These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Collisions and the Conservation of Momentum equations (Physics)

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#21 - 2013-12-24 14:40:00 UTC
I believe this has been pointed out before, but perhaps it was deleted or is another thread....

You are ignoring the lore of the game:

Quote:
All space ships are equipped with a warp drive device. The warp drive creates depleted vacuum by repeatedly ‘compressing’ vacuum between two polar discs, draining all energy neutrons and quarks out of it. A laser-locked field is then created to hold the ever-increasing depleted vacuum bubble until it has enveloped the whole ship. When that happens the ship is able to enter FTL speed.

Although initial experiments with the warp drive were very encouraging technology wise, problems arose in regard to navigation. Once the ship has attained FTL speed, it is very difficult for it to act or react to the world, such as for communication or scanning purposes. Numerous experiments were made, for example with compactified dimensions radio, but without success. The unpredictable nature of quantum mechanics made it very difficult to create a stable enough vacuum bubbles to allow for precise time measurements due to fluctuating speeds.

Finally, a solution was found. It was discovered that gravity capacitors similar to the control system used in stargates were able to pick up gravity signals from ‘normal’ space while the ship was on FTL speed. By locking the capacitor onto one of these signals, the ship travels to it. The bubble is then automatically dispersed once certain distance from the gravity well is acquired. The only problem is that these capacitors can only efficiently pick up signals from gravity wells of certain size or above, with the minimum being a small moon or a cluster of asteroids. Also, in order for the gravity capacitor to align correctly on the destination object in relevance to the position of the sun, it must follow a relatively narrow route towards it, resulting in a fairly restricted emerge area for the ship.

This puts some limits on the warp drive’s usage, but as all major objects in a system can be detected, this is not such a great problem. Furthermore, it is now possible to construct ‘fake’ gravity wells on space stations and stargates, which can be detected and thus homed onto by the gravity capacitor that is part of a ship’s warp drive.--Source


In other words, warp drive does not warp space as you claim. Nor does a MWD warp space.

The changes that a MWD impose on a ship are there for no other reasons than game balance. Game balance trumps the laws of physics when playing a game.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#22 - 2013-12-25 08:07:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Teckos Pech wrote:

In other words, warp drive does not warp space as you claim. Nor does a MWD warp space.

The changes that a MWD impose on a ship are there for no other reasons than game balance. Game balance trumps the laws of physics when playing a game.

Regardless of what the "warp" drive does to space, the fact of the matter is that there are no collisions during warp, hence flying through planets, and so it is not a stretch to allow MWD to be free of collisions as well.

Nothing trumps the laws of physics. Without those laws, there is no meaning or perspective. It is harder to maintain proper perspective of the magnitude of Eve's universe when those laws are tossed to the wind. People get a good feel for and appreciation of the masses of these ships when the Laws of Momentum are followed.

Plenty of games honor the laws of Physics and are therefore more fun and more immersive and still quite balanced.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#23 - 2013-12-26 06:05:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Andy Landen wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

In other words, warp drive does not warp space as you claim. Nor does a MWD warp space.

The changes that a MWD impose on a ship are there for no other reasons than game balance. Game balance trumps the laws of physics when playing a game.

Regardless of what the "warp" drive does to space, the fact of the matter is that there are no collisions during warp, hence flying through planets, and so it is not a stretch to allow MWD to be free of collisions as well.

Nothing trumps the laws of physics. Without those laws, there is no meaning or perspective. It is harder to maintain proper perspective of the magnitude of Eve's universe when those laws are tossed to the wind. People get a good feel for and appreciation of the masses of these ships when the Laws of Momentum are followed.

Plenty of games honor the laws of Physics and are therefore more fun and more immersive and still quite balanced.


OMG you are so pedantic.

Of course in real life nothing trumps the laws of physics.

Eve is not real life, it is a game and it has to be balanced....and in that sense game balance will always win out.

Not let this horribad thread die a ignominious death it deserves.

Edit: Or let me put it this way: the laws of physics are different in Eve than in RL. In that sense the game obeys these different laws. Trying to impose real life on a game is a fool hardy quest, but feel free to continue playing Don Quixote.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#24 - 2013-12-26 11:10:45 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
...
Eve is not real life, it is a game and it has to be balanced....and in that sense game balance will always win out...

