
Bimjo Caldari Domination. Sc0rched Earth	Posted - 2008.11.06 16:03:00 - [66] Originally by: Kendon Rid**** without a speed limit: imagine a freighter undocking and then going AFK just after DT... he comes back 10 hours later to find his freighter zipping along at 25km/s. might as well log off instead of trying to slow down ;p assuming freighter is slow(which it is) to accelerate and we give it a figure of 2 m/s/s(2 meters per sec per sec acceleration) as my charon takes about 40 seconds to go from 0 to 80 m/s , then after 10 hours of acceleration my freighter would be hitting a speed of 72 km/s approximately,your frieghter has already been QR speed nerfed
Javius Rong Caldari Sigillum Militum Xpisti	Posted - 2008.11.06 18:22:00 - [67] Originally by: CCP Lingorm On the topic of EVE's "Physics Engine", it is not a Newtonian Physics Engine, it is actually based on a Fluid Dynamics Engine, assuming that Space has some substance to it and thus if you turn of the Engine you will slowdown form the friction of the 'stuff'. RyanD has given you the Reasons this was chosen (Game Design and Network Communications). But if you look at EVE's physics from a Fluid Dynamics formula you will find that it is a lot more accurate (it is actually a nifty bit of coding to get it right). This is poorly stated. What is should say is the physics engine includes frictional forces which are speed dependent (which is still based upon Newtonian physics). EvE does not use a relativistic (Einsteiniam (sp?)) engine where the mass and velocity/acceleration are dependent upon each other.
Mithfindel Gallente Gariushi Foundation	Posted - 2008.11.06 20:28:00 - [68] Most models aren't perfect. On low speeds, the Newtonian model approximates well the relativistic one. Technically, if you want to name it after Einstein, it'd be Einsteinian, though the principle of time dilation (and similar effects) is actually known as the Lorentz transformation after a guy who invented it before Einstein, but thought of it as just a mathematical trick to make the observations to fit the Newtonian model. Might be slightly off, the parts of the specific theory of relativity were on my second year in the Uni, some time since those and can't be bothered to check. That said, RyanD is correct on the sense of a "Newtonian model" as used in space games. Though when we take drag into account, the same model of the three Newtonian laws fits. (I.e. sum(F)=ma doesn't have just engine thrust, but instead sum(F) = F1 + F2 = f_engine + (-kx'), where x' is the derivative of the location of the ship, i.e. the ship's velocity.) Gah, I'd better head to bed and get some sleep.
Bish Ounen Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.11.06 20:37:00 - [69] Originally by: CCP Lingorm On the topic of EVE's "Physics Engine", it is not a Newtonian Physics Engine, it is actually based on a Fluid Dynamics Engine, assuming that Space has some substance to it and thus if you turn of the Engine you will slowdown form the friction of the 'stuff'. RyanD has given you the Reasons this was chosen (Game Design and Network Communications). But if you look at EVE's physics from a Fluid Dynamics formula you will find that it is a lot more accurate (it is actually a nifty bit of coding to get it right). Fascinating.. So basically, Eve's physics design is modeled around the 18th century "aether" concept? I had long suspected this, but it's really nice to have confirmation of it. Cool! Now, if we can do something about "steampunking" the Minnie ships up a bit it would be EVEN BETTER! Tactical Logistics using the last T1 Frigate hull!
djenghis jan Amarr 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.11.06 23:33:00 - [70] The ships in eve are far to rigid to be real. Also rocking due too explosions, no way! Things would brake off or stuff would be blown off. Also ramming an asteroid or a billboard, even a little one and it stays in place while your ship bumps off. Battleships without small guns to shoot frigates? huh? why? to save money?

