One of the most amazing things about astronomy is simply the fact that we understand so much about it. That wasn’t true at first, of course. Our minds were curious, our telescopes got better, and then our ability to program computers with equations really helped us leap-frog ahead. Now we can observe objects, feed their parameters into computers programmed with the physics, and see what happens.
Because of this, we understand star formation.
Stars form in clouds of gas. The cloud is sitting there, its gravity balanced by pressure, until something happens to upset that balance. The cloud collapses, and stars form in various parts of it. But what are those "somethings" that happen? Well, clouds can collide with each other, for one, or a nearby supernova can slam them with high speed ejecta that can also trigger collapse.
 |
And even cooler? Now you can see this for yourself with The Star Formation Game! In this game, commissioned by The Hive Overmind Discover Magazine, you start with a gas cloud, and click where you want to detonate supernovae, corralling the gas. Do it right, form stars, and you move to the next level. Do it wrong, and the cloud dissipates, and you fail in your godlike powers of birth and death.
The game was crafted with the help of astronomer Adam Frank, who also wrote a companion piece to it. It’s actually a fun game, and just to let you know, I suck at it. I can’t seem to break 1000, but clearly there are ways to rack up lots more points. Give it a try and find out!
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:41 am
I WAS going to watch Season 4 of BSG, but I think you have successfully distracted me! Oh look, a bunny rabbit…
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:46 am
Our understanding of star formation is also important because it is one of the most robust proofs of an old universe. There is no possible “flood geology” method for forming stars in a universe with consistent laws of physics. For a spherical geometry, you just can’t compress stuff into a star much faster than the Eddington rate.
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:46 am
Can’t get past 1000? Did you try launching a massive number of supernovas around the edges of the map to drive all the cloud mass into the center? I kind of modeled my effort on how a thermonuclear bomb works.
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:48 am
I love it! My first couple of tries were pathetic, with my score being about 1% of the top score… I hope the top scorers will post some hints on this blog!
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:48 am
@Larian
Speaking of BSG, do you know if season 4.5 is available in its entirety anywhere? They seem to be missing the first 4 episodes on the web site…
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:54 am
I know this will cost my spot on the leaderboard, but…
The game won’t go below zero, so until the 1st star pops you can set off as many supernovae as you want. You don’t have to go supernova crazy. Just corral the gas down to nothing and let it cook for a second. Once the 1st star pops, it’s -2 per supernova and setting off a supernova breaks the chain which is where the real points are.
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:57 am
@Todd W. I had to go to one of the Intel Shop troops here and “acquire” some “copies” to watch.
AFN is behind, and with the shift I work here I even miss those airings. Sorry, no help for you.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Wow, it’s fun just making things ’splode!
Yeeeeehaw! Burn, baby, burn!
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:20 pm
I seem to top out at abotu 3400. I can use up over 90% of the mass on the first level. In the second an third levels all I create are more supernovae.
I took the general approach that karl does.
Set off your initial 6 at 60 degree intervals around the outside, then do it again closer in. My longest chain is 22 so far. I get almost all the points on the first level.
April 3rd, 2009 at 12:42 pm
4248 for me. Going to try again with a slightly different strategy.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 pm
The tick seems to be to get the gas “hearded” into a ring shape. With 4 – 8 outside explosions and at least one inside explosion. Then once the stars form they set up chain reactions into the rest of the ring.
Simply compressing it all into the center with outside explosions results in star creation that pushes the remaining mass back out and into a more diffuse state.
Set up the star creation so that it futher compresses the reamaining gaseous material.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I just got 1418 points!
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Wasn’t getting anywhere until I realized you can go negative on seed stars. One time, I got a cloud that looked a bit like Carl Sagan.
April 3rd, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Clever, but his strategy suggests two-dimensional thinking…
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:05 pm
Someone needs to find a way to combine this game with Universe Sandbox. That would be a fun game.
My best score on level 1 is 8543! Woo hoo, but I can’t seem to do nearly as well on the other levels.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:15 pm
I’ve broken 5000 using the ring method and it seems ot be the best. I start with one in the middle then put a ring of supernova around the outside. Then when the ring is collapsing a put another in the middle.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Freakin’ awesome.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Woohoo
Chainx46
10810 on first level
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:30 pm
BTW ring method is not as good a spiral method. I get a massively compressed glob of gas that
just goes berserk.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:35 pm
30450!
On the first level, just go nuts setting off rings of stars around the cloud to drive it inward–stars don’t cost anything, really–and get the entire cloud to collapse into the middle. Then do NOT set anything else off–the points come from chain reactions, and setting anything off breaks the chain of scoring, I think.
Before I figured that out, I was feeling god-like. Now I’m just crazy.
Thanks, Phil!
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:38 pm
After several tries I got level 3 to hit the quota with 3180 points!