Physics is the very definition of balance. Any game which does not find balance through physics lays no claim with any semblance of reality. But people like to think about how ships are so big, and how ships go so fast. Eve even uses conventional units like kg, m/s, and so forth. Given the sci fi genre, there is much room for interpretation, but the basic physics is always the foundation. When you are ready to contribute, then post with solutions to issues on topic. Until then, keep thinking or move along.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Nag'o
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2013-12-26 16:41:19 UTC
I think one of the major problems with EvE physics is that the ship's attrition with the viscous space is contradictorily smaller the bigger they are. This number is on the ship's specs: it's the ship agility. I don't mind the liquid physics, or the fact that there is an up and down in space... like I said before, this is not a simulation. Even so I don't like seeing giant ships getting bumped by insects, it's a real turn down.

Brain hackz0r. Execute schizophrenia virus. Hyper-phishing activated. Downloading reality.
androch
LitlCorp
Hisec Miners
#26 - 2013-12-26 16:43:31 UTC
why do players keep wasting time with these stupid scientific equations when they are supposed to be having fun in an internet spaceships game
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#27 - 2013-12-26 17:37:46 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Any game which does not find balance through physics lays no claim with any semblance of reality.


Like a game set in a fictional universe where people got there via what in the movies is often referred to as a McGuffin (a stable wormhole that lets ships pass through it--yes, yes theoretically possible, but its largely a device in much of science fiction to move story's along).

Also, changing the physics aspect of the game may very well change huge aspects of the game, at least for combat. For example, there would likely have to be substantial re-working of tracking, ranges, and possibly more. You are talking about, potentially, completely overhauling the game.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Nag'o
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2013-12-26 18:22:30 UTC
androch wrote:
why do players keep wasting time with these stupid scientific equations when they are supposed to be having fun in an internet spaceships game

science is so stupid, god made computers so who cares?

Brain hackz0r. Execute schizophrenia virus. Hyper-phishing activated. Downloading reality.
Alyth Nerun
Foundation for CODE and THE NEW ORDER
#29 - 2013-12-26 19:17:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Alyth Nerun
Andy Landen wrote:
Nothing trumps the laws of physics. Without those laws, there is no meaning or perspective. It is harder to maintain proper perspective of the magnitude of Eve's universe when those laws are tossed to the wind. People get a good feel for and appreciation of the masses of these ships when the Laws of Momentum are followed.

But the spaceships in EVE obey the conservation of momentum, so there is really no problem there.

Your only problem is that the MWD increases the mass of an object and you think that the only way to do that is relativistic speed.

But mass is not an intrinsic property of a particle. A particle gets its mass by interacting with the higgs-field. This field is described in the standard model, which is the most accurate description of the world on the very small scale that we have today. But it is not complete! And we know that for a fact!

So there is still room for speculation in this area and that's exactly what science fiction does all the time.

Your argument is invalid, bumping obeys the LAWS of physics.

Now obey the LAW of highsec and pay your mining permit.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#30 - 2013-12-26 22:20:33 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
...
The two primary issues that I am seeing with true momentum calculations applied is the MWD being overpowered due to increasing the mass by 50% and the velocity to 600% for a momentum increase of about 900%. The afterburner also has the same issue of increasing the mass and therefore increases the momentum to about 353% We can limit overpowering momentum with the MWD and AB in order to ensure proper balance (all sides benefit equally and fairly from the mechanic of momentum).

Two limitations to rebalance MWD after momentum is correctly calculated are: 1) No collisions while MWD is active, 2) Only considering the base mass for collisions calculations...

Without mass increases (Conservation of Mass) considered in the momentum equations, the MWD increases momentum by only 600% while the AB increases momentum by about 235%. These numbers are much more reasonable in preserving the significance of mass in the collision following the Conservation of Momentum equations.

The lack of collisions while MWD is on seems like an awesome feature which would strengthen the significance of the warp scrambler. It does seem to hold a potential issue with players deliberately cycling their MWD while moving into the space of another ship and then attempting to exploit the mechanic where ships are sent flying apart from each other at very high velocities. In that case, it seems reasonable that this case should be treated as if there was a collision between the two ships with the velocity of the ship whose MWD just cycled off is considered to be its current maximum velocity directed in a head-on collision for the purposes of the collision calculation. This should be the procedure regarding any ship which finds itself inside of any other object. Instead of being thrown out at insane speeds, it should be treated as a simple collision or series of collisions when the first collision does not free the ship from being within another object.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#31 - 2013-12-26 22:35:37 UTC
Alyth Nerun wrote:
...bumping obeys the LAWS of physics...