Sol ExAstris	Posted - 2008.11.07 02:20:00 - [71] As a BA holder in physics I can point out a few other things about EVE's physics (or lack thereof in this case) that might interest you for your paper. The Doppler shift is represented when your ship enters warp, but it is horribly miscalculated as you would shift through the entire spectrum quite rapidly until you couldn't even recognize the universe anymore because you would be seeing wavelengths so far off from normal. Then once you pass the speed of light the equation breaks (gives you non-real numbers if you're applying the relativistic compensation). Instead EVE shows a very slight shift towards blue when you're moving several hundred times c. doh. Their explanation of faster than light travel is also bogus (but then again they all are given our current understanding of physics ). Their ftl drives use "depleted vacuums" to move the extra stuff out of the way to allow objects to travel even faster. The reality is (if my understanding is correct) that the particle speed limit is actually based on the strengths of the forces involved that propel those particles/waves. In the case of light this is the electrostatic constant of the universe and the magnetic permeability constant of the universe. Those two constants can actually derive the speed of light for you, so that limit has nothing to do with "what is in the way". The fluid dynamics model does indeed more accurately model EVE ship's motion. This can not only be seen in top speeds and the acceleration curves used, but also in the rotational acceleration. In the real world, without fluid drag over a streamlined surface, your foreward velocity has no bearing on your ability to accelerate yourself in a circle. You can jump in circles and juke side to side just as easily in an aircraft moving 700mph as you can on the surface, however EVE thinks you can't. This would be much more akin to a speedboat wanting to change facing but still move 100mph in the same direction he was going, it just doesn't work for the boat. Collision modeling in EVE is basically big bouncy balls in space between ships and collidable objects and is effectively turned off when entering/exiting warp. Your ship would obviously not take kindly to ramming a station at 10,000m/s or more. Same for planets of course. Inertia of cans and wrecks is even worse as they inexplicably "anchor" themselves to space. Volumes can be a more basic physic problem should you like to mention those as well. The 1400mm artillery would have to use shells barely a centimeter thick to fit them into the volume they take when put into your cargohold. Then there are the giant sealed containers that take up 3,000 cubic meters of cargobay space but can hold 3,900 cubic meters of space within them. Scotty says, 'Ye canno' change the laws of physics'. Eve says you can. Further volume problems can be seen if you check the volumes of ships listed in their descriptions and compare them to the models actual volumes. The Hyperion and Thanatos are great examples of this. Curiously, laser weapons in EVE act like turrets with the same limitations as rail guns and conventional projectile weaponry. Even modern day lasers of large proportions can be aimed with incredible accuracy (check out the modified 747 with the laser on the nose to shoot down ICBM's). Random thoughts might include... what happens when someone uses a plastic ship against the Gallente? Those magnetometric sensors might not register anything. And why do the gravimetric sensors have their locking time based on the targets signature radius and not its mass? How does anyone in EVE communicate instantly if you have to use a jump drive of some sort to "clear" out the area of depleted particles? Shouldn't the signal be limited to c when traveling through a system instead of over the 'depleted space' network of gates? Anyways, there are a few that weren't mentioned throughly yet. Hope they help. Good luck on your report mate
HowardStern	Posted - 2008.11.07 03:36:00 - [72] Originally by: Baal Aristaeus 1. ON the topic of max velocity, why did CCP put it in at all? Do you think there should be no max velocity?
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.11.07 05:06:00 - [73] Keep in mind EVE physics is not Newtonian, it is based off of Fluid Dynamics. The fluid in EVE is equivalent to the viscosity of oil. Hope that helps.... Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts. Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2008.11.07 05:32:00 - [74] Originally by: sg3s Holy crap, you didn't notice the water like features of eve?... Man you're horrible. Truly, your internets flames burn with the heat of a thousand suns, or perhaps a three year old playing with matches _____________________ The unofficial faceless Achura alt of EVE Online
Judas Yanakov Caldari Corp 1 Allstars	Posted - 2008.11.07 05:40:00 - [75] 1. Max velocity could be an interpretation of subatomic particle collisions, i.e. small meteorites, random debris, and such which at a high enough velocity would start putting serious holes in any material. Bigger ships also have a bigger surface area, meaning more impacts. Therefore, they must move slower. That is only one thought, and i know the armor should be able to compensate, but hey, as has been said, its a game. 2. Game mechanics limitations. No other explanation. The answer is ALWAYS 42.