But I don’t see any way to put my name in there…
Oh well.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Ah, looks like I have to “log in” to get my name in there. I subscribe to the magazine, I’ll have to root around here and dig one up…
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Here I thought I’d be able to give some advice as far as exploding as many stars as possible in a ring formation, staggering so that two waves descend and severely compress the center, but it looks like most people here already figured that out. The trick is to get as many combinations as possible, and so far, I’ve been up to 20 in the 1st. Much trickier with the second and third, but it’s all about setting seed stars in intervals that help offset any supernova detonation.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Doug, what is the Spiral Method?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Basically setting off stars in a spiral to compress the gas in the middle, ie when you go round 360 degree the gas has already moved some what inwards so you move you next set of stars inward as well.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Well, I can’t get it to work well again. I didn’t have to log in to enter my high score, for what that’s worth.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:13 pm
18300 x60 first level
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:18 pm
the below zero cheat pretty much turns the game into “push anything in the middle and get random 5 digit score” pretty much not what the authors intended
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Does it give proper mixes of S and R process elements?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Thanks Doug!
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Awesome… I was just working on my simulation of protostellar outflow-driven turbulence in giant molecular clouds!
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Hah… 51328 boys and girls!
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:38 pm
T_U_T, if the authors didn’t intend for you to put the gas into the middle and get as many points as possible, then they wouldn’t give you extra non-free stars (that cost 2 points each), and they wouldn’t have enabled the point multipliers.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Wow. This is great!
I am really happy to see people enjoying the game. We worked pretty hard on it and have plans and some funding (thanks NSF) for more.
The idea of these things is to transform ideas direct from research into meaningfully fun games. This one came from my own research specialty but all ideas are welcome! Feel free to drop a line and make suggestions.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Hi Phil,
>Because of this, we understand star formation.
Not to be pedantic – and I really hate to disagree – but I think this
is too extreme and actually I would day: NO we don’t!
At best I might be ready to say: “we understand some aspects of
star formation in some environments”. But, there still is SO much we
don’t understand. For example, recently I was involved in an
(ongoing) study to (in part) investigate the modes of star formation
in the galactic center – an environment so dynamic and energetic that
some aspects of the “understood” star formation process(es) were
expected (maqybe) to be quenched; i.e., hostile to star formation.
But – boy! with a 144 orbit Hubble Space Telescope/NICMOS
Paschen-alpha emission map (which traces star formation), see here:
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2009/02/
we were in for a LOT of suprises (most still not understood)! This
project is going to take a while, but stay tuned… For now, though I think
we have a LONG way to go before we can make a statement so bold as to say
“we understand star formation”. (It’s the not knowing, but continuing to
learn more part, that actually makes this all “fun”).
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:08 pm
Man, I can’t seem to get over a few hundred. I suck at being god.
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Impressive. They can make stars.
April 3rd, 2009 at 8:27 pm
Thank you, Adam Frank, for making such an interesting diversion!
I’ll have to find out the names of some of the star formation guys & gals at NRAO and get them playing it! This is a hoot!
April 3rd, 2009 at 8:42 pm
This is an aside from the first paragraph, but what’s really cool about Copernicus is that he didn’t need a telescope or a major technological breakthrough (that I know of) to establish heliocentrism. The telescope helped Galileo firm up the evidence, but this is basically as big as any (or the biggest) breakthrough in astronomy ever and it was just a lot of hard work and some clever thinking relative to his predecessors. I guess if you include a handful of ancient scientists, heliocentrism isn’t a a mind-blowing breakthrough. But I’ll give him the benefit of the doutbt.
April 3rd, 2009 at 8:45 pm
I just got a chain of 88 in the first level… I’m “torgo” if it shows up in the highscore…
April 3rd, 2009 at 8:49 pm
Yep!! Fifth place!
The strategy is in the first level, before extra supernovas count against you, keep spiralling in and condensing the gas as tiny as it will go… you will be rewarded.
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:06 pm
My God, it’s full of stars. Not mine but maybe yours was. Very cool.
April 3rd, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Damn you, Plait! All I need is another geek addiction. Thanks a lot.
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Nothing came up when I clicked the link, it just says “Second Ave” 100%
Am I missing something?
Pete
April 4th, 2009 at 12:19 am
[...] Via Bad Astronomy [...]
