Note that I said DSC.
Which means, are there any resources or documentation that can guide addon creators who want to create just .dsc globular clusters, real or fictitious, instead of globulars created by the popular generator made by Rassilon, as well as the meanings/explations behind the definitions and variables used for globulars in .dsc files?
Designing our own DSC globular clusters?

Topic authorPlutonianEmpire
 Posts: 1355
 Joined: 09.09.2004
 Age: 35
 With us: 15 years 3 months
 Location: MinneSNOWta
Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
Terraformed Pluto: Now with New Horizons maps! :D
Re: Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
"Something is always better than nothing!"
ASUS G75VX4007H Intel i7 3630QM, 2.4 GHzSSD 250GB+SSD 1TB, SATA 332GB DDR3 1600 MHz Nvidia GeForce GTX 780MX 3 GB
ASUS G75VX4007H Intel i7 3630QM, 2.4 GHzSSD 250GB+SSD 1TB, SATA 332GB DDR3 1600 MHz Nvidia GeForce GTX 780MX 3 GB
 t00fri
 Developer
 Posts: 8772
 Joined: 29.03.2002
 Age: 17
 With us: 17 years 8 months
 Location: Hamburg, Germany
Re: Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
This is NGC 288 in celestia.Sci...and you can land on anyone of these star systems of my globular clusters for an amazing sky experience!
[click on image by all means!]
Everyone of the 156 galactic global clusters looks different. This one is golden
name Whiting 1
===========
[click on image by all means!]
while NGC 5053 is rather bluish
NGC 5053
=======
[click on image by all means!]
Enjoy,
Fridger
[click on image by all means!]
Everyone of the 156 galactic global clusters looks different. This one is golden
name Whiting 1
===========
[click on image by all means!]
while NGC 5053 is rather bluish
NGC 5053
=======
[click on image by all means!]
Enjoy,
Fridger
Re: Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
Talking about that.Do anyone have the file M4.zip of Rassilon and could send to me?
PlutonianEmpire wrote:Note that I said DSC.
Which means, are there any resources or documentation that can guide addon creators who want to create just .dsc globular clusters, real or fictitious, instead of globulars created by the popular generator made by Rassilon, as well as the meanings/explations behind the definitions and variables used for globulars in .dsc files?

Topic authorPlutonianEmpire
 Posts: 1355
 Joined: 09.09.2004
 Age: 35
 With us: 15 years 3 months
 Location: MinneSNOWta
Re: Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
Here ya go.danielj wrote:Talking about that.Do anyone have the file M4.zip of Rassilon and could send to me?PlutonianEmpire wrote:Note that I said DSC.
Which means, are there any resources or documentation that can guide addon creators who want to create just .dsc globular clusters, real or fictitious, instead of globulars created by the popular generator made by Rassilon, as well as the meanings/explations behind the definitions and variables used for globulars in .dsc files?
http://web.archive.org/web/200807012140 ... ~rassilon/
EDIT: I was looking at globulars.dsc, and I find the formula for the KingConcentration, c = log10(r_t/r_c), a bit confusing. Can someone explain it, please?
Terraformed Pluto: Now with New Horizons maps! :D
 John Van Vliet
 Posts: 2713
 Joined: 28.08.2002
 With us: 17 years 3 months
Re: Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
 edit 
Last edited by John Van Vliet on 19.10.2013, 04:08, edited 1 time in total.
 t00fri
 Developer
 Posts: 8772
 Joined: 29.03.2002
 Age: 17
 With us: 17 years 8 months
 Location: Hamburg, Germany
Re: Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
Since I wrote the Perl code long time ago, I should know what it all means.
A proper understanding of the underlying theory would require reading and digesting a number of astrophysical research papers as well as knowing about advanced methods in Stochastic math. This is probably not what you guys might have in mind. I actually have collected a long long clickable list of scientific references that went into my entirely new coding of globular clusters in celestia.Sci.
Here is the link, just in case
http://www.celestialmatters.org/users/t ... apers.html
But I suppose there is little interest for that here...