Everyone knows that a frigate colliding with a Titan should have virtually no effect on the Titan. Currently the mechanics do not follow the Conservation of Momentum. And if there is no damage, the collisions should be elastic, meaning that the elastic constraints should be applied to the Momentum equations as well. When the frigate hits the Titan, he should fly back at about the same speed that he hit with. Currently, this does not happen either. So in order to implement momentum correctly, we need to think about elasticity of collisions, Conservation of Energy, and Conservation of Mass. Removing collisions during MWD eliminates any issues with MWD mass increase. Having much less effect on momentum, it is simple and reasonable to consider the full mass increase from the AB in the momentum equations for as long as the AB continues to bonus the mass.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
stoicfaux
#32 - 2013-12-27 00:14:06 UTC
Eve physics are nonsensical at best. Applying even basic real world physics principles fails more often than.

IMO, eve ships do not collide in the traditional sense. Instead I prefer to think that the warp core fields of the ships interact in a manner to effect ship bumping as we currently see in eve.

But yes it would be interesting to see bigger ships less affected by being bumped by smaller ships.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Pipa Porto
#33 - 2013-12-27 01:04:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Andy Landen wrote:
Everyone knows that a frigate colliding with a Titan should have virtually no effect on the Titan.



And they don't have much effect on a Titan.

Which is why people use Machariels to bump Titans.

Even without the mass increase of the MWD, an unplated bump SFI has a momentum of up to 144 billion kgm/s (10 million kg moving at 14km/s), a Freighter (Charon) has a momentum of 9 billion kgm/s (96 million kg moving at .1km/s). Freighters are big, but they're not that heavy, and they're really slow.
A Carrier (Archon) does a little better, with a momentum of 108 billion kgm/s (1 billion kg moving at .01km/s).
A T1 frigate fit to bump things can have a momentum of up to around 11 billion kgm/s (~1 million kg moving at ~10km/s).
If we step up the size, a bump Machariel has a momentum of 392 billion kgm/s (94 million kg moving at 4km/s), compared to the Avatar's 170 billion kgm/s (2.2 billion kg moving at .075km/s).

Again, this is all calculated without the effects of an MWD on mass.


If an Avatar and a Machariel run into each other head on, the Avatar will be sent back the way it came, since the total momentum of the system is a full speed Titan's momentum in the direction the Mach is going.

If a Freighter and a Bump Frigate collide head on, they'll both go back the way they came at around the speed they came. A Bump SFI will send a Freighter spiraling off at about 1400m/s in a head on collision.

That's using elastic collisions and entirely discounting the mass increases from MWDs.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Nag'o
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2013-12-27 01:13:51 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Everyone knows that a frigate colliding with a Titan should have virtually no effect on the Titan.



And they don't have much effect on a Titan.

They don't affect the TItan's speed much, but they make it spin like a beach ball on a pool with just a small bump it the Titan is stopped.

Brain hackz0r. Execute schizophrenia virus. Hyper-phishing activated. Downloading reality.
Pipa Porto
#35 - 2013-12-27 01:35:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Nag'o wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Everyone knows that a frigate colliding with a Titan should have virtually no effect on the Titan.



And they don't have much effect on a Titan.

They don't affect the TItan's speed much, but they make it spin like a beach ball on a pool with just a small bump it the Titan is stopped.


That's because EVE doesn't simulate, in any way, rotational momentum.

This is also why, if you're stopped, you can get into warp to a destination in any direction you want in the same amount of time, regardless of the way your client has decided to point the picture of your ship (also why capitals often enter warp sideways).
The server sees your ship as a velocity vector with a hitbox around it. When the vector's length is very small, it's very easy to change its direction. And your client interprets that as spinning rather than moving backwards or sideways.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Nag'o
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#36 - 2013-12-27 10:46:05 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Nag'o wrote:

They don't affect the TItan's speed much, but they make it spin like a beach ball on a pool with just a small bump it the Titan is stopped.

That's because EVE doesn't simulate, in any way, rotational momentum.

