This site requires JavaScript, please enable it in your browser!
Greenfoot back

Comments for Planets

Return to Planets

A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-05-14 15:43:23 UTC 0.0.1: -Black background -Fading trails -Color changes
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-05-15 23:46:21 UTC 0.1: -Toggle light / dark -Planet adder -Color tweaks
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-05-21 13:55:17 UTC 0.2: -Auto-scrolling -Two trails -"O" instead of "pNEW" -Bug fixes
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-05-22 17:29:39 UTC 0.3: -Made slider logarithmic -Trails togglable -Auto-scroll togglable -Indicators -Bug fixes
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-05-28 15:11:18 UTC 0.3.1: -Added clear button -Added orbit on user scroll -Added play / pause -Added scrolling -Tweaks -Bug fixes
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-06-03 17:30:49 UTC 0.3.2: -Added start screen
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-06-13 21:51:56 UTC 0.3.3: -Planet selection
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-06-16 18:29:54 UTC 0.4: -Added planet naming -Added changelog -Added FPS counter -Default mass to 1 -Tweaks
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-07-09 17:10:18 UTC 0.5: -Added zooming -Planet removing -Easier planet adding -Removed scrolling -Tweaks
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-07-10 17:18:38 UTC 0.5.1: -Bug fixes
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-07-11 17:22:31 UTC 0.6: -Added barycenter -Tweaks
Game/maniacGame/maniac

2016/7/12

You should use the runge-kutta method for making the orbital paths more accurate.
NichodonNichodon

2016/7/12

Do you mean the trails or the actual movement of the bodies? The trails are just lists of points that are connected by the world (not the best solution and I probably will do something about that).
NichodonNichodon

2016/7/12

A reason that they can be choppy in 0.5 zoom is because the points are integers while 0.5 is not. When I programmed the trails I didn't think I would make a zoom function.
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-07-16 16:29:09 UTC 0.6.1: -Added show / hide
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-07-18 21:14:52 UTC 0.6.2: -Tweaks -Bug fixes
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-07-19 19:23:43 UTC 0.6.3: -Added zoom slider -Bug fixes
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-07-21 17:55:07 UTC 0.6.4: -Bug fixes
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-07-22 15:20:12 UTC 0.7: -Added grid -Made zoom higher -Trails longer in zoom -Bug fixes
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-07-23 17:31:25 UTC 0.7.1: -Made grid togglable
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-07-24 22:25:13 UTC 0.7.2: -Sliders easier to use
Game/maniacGame/maniac

2016/7/25

The reason you would use the runge-kutta method is so you can approximate the new location of the planets better. The book "Physics for game programmers" by Grant Palmer has a really good explaination for why you should use the Runge-Kutta method for approximation in a scenario like this. I am going to be using this in my own orbital simulation soon.
NichodonNichodon

2016/7/26

I see. From what I understand, the Runge-Kutta method has many applications in ODE's.
Game/maniacGame/maniac

2016/7/26

Yes
Game/maniacGame/maniac

2016/8/1

Actually now I have done the math. I don't think you can use the runge-kutta method in this type of problem. :(
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-08-11 23:50:07 UTC 0.7.3: -Added barycenter trails
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-12-10 19:01:07 UTC 0.7.4: -Added position info
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2016-12-11 20:01:10 UTC 0.8: -Added distance info -Tweaks -Bug fixes
A new version of this scenario was uploaded on 2017-06-17 00:35:06 UTC 0.8.1: -Changed title screen -Bug fixes