7b65ab4812a47466f3ce7fe687796c350303882b
9
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
  SenrokaiandClaude Opus 5.5
|
7b65ab4812 |
Draw a planet and a heavy moon going round their barycentre, as Pluto and Charon do
Standish's "Pluto" is the Pluto-Charon barycentre, and Charon is an eighth of Pluto's mass, so that point lies 2 131 km from Pluto's centre, 943 km above its surface. Drawn the usual way, with Pluto at its row's position and Charon going round it, Pluto sits where nothing is and Charon's orbit is 2 131 km too wide on one side. A moon record can now carry massRatio, its mass over its planet's. For such a moon the renderer keeps the pivot at the planet's elements, which is the barycentre, and each tick puts the planet massRatio / (1 + massRatio) of the relative separation back from it and the moon the rest out. Both orbits are the relative ellipse scaled, the moon's by 1 / (1 + q) and the planet's by -q / (1 + q), turned with the moon's node every tick: Charon's spans 17 460 km of radius and Pluto's 2 131, round the same point, and neither passes through Pluto. Only Charon will carry it; every other moon's barycentre is inside its planet. Checked against Horizons in the unit suite, on JPL's records for the two: Pluto (999) from the Pluto-system barycentre (9) in 2100 is 2 131.24 km out, and the renderer puts it within 5 km of that length and 0.5 degrees of that direction, exactly opposite Charon at the inverse of their mass ratio; Charon from Pluto is within 0.5 degrees of Horizons in 2100 (measured 0.37). The same table adds Titania, against Uranus's equator 120 years from its 1980 epoch, within 0.75 (measured 0.62). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
SenrokaiandClaude Opus 5.5
|
48319c3fe2 |
Move the solar system on JPL's mean elements, so it stays right as the clock runs
Every body carried one set of osculating elements from Horizons at 2025-01-01, run forward by
Kepler with a GM from a table of mass ratios. That set is exact at its instant and drifts from
then on, and the clock now runs a month a second: the Moon, with Earth's mass ratio lacking its
own and the osculating axis, went round in 27.70 days instead of 27.32, 66 degrees out after a
year, and its locked face was spun at the same wrong rate.
Planets and Pluto now take Standish's Table 2a/2b ("Keplerian Elements for Approximate
Positions of the Major Planets"): elements against the J2000 ecliptic, their rates per century,
and the b, c, s, f terms of Jupiter to Pluto, fit for 3000 BC to AD 3000. Table 1 is closer near
the present (Saturn 0.23 degrees at worst 1950-2100, against 0.32 here) but is only fit for
1800-2050, and by AD 3000 has Saturn 4.3 degrees out where Table 2 holds every planet within 0.3.
The moons take JPL SSD's satellite mean elements: sidereal mean motion n to ten figures, the
periods of their node and periapsis, and each one's local Laplace plane by its pole. They
propagate with n itself, never a GM: gmForParent and its mass table are gone. Horizons still
gives size, spin and obliquity.
Both tables are read from the Internet Archive's copy of JPL's pages, pinned to one capture: the
live approx_pos page has dropped Pluto, and the live sats/elem page has dropped n and rounds the
period to four or five figures (Phobos 0.3187 d, a revolution out within a decade).
What the tables leave implicit, measured against Horizons before it was accepted:
- The precession periods are magnitudes. A node regresses on a prograde orbit and advances on a
retrograde one; a periapsis advances except where a resonance forces the eccentricity. Io's
and Europa's follow their conjunction line backwards at 2 n(Europa) - n(Io) = 0.74 degrees a
day, which is exactly the 1.625- and 1.394-year periods in the table. Read as advancing, Io
was 0.9 degrees out and Europa 2.1.
- On a retrograde orbit the node's turning is added back to the mean anomaly. Taken off, Triton
drifted a degree a year, 105 degrees by 2100.
- The Laplace frame's x axis is where the plane rises through the ICRF equator, RA of the pole
plus 90. Read against the ecliptic, Io was 2.8 degrees out, Phobos 54 and Titan 127.
Orbit lines are now drawn in their own plane and turned by a quaternion each tick, so a turning
node carries the line with the body: fixed at one date, the Moon's line would be up to 69 000 km
off it nine years on. The Earth row is the Earth-Moon barycentre, 4 700 km from Earth, 0.002
degrees from the Sun. A tidally locked moon's day is now 360 / n, its sidereal period (the Moon
27.321662 d), so it stays locked to the orbit it is drawn on.
Angular error against Horizons VECTORS (ICRF, TDB; heliocentric for planets, planet-centred for
moons), degrees, read from the live renderer's markers in the running app:
body 1950-01-01 1975-01-01 1987-07-23 2000-01-01 2025-01-01 2037-03-06 2050-01-01 2075-01-01 2100-01-01 max
mercury 0.004 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.004
venus 0.003 0.007 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.007
earth 0.003 0.008 0.002 0.005 0.004 0.009 0.003 0.002 0.003 0.009
mars 0.009 0.010 0.008 0.024 0.009 0.012 0.009 0.011 0.028 0.028
jupiter 0.063 0.030 0.171 0.135 0.013 0.020 0.056 0.041 0.075 0.171
saturn 0.080 0.064 0.018 0.320 0.066 0.114 0.044 0.164 0.177 0.320
uranus 0.018 0.169 0.068 0.050 0.101 0.015 0.141 0.017 0.114 0.169
neptune 0.070 0.028 0.004 0.021 0.036 0.037 0.013 0.029 0.072 0.072
pluto 0.045 0.054 0.041 0.033 0.019 0.020 0.023 0.027 0.026 0.054
moon 0.486 1.928 0.127 0.631 1.407 1.086 0.720 0.339 1.180 1.928
phobos 2.068 0.294 0.881 1.113 0.313 0.636 2.089 5.862 11.099 11.099
deimos 0.077 0.043 0.310 0.066 0.164 0.068 0.034 0.468 0.044 0.468
io 0.021 0.015 0.010 0.019 0.009 0.035 0.006 0.011 0.022 0.035
europa 0.036 0.039 0.053 0.064 0.078 0.032 0.006 0.034 0.044 0.078
ganymede 0.132 0.103 0.018 0.007 0.023 0.054 0.091 0.118 0.044 0.132
callisto 0.040 0.019 0.023 0.019 0.038 0.008 0.060 0.119 0.056 0.119
titan 0.003 0.019 0.023 0.023 0.027 0.028 0.048 0.008 0.014 0.048
triton 0.051 0.029 0.009 0.021 0.052 0.048 0.063 0.089 0.137 0.137
Three miss what was hoped for, and why:
- Jupiter 0.17, Saturn 0.32, Uranus 0.17 against the 0.1 hoped for: short-period perturbations
of the giants by one another, which no Keplerian fit carries. Standish states his own Table 2
errors as 600, 1 000 and 2 000 arcseconds (0.17, 0.28, 0.56 degrees). Out to AD 3000, measured
at 1800, 2200, 2400, 2600 and 3000, every planet stays within 0.3.
- The Moon, 1.9: evection (1.27) and variation (0.66), which a mean ellipse leaves out.
- Phobos, 2.1 until 2050, then 5.9 in 2075 and 11.1 in 2100, growing as the square of the time:
its tidal acceleration, which the table has no column for. Its elements are MAR080's, epoch
1950. The map's dates are also UTC where the elements are TDB, 69 s today,
which is 0.9 degrees of Phobos and nothing for anything else.
Held in place by:
- build.ts: each body's mean elements against Horizons' own osculating elements on the ETL's
2025-01-01, at most 0.25 degrees for a planet and 2.5 for a moon (measured: Uranus 0.101, the
Moon 1.407; a regressing Triton node reads 10.24 and fails), and every moon's day equal to its
sidereal period (a 1% error fails).
- Unit tests freezing nine Horizons vectors (Earth 2100, Jupiter 1950, Saturn 2075, Pluto 1975,
the Moon 2050, Io and Europa 1950, Titan and Triton 2100) through SystemOrbitsRenderer, the
Moon kept on its own turning line, the retrograde rule, the Standish terms, the Laplace frame,
and both table parsers. Nine mutants each fail the test named for them, and the two
validators each refuse a mutated build of the real catalogue.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
SenrokaiandClaude Opus 5.5
|
c38a42cbcb |
Fix what the review of this branch found, starting with the pick rule it only claimed
The off-screen rule for clicks was described in
|
||
|
SenrokaiandClaude Opus 5
|
225d676ab0 |
Turn each body at its own rate, from Horizons' own figures
The view had one rotation in it — the planet on the detail page, at 0.08 rad/s, a number with no source. Nothing in the system view turned at all. The data was already on disk: every cached Horizons page carries how its body spins, in one of five forms. The rate in radians per second is preferred where it appears, because it is signed — that is how Venus and Uranus are known to turn backwards — then a period in hours or days, then the `9h 55m 29.711 s` the giant planets use, and finally the word every major moon here carries instead of a number: Synchronous. A tidally locked moon's day is its orbit, so Kepler supplies it from the elements already parsed and the parent it goes round. Seventeen of the eighteen bodies come out within 1% of their published period — Earth 23.934 h, Jupiter 9.925 h, Venus -5832.5 h, Io 42.5 h, Callisto 400.5 h. Titan is the exception: its page states no period at all, so it is left still rather than turned at an invented rate. The axis is the orbit normal tilted by the obliquity about the orbit's ascending node, which is where an obliquity is measured from and the only line in the orbit the elements name. The phase at the epoch is published for none of these bodies, so the face turned toward the camera is not a claim; the rate and the direction are. At true rates nothing is visible moving — Earth turns 15 degrees an hour. A clock the reader can run faster is the next piece, and the audit asks for it anyway. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016jxMkwA2rbicdGxHosecYi |
||
|
Claude
|
a84e2d3a69 |
Put a reference grid under the system view