No, it does simulate, but it does it in a contradictory way. If a frig at full stop gets bumped, even while having a much lower mass, it doesn't stay spinning around for a whole minute like the Titan does. That's because it's attrition with space (the inertia modifier) is much higher than the one from the Titan. There's the contradiction. I know if you give the Titan a inertia modifier proportional to it's size it will take a whole day for reaching full speed. I don't have any different idea though. I'm just saying it sucks.

Brain hackz0r. Execute schizophrenia virus. Hyper-phishing activated. Downloading reality.
Pipa Porto
#37 - 2013-12-27 23:19:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Nag'o wrote:
No, it does simulate, but it does it in a contradictory way. If a frig at full stop gets bumped, even while having a much lower mass, it doesn't stay spinning around for a whole minute like the Titan does. That's because it's attrition with space (the inertia modifier) is much higher than the one from the Titan. There's the contradiction. I know if you give the Titan a inertia modifier proportional to it's size it will take a whole day for reaching full speed. I don't have any different idea though. I'm just saying it sucks.


Your client shows ships spinning at a fixed rate (something like the maximum align time). This is because the two equally simple alternatives, instantly snapping to point to your current vector or never changing direction, both look weird.

This is why the Titan takes so long to turn around (the full turn is caused by the Titan pilot wanting to get back pointing the way he was pointing, not by the bump).

The frigate takes less time to spin around because that fixed rate is much higher for the frigate.

They both only spin once. Any ship will only get turned a maximum of 180 degrees. That's how you know there's no simulation of angular momentum. If there was, smaller (or lower inertia) ships would get turned more than 180 degrees if they were bumped hard.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Nag'o
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2013-12-28 14:56:24 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
No, it does simulate, but it does it in a contradictory way. If a frig at full stop gets bumped, even while having a much lower mass, it doesn't stay spinning around for a whole minute like the Titan does. That's because it's attrition with space (the inertia modifier) is much higher than the one from the Titan. There's the contradiction. I know if you give the Titan a inertia modifier proportional to it's size it will take a whole day for reaching full speed. I don't have any different idea though. I'm just saying it sucks.


Your client shows ships spinning at a fixed rate (something like the maximum align time). This is because the two equally simple alternatives, instantly snapping to point to your current vector or never changing direction, both look weird.

This is why the Titan takes so long to turn around (the full turn is caused by the Titan pilot wanting to get back pointing the way he was pointing, not by the bump).

The frigate takes less time to spin around because that fixed rate is much higher for the frigate.

They both only spin once. Any ship will only get turned a maximum of 180 degrees. That's how you know there's no simulation of angular momentum. If there was, smaller (or lower inertia) ships would get turned more than 180 degrees if they were bumped hard.

I'm not talking about the spinning the ship does to align. I'm talking about the spin it does after being bumped.
And it's not only the spinning, a frig can push a battleship to ridiculous distances even without a propulsion module activated.

Brain hackz0r. Execute schizophrenia virus. Hyper-phishing activated. Downloading reality.
Pipa Porto
#39 - 2013-12-28 23:14:04 UTC
Nag'o wrote:
I'm not talking about the spinning the ship does to align. I'm talking about the spin it does after being bumped.
And it's not only the spinning, a frig can push a battleship to ridiculous distances even without a propulsion module activated.


The turning speed of every Avatar model is the same in every situation. It takes the same amount of time for the model to turn whether its velocity vector's direction is changed by the pilot giving a command or by someone bumping it. The speed of the model's turn is unaffected by skills or the momentum behind the bump. Thus, rotational inertia is not simulated.

Bumping is based primarily on clipping, not on collision physics, so... what's your point? Does gameplay suffer for it? Should a Machariel be able to send a freighter spinning off at 1400m/s?

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#40 - 2013-12-29 05:22:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Pipa Porto wrote:
If we step up the size, a bump Machariel has a momentum of 392 billion kgm/s (94 million kg moving at 4km/s), compared to the Avatar's 170 billion kgm/s (2.2 billion kg moving at .075km/s).
...
Bumping is based primarily on clipping, not on collision physics, so... what's your point? Does gameplay suffer for it? Should a Machariel be able to send a freighter spinning off at 1400m/s?

I am still wondering how you get a Machariel going 4km/s. Something is very wrong about that. I bet part of the issue there is with the MWD. After turning collisions off during MWD, we would not see any issue, but it still leaves me wondering how anyone can accept that a battleship should be able to travel anywhere near 4km/s.

PS: Please tell us more about "clipping." What is this mechanic?

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein