Are the Planets in KSP Too Small? 

Incidentally, Juno:New Origins home planet, Droo, is about double the radius of Kerbin. I wonder if its developers did math like this. Its star is also interesting, being a hypothetical type which may exist in the future: a blue dwarf.

Yeah, space and everything is scary big. Half the reason I play stock kerbol system loll. I did one "session" of doing a few poses and now I can use those for all videos, not too spectacular haha.

You know how you can see clouds on the ISS livestream? Imagine the same clouds, but different colours, with hundreds of times more planetary mass to work with. That's Jupiter

Marvel?! Did they update the game

It’s smaller than Earth

That’s quick

@@MDE_never_dies not when you have to hold your finger on a key for that long

@@Messier42-handle Poor baby

Thank you so much!

but that's just a theory...

@@MightySpaceman homosexual

@@CultReport huh

Using some equations relating to orbital mechanics, you can determine the gravitational constant. It turns out to be the same as in out universe.

@@curious_ksp_ Well, looking at how orbits around a body behave only gives you the product GM, not G itself - in fact, GM is generally known to a higher precision than just the mass of celestial bodies IRL, because G is very uncertain compared to other fundamental constants. So a higher value of G absolutely would compensate for a lower mass of the bodies.

I am so happy to be in a comment section with players that understand this issue. At one point a KSP version was released that changed the gravity at Kerbin, and some players noticed that their Kerbin satellite orbits had changed. I replied to the forum that the Kerbin sea-level gravity (and its change) was responsible. The thing is, in the Kerbal universe there is not per say a universal gravitational constant (often called G). When you are in (e.g.) the Kerbin sphere of influence, gravity is determined by a reference distance (Kerbin sea-level at 600km from its centre) and a reference gravity acceleration (Kerbin sea-level g0 = 9.82m/s^2). That is, the gravity is as you would expect from a point mass at the centre of the planet, and is, of course, relative to the celestial body (it also implies that when you orbit Kerbin you indirectly orbit the 'sun' as well). At least that is how I choose to interpret the Kerbal universe when I play. Or you may express gravity in way of parameter GM as zuthalsoraniz6764 do in their excellent reply; in my mind GM is tersely parametrised sea-level gravity (given that you know the reference sea-level, or just don't care, as when doing pure orbital mechanics calculations). A fairly large number of players really like creating spread sheets and formulas, and in particular they like to model the Kerbal universe with a "G"-constant. So as a service to those players, the planets are fitted with a derived mass based on the "G" known from real life. That way everybody is happy. Or, well, boy did some of the players get offended that I didn't have a universal "G" in my model of the Kerbal universe.

Woop Woop!

I try, got any ideas for videos?

The one who has been here from the beginning! Thank you for all your support!

@@curious_ksp_ No problem man!

Fun fact: Kerbin is the exact same as an old libnoise stock planet.

Im gonna colonize you. Just you wait

what is the 64k mod (i looked it up and i cant figure it out(i only tried to work it out for 3 minutes because i only care a little bit))

Of course it has to be different in some way, but i try to apply real physics to create some understanding about things surrounding our own universe

@@curious_ksp_ And that's awesome, keep it up

I like this one more because it is easier to read than the other one. Edit: so please forgive me🙂

Ok

Juno:New Origins home planet, Droo, is about double the radius of Kerbin, suggesting that maybe its developers did math like this. It's a harder game than KSP, perhaps partly due to this. It's easy to make simple rockets with the scalable parts, but not big complex ships.

You have seen nothing yet, next video is going to be even more math!

New video? How big would the black holes be if this was true? How long would it take to consume the planets?

What about neutron stars instead? Then we don't have to deal with the destruction of the planets.

Or just small Kings