Silver Night Caldari Naqam Exalted.	Posted - 2008.11.07 05:42:00 - [76] Edited by: Silver Night on 07/11/2008 05:42:49 The Cargo container and sound issues are actually explained somewhere. The cargo container thing is on purpose, and explained with a bunch of hand waving. The Sound part though: Sound is synthesized by your pod. Someone actually calculated the viscosity of the fluid that apparently fills the eve universe once. I believe it is a light oil. That's right. We are all flying around in a universe filled with massage oil. -------------- The Clown Man. GLS Mr. State Caldari Patriot. Sansha's Nation Supporter
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2008.11.07 05:50:00 - [77] Originally by: Xenomorphea Well, since 2003 when EVE was introduced CPU processing has increased on average by almost a factor 10. What is 40,000 calculations a second in the time of Tera- and Peta-Flops computing? :-) Cheers, Xeno Well, its more than just 40,000 per second, the server is just going to have to calculate 40,000 different 'does this line intersect this circle/ellipsoid' attempts, each of which will have a few individual calculations in it, multiplications and so forth, which is a lot of time. Not to mention that if you scale it up to 500v500, you've now got 250,000 calls, which is a lot - and the server is already limited in such battles as is. Most other MMO games don't bother with players blocking LOS because of the calculations (among others) However, like I said, there are probably CPU effective ways of simulating LOS without necessarily implementing it directly. _____________________ The unofficial faceless Achura alt of EVE Online
Fennicus Amarr Shoot To Thrill	Posted - 2008.11.07 15:00:00 - [78] Originally by: Mecinia Lua Keep in mind EVE physics is not Newtonian, it is based off of Fluid Dynamics I see what you're trying to say but you're spreading some confusion about the words involved. "Newtonian" usually refers to anything not relativistic; thus, you can have Newtonian fluid dynamics and relativistic fluid dynamics (usually reserved for studying various astrophysical events, such as supernovae). I think you meant to say that, instead of space being a perfect vacuum, it's more of a viscous fluid. And we're all well aware of this by now. I really don't think the game engine actually works using the Navier Stokes equations, it's not necessary for a single particle (and I should know, I'm doing a PhD based around solving the fluid equations numerically) but rather a simple mechanism involving thrust and a speed-dependent resistance.
Jurgen Cartis Caldari Interstellar Corporation of Exploration	Posted - 2008.11.08 18:50:00 - [79] Originally by: Spike 68 Originally by: Chaos Incarnate You mean to say my internet spaceships are really internet submarines?! Fire Torpedoes 1 and 4! They've spotted us! Crash Dive, Crash Dive! What do you mean there's nowhere to dive to? Dammit Bernhard, what did you do this time?! -------------------- Originally by: Crumplecorn I prefer launching bathtubs of antimatter at my opponents over pointing an open DVD player at them, even if the bathtubs do miss a lot. So no.
Chiralos Epitoth Fleetyards	Posted - 2008.11.09 03:28:00 - [80] Here's one I've never seen mentioned: some planets rotate waaaay too fast. I haven't timed it but the period looks like its only a few minutes, which means the surface is moving way faster than orbital velocity. Amarr Victor.

Hitachi Morimoto Gallente Hematite Rose Bionic Dawn	Posted - 2008.11.18 22:54:00 - [81] An answer to why ships move so slowly compared to what they could be going: 1: Assuming that our ships have a self contained power source that can run near indefinitely, the propulsion drives would run off something energy based. Say, an ion drive. These drives achieve slow speeds that would be used for precise maneuvering, Ship to ship combat, and limited transportation. 2: The advent of warp drives reduced the need for intense speeds, and such they don't have the capability apart from afterburners and MWD. Solid rocket boosters, like those used today have limited fuel, and take up a lot of room. Sure, it's nice to strap a SRB on that curse and achieve 300 KPS, but it wouldn't be practical. 3: Imagine going at 20 KPS and accidentally bumping into a cloaked titan, causing an instant slowdown (Or in real life a catastrophic hull failure.) Now imagine what that would do to your body. Despite being immersed in fluid, inertia exists still. I doubt an inertial dampener or the like could protect you from being turned into bioputty.
Chelone Ministry of War	Posted - 2008.11.19 00:07:00 - [82] Originally by: Baal Aristaeus 1. ON the topic of max velocity, why did CCP put it in at all? Easy. Real physics (unlimited newtonian speed) is horrible for space battles. Try an old game called Aliants, if you can run it on an emulator. The combat consisted of accelerating like crazy toward each other, firing madly while the ships flew past each other at ridiculous speed, then spending 2 minutes decelerating to repeat the annoying process all over again. Terrible game, mainly because of the "realistic" combat. Eve, in short, "takes the derivative" of everything. Max acceleration becomes max velocity. Turning off your engines, instead of putting you at constant speed puts you (eventually) at a constant position. (i.e. stopped.) It makes it far more sane. Also, max v is plausible, assuming all of Eve space was in a nebula, all with the same density... Originally by: Baal Aristaeus 2. Moving planets and moons in solar systems. Why does not planets, moons, stations, asteroid belts and rotate around their respective pivot point? What I mean is; for example planets rotate around their own axis, but not around the sun. Why is this? Part laziness. Partly because it would do a lot of "unfortunate" things to objects in space. Log out for a couple days and all your bookmarks are wrong. Would bookmarks be based on planetary coordinates, solar coordinates, galactic coordinates etc? Gets too complicated. I can add to your list... - We break the light barrier - We can warp through planets - We can be very close to or inside stars without incinerating - Planets or other large bodies don't pull on our ships with gravitational force - Our ships have seemingly infinite fuel (though I suppose they could burn some of that nebular gas we fly through) - Gamma/XRay/UV lasers don't completely irradiate ships crews & pod pilots before making a dent in the ship's armor/hull - Full/empty cargoholds don't affect ship mass/inertia I could list more but I'm busy.