As to the King concentration c = log10(r_t/r_c), this is easy to explain. As the famous astrophysicist Prof. Ivan King found out a long long time ago, one can fit the skyplaneprojected radial surface luminosity profiles of ALL known GCs very well with a socalled King formula
that involves besides the radial distance r from the GC center , TWO radius parameters r_c and r_t. These characterize the shape of the luminosity distribution of stars in a given GC.
r_c = core radius
r_t = tidal radius and usually, r_t >> r_c.
Instead of these 2 radii, it has become customary to use equivalently ONE radius and the socalled dimensionless King concentration c = log10(r_t/r_c). Just replace (r_t/r_c)^2 in the second term of the King formula by 100 ^ c.
The tidal radius is defined as follows:
For core distances r > r_t strictly NO stars can be gravitationally bound by the GC core such that any stars beyond r_t do not belong to the GC! In other words the above King formula satisfies the constraint that it vanishes for r = r_t (as well as for r > r_t) as you may easily check.
The core radius r_c characterizes the size of the bright core of the GC and mathematically
r_c is implicitly defined as distance r =r_c where f(r_c)/f(0) ~ 1/2. Thus c = log10(r_t/r_c) has indeed the meaning of a concentration parameter.
For the regular Celestia distribution I just used the parameters r_c and c by Harris. They may be found in my globulars.dsc file.
For celestia.Sci the next step was to take the King luminosity formula and perform a leastsquare fit by computer to all corresponding measured data for the 156 galactic GCs. In the paper of Harris, the resulting values for r_c and c actually refer to a more complicated variant of the King formula, the use of which would be too slow for Celestia. Since empirically it does not describe the data better, I did myself a refit of all data and extracted the best r_c and c values based on the above formula.
With a complex Maple program I did all these many fits automatically with excellent results. Here are two examples illustrating how well the King formula (blue curve) fits the measured surface luminosity data (red dots):
1) famous NGC 104 = 47 Tuc (=> r_c = 0.51, c=1.94)
=============================================
This one is MUCH dimmer and far less concentrated (r_c = 2.29, c= 0.52), whence you see that a large amount of different profiles can be fit by the King formula!
2) Palomar 4 (=> r_c = 2.29, c= 0.52)
=================================
The computer determined the resulting r_c and r_t radii for all these fits. They are to be found in the globulars.dsc file of celestia.Sci. Note that in the plots the radius scale is logarithmic and the units are arcmin! The quantity on the yaxis is the visual surface brightness ?_V in [magnitudes/arcsec^2]. The black lines indicate the physical socalled ?_V = 25m/arcsec^2 radius where the surface brightness isophote has reached the very dim standard value of 25m/arcsec^2. This is the physical GC radius where Celestia(.Sci) puts its four red marking triangles.
With these determined profiles (yet a very different colormagnitude distribution) the two representative GCs above look very different in celestia.Sci: NGC 104 on top, Palomar 4 below, both being displayed with the SAME field of view (FoV) to allow for a meaningful comparison:
The next step is to interpret the King formula as a probablity distribution for finding stars at distance r from the GC center! By means of the standard Von Neumann method I then randomly generate ~100 000 stars, whose distribution in distance from the GC center is according to the King formula. Note that we are not talking here about uniform distributions of random numbers (like when you throw dice), but rather a specific probability function (<=> King) that is strongly peaked in the center. Von Neumann tought us long ago, how to generate random numbers according to an arbitrary probability distribution in Stochastics. It's NOT simple.
The latter part is done within the Celestia(.Sci) code for efficiency reasons. Of course in celestia.Sci there is much more involved stuff, like the GC stars must also have the correct luminosity, mass and color distributions etc...But that would lead too far here.
Such GC stars could be also generated with Perl scripting but then reading in the data for 100 000 stars, say, would take a long long time. And one wants at least 156 galctic GCs hence 156 * 100 000 stars to generate and to read in... Finally, also Perl requires advanced programming knowledge. . However, learning Perl is substantially easier than learning good C++
All these steps represent familiar "handicraft" for professionals like myself. For lay persons I am afraid this might be far too involved...
