[oliacym]

Hi everyone, thanks to all the fine tutorials, resources and tools on this board, I finally managed to make something basic. I'm fascinated by skyboxes, so I made this one, it's basically a Dyson Sphere, although the scale is closer to a Globus Cassus. It started as a box shape, but the gunflash was making the surfaces light up, breaking the illusion, so I made it into a sphere instead, which actually makes for a better effect anyway. Hope you like!

http://www.mediafire.com/download/84lba4tby7qq6r4/dyson-sphere.rar

EDIT: Nearly forgot, I didn't make the texture itself, it came from here: http://dic.academic.ru/pictures/wiki/files/76/Land_ocean_ice_cloud_hires.jpg

However, any texture of 2:1 will work with this skysphere, which might be easier for some people to work with than a skybox, I dunno!

[attachment deleted by ninja]

[The E]

That's either a very small Dyson sphere, or a few very large continents

It started as a box shape, but the gunflash was making the surfaces light up

Hang on, did you place this as an actual object in FRED? For the record, skyspheres/skyboxes are defined by using the "Skybox" field in the background editor. Placing them there will ensure that they're not subject to lighting in any shape or form, and that the player cannot travel outside of them.

[oliacym]

That's either a very small Dyson sphere, or a few very large continents

Yeah I always wondered in a true Dyson Sphere, whether you'd even be able to SEE the other side, somehow a smaller shell ends up being more visually relatable. So maybe Globus Cassus is better after all!

Hang on, did you place this as an actual object in FRED? For the record, skyspheres/skyboxes are defined by using the "Skybox" field in the background editor. Placing them there will ensure that they're not subject to lighting in any shape or form, and that the player cannot travel outside of them.

Oh really! Well I was using someone else's retextured skybox before, so that might be a factor. I was loading it as a skybox in FRED, as you say, so that's weird. Some of the surfaces were definitely lighting up from my gunflashes. Although I think the "No lighting" checkbox wasn't ticked.... is that what was doing it you think?

[The E]

That would be the cause, yes.

[oliacym]

On the face of it, that does make a lot of sense I think I remember why I unticked it actually, the whites were coming out too bright. I'll tone down the whites in the texture I think, experiment a bit. Many thanks!

[The E]

I don't know whether you're actually capable of doing it, but what would be really cool is if you could alter the textures to fit the Globus Cassus idea better. We have a lot of very beautiful starscape backgrounds already, but there's a distinct lack of genuine Sci-Fi sense of wonder type structures (See also: Strike Suit Zero backgrounds)

[oliacym]

Oooh, interesting! Like kinda a megastructure aspect of some kind... yeah, good idea, I'd like to move that way next, so I'll give something like that a go, but it's all a bit scary still, I've just started with the 3d modelling, which I think I can use for very large background items maybe, like make a render then put it on the skybox texture. I've been reading about them struggling with the Death Star on the Star Wars TC board, and it got me thinking about things like using Skydomes and the like to partially interact with these enormous structures. Will have to see what's feasible and what is mad dream

[Luis Dias]

To turn it into a real Dyson Sphere, one way to do it would be to place the perspective really near one surface, place a sun in the middle of it and a kind of a fog. Too much work in the textures probably though.

[The E]

Indeed.

Also, given the general issues with habitable Dyson Spheres (like, gravity, for example), I really prefer smaller megastructures, like Ringworlds or Orbitals, or planets with SF bits attached (Like an orbital elevator, or visible large-scale construction).

[Phantom Hoover]

ringworlds have pretty massive issues too though, like the fact that unlike spheres they're not even neutrally stable

[The E]

Yes, but they're believable enough to be able to invoke sufficiently advanced technology. A dyson sphere (NOT a dyson swarm, which is another really cool thing to try to depict), on the other hand, not only requires an unbelievable amount of raw materials to construct, but also an unbelievable amount of tech to invert the surface gravity so that people can live on the inside. I dunno, my sense of disbelief cancelling mechanisms don't seem to be able to handle that much insanity

[Luis Dias]

Indeed.

Also, given the general issues with habitable Dyson Spheres (like, gravity, for example), I really prefer smaller megastructures, like Ringworlds or Orbitals, or planets with SF bits attached (Like an orbital elevator, or visible large-scale construction).

That gravity argument never really got into me one bit. Clearly, a civilization that is able to mount a friggin Dyson sphere (which might need more material than the whole inner planets of the solar system can provide themselves) would be able to solve the otherwise basic problem of stabilizing the damn sphere so it won't fall into the sun.

[The E]

I was more referring to the minor issue of making things stick to the inside

[Luis Dias]

It's a good discussion though. I'd say that the Dyson sphere is the ultimate efficient solar reactor.

Also, Jupiter-brains and so on.

I was more referring to the minor issue of making things stick to the inside

Making it rotate would be unbearable on the materials? Probably, don't remember that bit.

[oliacym]

I was more referring to the minor issue of making things stick to the inside

I always wondered - if you made the shell sufficiently massive and dense, would it exert enough gravity on the things inside to keep them fixed without the need for spin?

Now, an Alderson Disk... that's another problem altogether...

[The E]

It's a good discussion though. I'd say that the Dyson sphere is the ultimate efficient solar reactor.

Also, Jupiter-brains and so on.

I was more referring to the minor issue of making things stick to the inside

Making it rotate would be unbearable on the materials? Probably, don't remember that bit.

It would also make the internal structure pretty weird, what with the need to provide surfaces perpendicular to the centrifugal force and all.

I always wondered - if you made the shell sufficiently massive and dense, would it exert enough gravity on the things inside to keep them fixed without the need for spin?

Unfortunately, no. The gravitational force of a spherical object can be modelled as originating from a point in its exact center; in this case, it would act as if it came from the star that the sphere is built around.

[Phantom Hoover]

actually no; with the shell theorem you can show that a dyson sphere exerts absolutely no gravitational force anywhere inside it; this also means that it has no overall gravitational interaction with the star it's built around

[NGTM-1R]

Making it rotate would be unbearable on the materials? Probably, don't remember that bit.

In practical terms yes, but also in practical terms it's a Dyson sphere and the materials science involved is already very, very trololololololol, so...

[The E]

actually no; with the shell theorem you can show that a dyson sphere exerts absolutely no gravitational force anywhere inside it; this also means that it has no overall gravitational interaction with the star it's built around

Huh. Did not know that, thanks for bringing it up.

[oliacym]

Aw man, now we have to rely on gravity generators Guys, I'm concerned this Dyson Sphere thing isn't going to get off the ground.