0vermama	Posted - 2008.11.19 00:12:00 - [83] 2) imagine you make a safe and after some days you warp at your safe and there is a moon whit a POS
The Tzar Malicious Intentions	Posted - 2008.11.24 13:24:00 - [84] A true vacuum is just a theoretical end point to base 'what if' type calculations on. Space 'carries' light (along with many other wave/particles) which exhibits characteristics of particulate matter therefore space is not a true vacuum. Even photons create a small amount of drag in sufficient numbers, hence the concept of a 'light-sail' locomoted spaceship. __________________________________________ 'Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear intelligent until they speak' __________________________________________
Alexeph Stoekai Stoekai Corp	Posted - 2008.11.24 14:57:00 - [85] Originally by: Sol ExAstris How does anyone in EVE communicate instantly if you have to use a jump drive of some sort to "clear" out the area of depleted particles? Shouldn't the signal be limited to c when traveling through a system instead of over the 'depleted space' network of gates? It's quantum. -----
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles Zzz	Posted - 2008.11.24 15:23:00 - [86] I'm trying to think of some that haven't been mentioned so far - how about these: Gas giant planets that are too dense to be made of gas (look at the attributes of a few planets, you'll see what I mean) Abundant naturally occurring technetium (an element with no stable isotopes) Teleportation of objects over distances of up to 6km (moving stuff from one POS structure to another when your ship is up to 3km away from each) Tractor beams / stasis webifiers Violation of Newtonian relativity - for no good reason, your ship always lies in the plane of the local solar system when at rest. Some items have a volume of less than 4% of the volume of their component minerals, and can then be reprocessed to get the minerals back (contact me if interested) The alignment of a ship is separate from its velocity - large ships tend to enter warp sideways, despite only having rear thrusters. Stargates have such large masses that they fall within their own Schwarzschild radii (of approximately 0.1AU!) and by rights should collapse to form black holes, destroying large parts of the solar systems around them. Cargo containers can hold more than their own volume in goods. Ships are treated as ethereal when undocking, and if two undock on the same trajectory at the same time, one gets stuck inside the other for a few seconds before the server notices the discrepancy. Objects can be 'anchored' in space in such a way that collisions have no effect on them. --- Can't afford that BPO? Look here. 20:1 mineral compression The EVE f@h team
Jackie Fisher Galactic Defence Consortium	Posted - 2008.11.24 15:29:00 - [87] Originally by: Bish Ounen So basically, Eve's physics design is modeled around the 18th century "aether" concept? Your MichelsonûMorley Interferometer is well aimed at the Eve Physics engine, inflicting 4098 damage.
Cas Blaire	Posted - 2008.12.01 11:57:00 - [88] That must be easy to implement (and will bring more difference in weaponry): Kinetic damage from artillery [and] rockets must affect enemy's turrets orientation if it's low on shields (if it's hard to implement that effect for entire ship's orientation). Maybe drops of their tracking speed (* kinetic damage/ship mass) for a short time or some other methods for more easier programming and save of traffic (dunno what kind of math goes on servers to drop traffic). Sure lasers [and maybe] hybrids must not do that, so balancing will be required (or maybe lasers can also do so when shields is online).
Aisley Tyrion DAB G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.12.01 12:21:00 - [89] Originally by: sg3s First of all, please remember that this is eve, and not real life... And you can find 'scientific' articles about how stuff works within eve in the back story section of this site. They explain it some detail how faster than light works and how stargates suposedly work etc... According to the 'scientific' articles and background lore stargates should only exist on binary systems (no pun intended ) and only one stargate per system. And I have yet to see a single binary star system in EVE... Source
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.12.01 12:27:00 - [90] Old thread. Hope someone pointed out to the guy that the 'thrusters' on ships aren't necessarily how they move. I'd love to see the people who take issue with EVE's ship movements tackle the issue of a car moving just one tiny off center 'thruster'. - DesuSigs



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.