Fridger
A proper understanding of the underlying theory would require reading and digesting a number of astrophysical research papers as well as knowing about advanced methods in Stochastic math. This is probably not what you guys might have in mind. I actually have collected a long long clickable list of scientific references that went into my entirely new coding of globular clusters in celestia.Sci.
Here is the link, just in case
http://www.celestialmatters.org/users/t ... apers.html
But I suppose there is little interest for that here...
As to the King concentration c = log10(r_t/r_c), this is easy to explain. As the famous astrophysicist Prof. Ivan King found out a long long time ago, one can fit the skyplaneprojected radial surface luminosity profiles of ALL known GCs very well with a socalled King formula
that involves besides the radial distance r from the GC center , TWO radius parameters r_c and r_t. These characterize the shape of the luminosity distribution of stars in a given GC.
r_c = core radius
r_t = tidal radius and usually, r_t >> r_c.
Instead of these 2 radii, it has become customary to use equivalently ONE radius and the socalled dimensionless King concentration c = log10(r_t/r_c). Just replace (r_t/r_c)^2 in the second term of the King formula by 100 ^ c.
The tidal radius is defined as follows:
For core distances r > r_t strictly NO stars can be gravitationally bound by the GC core such that any stars beyond r_t do not belong to the GC! In other words the above King formula satisfies the constraint that it vanishes for r = r_t (as well as for r > r_t) as you may easily check.
The core radius r_c characterizes the size of the bright core of the GC and mathematically
r_c is implicitly defined as distance r =r_c where f(r_c)/f(0) ~ 1/2. Thus c = log10(r_t/r_c) has indeed the meaning of a concentration parameter.
For the regular Celestia distribution I just used the parameters r_c and c by Harris. They may be found in my globulars.dsc file.
For celestia.Sci the next step was to take the King luminosity formula and perform a leastsquare fit by computer to all corresponding measured data for the 156 galactic GCs. In the paper of Harris, the resulting values for r_c and c actually refer to a more complicated variant of the King formula, the use of which would be too slow for Celestia. Since empirically it does not describe the data better, I did myself a refit of all data and extracted the best r_c and c values based on the above formula.
With a complex Maple program I did all these many fits automatically with excellent results. Here are two examples illustrating how well the King formula (blue curve) fits the measured surface luminosity data (red dots):
1) famous NGC 104 = 47 Tuc (=> r_c = 0.51, c=1.94)
=============================================
This one is MUCH dimmer and far less concentrated (r_c = 2.29, c= 0.52), whence you see that a large amount of different profiles can be fit by the King formula!
2) Palomar 4 (=> r_c = 2.29, c= 0.52)
=================================
The computer determined the resulting r_c and r_t radii for all these fits. They are to be found in the globulars.dsc file of celestia.Sci. Note that in the plots the radius scale is logarithmic and the units are arcmin! The quantity on the yaxis is the visual surface brightness ?_V in [magnitudes/arcsec^2]. The black lines indicate the physical socalled ?_V = 25m/arcsec^2 radius where the surface brightness isophote has reached the very dim standard value of 25m/arcsec^2. This is the physical GC radius where Celestia(.Sci) puts its four red marking triangles.
With these determined profiles (yet a very different colormagnitude distribution) the two representative GCs above look very different in celestia.Sci: NGC 104 on top, Palomar 4 below, both being displayed with the SAME field of view (FoV) to allow for a meaningful comparison:
The next step is to interpret the King formula as a probablity distribution for finding stars at distance r from the GC center! By means of the standard Von Neumann method I then randomly generate ~100 000 stars, whose distribution in distance from the GC center is according to the King formula. Note that we are not talking here about uniform distributions of random numbers (like when you throw dice), but rather a specific probability function (<=> King) that is strongly peaked in the center. Von Neumann tought us long ago, how to generate random numbers according to an arbitrary probability distribution in Stochastics. It's NOT simple.
The latter part is done within the Celestia(.Sci) code for efficiency reasons. Of course in celestia.Sci there is much more involved stuff, like the GC stars must also have the correct luminosity, mass and color distributions etc...But that would lead too far here.
Such GC stars could be also generated with Perl scripting but then reading in the data for 100 000 stars, say, would take a long long time. And one wants at least 156 galctic GCs hence 156 * 100 000 stars to generate and to read in... Finally, also Perl requires advanced programming knowledge. . However, learning Perl is substantially easier than learning good C++
All these steps represent familiar "handicraft" for professionals like myself. For lay persons I am afraid this might be far too involved...
Fridger
Last edited by t00fri on 02.11.2012, 11:42, edited 7 times in total.

 Posts: 1803
 Joined: 12.10.2007
 With us: 12 years 2 months
Re: Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
For lay persons I am afraid this might be far too involved...
No Kidding...
Nonetheless, your expert insight into these matters is very much appreciated by some of the BrainDead.
I always want my Celestia (and eventually Celestia.Sci) to incorporate the essentials of realism, and your
untiring efforts in this area are  again very much appreciated.
Thanks again for all of your efforts here Good Doctor, BrainDead Bob
BrainDead Geezer Bob is now using...
Windows Vista Home Premium, 64bit on a
Gateway Pentium DualCore CPU E5200, 2.5GHz
7 GB RAM, 500 GB hard disk, Nvidia GeForce 7100
Nvidia nForce 630i, 1680x1050 screen, Latest SVN
Windows Vista Home Premium, 64bit on a
Gateway Pentium DualCore CPU E5200, 2.5GHz
7 GB RAM, 500 GB hard disk, Nvidia GeForce 7100
Nvidia nForce 630i, 1680x1050 screen, Latest SVN
 John Van Vliet
 Posts: 2713
 Joined: 28.08.2002
 With us: 17 years 3 months
Re: Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
 edit 
Last edited by John Van Vliet on 19.10.2013, 04:07, edited 1 time in total.
 t00fri
 Developer
 Posts: 8772
 Joined: 29.03.2002
 Age: 17
 With us: 17 years 8 months
 Location: Hamburg, Germany
Re: Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
john Van Vliet wrote:I was thinking that it was the rate of drop off from the center
close, a complex rate of drop off
Close indeed. The King function f(r) above describes the radial drop off of various related GC observables. E.g. the above discussed visual surface brightness ?_V(r) is expressed in terms of f(r) as follows:
Remember first that two magnitudes are related as
Code: Select all
m2 = m1  2.5 log10 (L2 / L1);
for sources with luminosities L2 and L1. The surface brightness ?(r) as function of radial distance reads generally in terms of magnitude m and area of the object:
Code: Select all
?(r) = m(r) + 2.5 log10( area(r) );
Hence by taking the difference of surface brightness values at r and at r=0,
one can immediately write (since f(r) ~ luminosity(r) / area(r))
Code: Select all
?_V(r) = ?_V(0)  2.5 log10( f(r) / f(0) );
involving the ratio of King functions f(r) / f(0).
While f(r) describes the projection of the 3D distribution to the 2D skyplane, the former can also be derived in terms of the 2D King function f(r) by solving a certain differential equation.
Also the total number of stars (nStars) in a GC can be calculated in terms of the King function:
Code: Select all
nStars = integral_0^R (2?r f(r) dr) = integral_0^GCarea (f d (area))
since d (area(r)) = 2?r dr and 2?r dr = d(? r^2). Hence we infer for the King function f:
Code: Select all
f = d (nStars) / d (area).
i.e. it also describes the density drop off of GC stars (<=> [number / area]) as function of r!
etc.
Fridger
 t00fri
 Developer
 Posts: 8772
 Joined: 29.03.2002
 Age: 17
 With us: 17 years 8 months
 Location: Hamburg, Germany
Re: Designing our own DSC globular clusters?
For people interested in more concrete instructions about how to generate randomly the desired spherical distribution of GC stars with radial dependence equal to the above King function, see
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=17128&start=2
Fridger
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=17128&start=2
Fridger
Return to “Addon development”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: MrSpace43