A system was a handful of ellipses floating in the dark. You could see that one orbit was bigger than another, but not how big, and not that a planet sat above or below the plane the others share. Adds the same plane-and-tether reading aid the outer scales got: a polar grid in the system's own reference plane, with a drop line from each body onto it. Ring radii snap to a 1-2-5 ladder rather than dividing the system evenly, because the point is to put a number on a distance — 5, 10, 15 AU can be read at a glance and 4.34, 8.68, 13.02 cannot. That holds across the four orders of magnitude real systems span: the solar system gets 5 AU rings, TRAPPIST-1 gets 0.01 AU ones. The outermost ring encloses the outermost orbit rather than falling just inside it. The rings are dashed. Solid ones would sit in the same plane as the orbit ellipses, which are themselves rings, and at a glance a reference circle and a circular orbit are the same picture. Dashes are cut by dropping whole segments rather than by a dashed material: the ring is already built from independent segment pairs, so a material's dash pattern would restart at every one. Drawing the grid exposed a framing bug it made unmissable. The camera settled along one fixed direction derived from the ecliptic, which is face-on only for the one system whose elements are ecliptic. Every exoplanet system — measured against the plane of the sky, perpendicular to the line of sight to its own host star — was being presented nearly edge-on, a smear of overlapping ellipses. The settle direction is now taken relative to whichever plane the system was measured in, so all of them read as discs. The solar system is unmoved, which a test pins. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WaySiNst4HhDXBHnMy8p5G |
||
|
Claude
|
2f45fa7fef |
Measure exoplanet inclination from the plane of the sky
The Exoplanet Archive measures orbital inclination from the plane of the sky — the plane perpendicular to our line of sight to the host star. Ninety degrees means edge-on as seen from Earth, which is why transiting planets pile up there: 1643 of the 2061 published inclinations are within five degrees of 90. The renderer fed that straight into a propagator that reads inclination as an angle from the reference plane, so every transiting system was tilted against a plane its inclination was never measured against. Each body's elements are now rotated out of their own reference plane into the scene by a per-body quaternion. Solar-system elements keep the ecliptic rotation from the previous commit. Exoplanets get a rotation carrying the elements' +Z onto the line of sight to their host, which is exactly the star's own position — so an inclination of i means the orbit's normal sits i from our line of sight, which is the definition. The rotation about that axis is the node's position angle on the sky. The archive does not publish it and the ETL does not request it, so the shortest arc is used: deterministic, and no less arbitrary than anything else given no data. Planets with no published inclination default to face-on, which is the honest reading of an unconstrained orbit rather than a guess at a tilt. Unifying this replaced the direct eclipticToEquatorial call in the renderer, so solar-system bodies and moons come out exactly where they did before — verified against Sol side by side. Tests: 253 passing, up from 247. The strongest one is the definition itself: a 90-degree planet must pass through our line of sight to the star, which is what a transit is. One test of mine had to be corrected rather than the code — it asserted that two systems at the same inclination must occupy different planes, which is not guaranteed once the node angle is arbitrary, while each still sits at the correct angle to its own host. Note the e2e camera-flight test flaked once under parallel load during this work, then passed in isolation and on two further full runs. Its click-until- entered poll has a fixed 15s budget that a loaded machine can exceed; that is pre-existing and unrelated to this change. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WaySiNst4HhDXBHnMy8p5G |
||
|
Claude
|
2293585940 |
Put orbits and stars in the same reference frame
The app's two sources disagree about which frame they are in, and nothing reconciled them. HYG star positions are equatorial J2000 — that is what raDecDistanceToXyz produces and what the galaxy view renders directly. Orbital elements come from JPL Horizons, whose default reference plane for element output is the ecliptic, and the ETL never overrides it. The two are tilted 23.4 degrees apart, so the orbits sat that far off the sky they are drawn against. Confirmed rather than assumed, from both ends: the Horizons request in lib/horizons.ts sets no REF_PLANE, and the resulting solar-system inclinations are 0 to 17 degrees with Earth exactly 0.00 — which is only true of the ecliptic, since Earth's orbit defines it. eclipticToEquatorial now rotates orbit positions into the scene frame, so a direction means the same thing in the galaxy view and the system view. The rotation is about the vernal-equinox axis, which both frames share. That exposed a presentation problem the old code had been hiding. The renderer mapped the propagator's z straight onto the scene's vertical, which silently redefined the frame but did make systems render flat. In a properly equatorial scene, orbital planes lie 23.4 degrees off the scene's own axes, so a system would be presented edge-on. Rather than rotate the world back into a comfortable pose — which would only put the orbits at odds with the sky again — the camera now settles relative to the orbital plane: a three-quarter view about 37 degrees off the ecliptic normal. The arrival still begins along the approach direction and swings round as it settles, so the transition stays continuous, and the framing is now the same every time rather than inherited from wherever the camera happened to be. Tests: 247 passing, up from 237. The frame tests are the discriminating kind — Earth's orbit must lie perpendicular to the ecliptic pole rather than to the scene's vertical, and must reach 23.4 degrees of declination a quarter orbit on, where it used to read zero. Verified in a browser against Sol and Gl 357. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WaySiNst4HhDXBHnMy8p5G |
||
|
Claude
|
f241b093eb |
Draw the 1509 exoplanets that were being silently dropped
The system renderer required both a semi-major axis and an eccentricity before it would place an exoplanet, even though resolveOrbitalElements already defaults every other missing element. The archive publishes an axis far more often than an eccentricity: 3895 records have one and only 2386 have both, so 1509 planets were dropped for want of a value that can simply be assumed. A missing eccentricity now defaults to 0, a circle. That is the conventional assumption for an orbit whose shape has not been constrained, and it is the only honest option available, since the axis alone says nothing about elongation. The effect is not subtle. 18 systems gain planets, and seven of them previously rendered as a bare star with nothing around it at all: Gl 357 goes from zero planets to three, HD 176986 likewise. Beyond the effect today, a user could already reach one of these planets through search and its detail page, then jump to its system and find it missing from the very system it belongs to. isPropagatableOrbit replaces the old inline guard and also rejects what the old one never checked: a non-positive axis, and an eccentricity of 1 or more. Those are escape trajectories that no ellipse describes, and propagating them anyway does not throw — it yields NaN, which reaches the vertex buffer and poisons the geometry's bounding sphere, disabling culling for the whole object rather than just the bad orbit. Being a type guard, it also lets the caller drop a seven-line field-by-field copy of the orbit. Fixes a label leak found while verifying this in the browser. Galaxy star labels were being cleared on entering system space but immediately recomputed, because the tick gated them on `currentStarId`, which is not assigned until the arrival flight finishes a second later — so parsec-scale names sat pinned over the system. Both label and orbit updates now gate on which group is actually visible, which is true throughout the transition rather than only at the end of it. Tests: 185 passing, up from 171. Verified in a real browser: GJ 1151 draws the orbit and marker it gained, and no labels survive into the system view. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WaySiNst4HhDXBHnMy8p5G |
||
|
Claude
|
8d8c65bdb2 |
Propagate exoplanets with their real orbital period
Every exoplanet was propagated with gmForParent(undefined) — the Sun's gravitational parameter — so the whole catalogue orbited as though each host were exactly one solar mass. Most hosts are red dwarfs far lighter than that, and a heavier central mass pulls harder and shortens the period, so their planets were whirling round much too fast: TRAPPIST-1 is 0.09 solar masses, and its planets were completing an orbit in roughly a third of the true time. pl_orbper was already in the TAP query and was being discarded on the way into the record. It is now kept, along with st_mass. A period and a semi-major axis together pin the host's gravitational parameter exactly, via GM = n^2 a^3 — no stellar model, no assumption, just the inverse of the orbitalPeriodDays helper that was already there. resolveGravitationalParameter picks the best available source: the measured period, else the published host mass, else one solar mass as before. A derived value implying something outside 0.01-150 solar masses is rejected and falls through, since a period and axis taken from disagreeing solutions would otherwise send a planet spinning at a visibly absurd rate. Note the direction of the error, which is the opposite of what it looks like: assuming a *heavier* host than reality makes a planet orbit *faster*. A test pins it, and caught me stating it backwards first. The NASA Exoplanet Archive is unreachable from this environment (egress policy returns 403 on CONNECT), so exoplanets.json cannot be regenerated here and still carries no periods. Behaviour is therefore unchanged until `npm run etl` is run somewhere with archive access, at which point every planet with a published period starts moving correctly with no further code changes. build.ts reports how many records gained a period, and rejects non-positive ones. Tests: 171 passing, up from 151, including a new end-to-end check that TRAPPIST-1 b with its real period completes exactly one orbit in 1.51088 days and sits a full diameter away at half that. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WaySiNst4HhDXBHnMy8p5G |