April 4th, 2009 at 12:42 am
[...] Starformation, the gameSterrenkunde kàn af en toe best wel saai zijn, met name als je dikke tekstboeken door moet worstelen over bijvoorbeeld zonnebevingen. Maar het is in de meeste gevallen helemaal niet saai, zeker niet als een onderwerp op een speelse manier wordt behandeld. Als voorbeeld neem ik maar even het online computerspel Star Formation, dat onlangs door Discover Magazine is uitgebracht. Hardstikke leuk om te doen én zeer leerzaam. Het gaat er in dat spel om dat je probeert een interstellaire gaswolk zo ver moet zien te krijgen dat ‘ie in elkaar klapt en sterren vormt. Maar zoiets gaat niet vanzelf. Zo’n wolk van waterstofatomen zal niet uit zichzelf ineenkrimpen, daar is een bepaalde ‘trigger’ voor nodig, bijvoorbeeld een nabije supernova. De schokgolf van zo’n supernova kan er voor zorgen dat de wolk op sommige plekken wel ineenstort. Maar cruciaal is dan weer wáár die supernova plaatsvind. En dat kan je allemaal zelf bepalen. Hoe meer sterren je weet te scoren met je quanta aan supernova hoe hoger je score. De allereerste keer haalde ik 586 punten. Da’s niks, want de ranglijst wordt aangevoerd door Phil Plaits, hoe kan het ook anders, met 55.646. Ik moet er kennelijk eens een avondje voor gaan zitten om te kijken hoe ik m’n score aan stervorming kan verhogen. Kortom, waag je ook aan Star Formation, The Game! Bron: Bad Astronomy. [...]
April 4th, 2009 at 4:10 am
@Eageus :
The other two levels are pretty much useless in terms of score. Surely not the thing the authors intended. I guess the normal score was in order of 1000, but they allowed extra supernovae to make it easier but making them so cheap that they allowed this strategy without any intent
April 4th, 2009 at 6:56 am
Finally broke 1000!
I can’t seem to figure out how to get 5 digit scores.
April 4th, 2009 at 7:05 am
BTW, I can think of a neat upgrade; add another level were you now can wind up creating hypernova, and have a black hole consume the cloud!
April 4th, 2009 at 7:45 am
How many billions of years have we put into this game ???
April 4th, 2009 at 7:51 am
[...] – via Bad Astronomy Blog [...]
April 4th, 2009 at 7:53 am
T_U_T, you are a cheerless git. Stop complaining and enjoy the way things are. Of course a bunch of nerds are going to figure out how to “game” a game.
The game is FUN. Thanks to Adam Frank and all for making it. And Phil for sharing it.
I like how, when I’m not playing very intelligently, it makes filaments of dust, with clumps and strands, just like the structure of the universe on so many scales.
It’s one of the times when science gives a god’s-eye view of the universe. And god-like powers, too . . . mwha-ha-ha!
April 4th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Ack! Only 1078,,bummer,,,Guess I’m not nearly as GodLike as I’d supposed,,,
GAry 7
April 4th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Even God is being bumped off the top ten scorers now. I hope the fundies don’t find out about this.
April 4th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
1248.. Not bad for the first time.
April 4th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
[...] Phil Plait of Bad Astronomy writes about Star Formation the Game, commissioned by Discover magazine. If you get the science right in games like this, the learning becomes easy. [...]
April 5th, 2009 at 12:04 am
I totally saw the Face of Satan in there.
April 5th, 2009 at 1:17 am
Heh, “Suck it, Phil” is in second place with 55646 points, with Stark right behind him.
April 5th, 2009 at 3:52 am
1780 (without cheating in the first level)
April 5th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Woot! Third!! (Toothy Grin).
April 5th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
I AM A GOD !!!
Wait. Was that not the point of the game?
April 5th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Using the ring method (spiraling in, of course), I scored ~24,250 on the first level, with a chain reaction of 67. 2 blew prior to the 67, so the cloud wasn’t at full mass of 625 (cloud units?). Some mass (~100 cu) remained. Unfortunately, I thought I had just figured out the “way” and immediately restarted the level (missing a few hundred more points on levels 2 & 3); and I’ve since been unable to top 8500 or 35 chains.
April 5th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
BTW, from the screenshot I took (yes, I’m a geek), the remaining mass after the ×67 chain was 74 cloud units. So, whatever that amount could produce would be how many more stars could be added to the chain.
Mewonders if there’s a bonus score for using all of the available gas. I was able to get it down to ~13 cu on another try; but a minute’s worth of clicking in a circle wasn’t enough to compress it further.
April 6th, 2009 at 2:22 am
Solar Masses?
Chain x42 is my record. I wonder if that means anything?
April 6th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
As the gas wasn’t technically a star yet, how about:
unknown gases, or gas units, or soon-to-be solar particles…
April 8th, 2009 at 10:16 am
“The idea of these things is to transform ideas direct from research into meaningfully fun games.” Fun games – your tax dollars at work.
But the wizards’ university in [The Science of Discworld] would have loved this toy. What they couldn’t figure out though was why all the worlds they built came out round, not flat… and why were the suns all way bigger than the real one? To work at all, they’d have to be much further away!