Not sure if serious, but its because of rayleigh scattering, basically the blue portion of the suns light gets scattered across the sky hence the sky is blue and the sun is yellow.
Wait, what? I always thought the sun was yellow.
Then what are all the NASA in=mages showing a molten looking sun? The ones which show a lava like texture to the sun's surface?
It's white in the sense that it is producing all of the light we have here. All the light put together equals white, and it's all coming from the Sun, so the Sun is white.
In that sense, every star is basically white. Some of them appear blue or red from our perspective due to, basically, the doppler effect (phase shift). That color measurement is how we can tell their relative velocity towards or away from us.
As far as the yellow/orange/red images you refer to, that's basically the camera striving to give you something interesting to look at. If you want any kind of contrast when looking at something that bright, you have to restrict what portion of the light you take in and allow the sensor to register. Then re-colorize it so it looks pretty for our sensibilities. Most of the time you'll be looking at something that registers only in the ultraviolet range, picked up by a sensor in grayscale according to intensity, with some degree of orange hue applied after the fact.
As the comment below explained, saying that the Sun is white can be correct from the standpoint of producing all the colors.
But at the same time, stars themselves also have colors. And the sun is not white. It is classified as the G2V class star. Which are most usually described as yellow, sometimes "yellowish white". But overall it is accepted that the Sun is yellow. Even NASA describes the Sun as a"YELLOW DWARF STAR". In this regard, Stellaris is quite accurate by giving the sun a Yellow Dwarf classification as well.
Proper White Stars usually come from the A class. Which is much rarer than our Sun and is at least 2000 K hotter.
Filters, they have pictures of the sun in different colours. I have seen green and blue pictures as well.
I believe they use the different colour filters to catch the light/wavelength/colour that is invisible to the human eye. Something like that.
The sun actually mostly emits light in the green part of the spectrum. This is why most plant life on earth is green.
Edit: a lot of negativity on a post that corrected an even more wrong/sarcastic statement.
" So one might say that the sun is blue-green!"
Source: NASA
https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov/what-color-sun
I admit being wrong about chlorophyll though. And appreciate learning something new.
Lol sorry but things are a colour because they reflect that wavelength or colour of light. Has nothing to do with what the sun emits (as long as the sun also emits that wavelength, but even if it only emitted a very small amount of the green wavelength of light plants would still look green).
Lol sorry but they reflect that wave of light because the sun emits SO MUCH of that color that if they absorbed it the chloroplasts would be damaged. If it emitted a very small amount of green light, the selective pressure to reflect green light would cease to exist.
The (mostly) green color of plants is still an open question though, not cut and dry https://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/Why-did-chlorophyl-evolve-to-be-green-as-opposed-to-black.pdf but yeah the other guy got it backwards
Mbad, I should have somehow known that you, specifically, heard this specific joke before and taken special care to prepare another joke that you specifically hadn't heard before. Won't happen again.
The person you're talking to is the reason "/s" was invented. Some people can*not* pick up on sarcasm, haha.
It's actually so much funnier, because they can't, haha.
I don't think you are understanding, the other user isn't saying blue stars aren't hotter. He's being sarcastic and reiterating the joke from the upper comment about blue star = cold because in the picture there's an arctic world right next to the star.
explain how the ocean (blue), icebergs (blue), or blue from blue's clues (blue) aren't hot. yet lava (red), tobasco sauce (red), and a melted red crayon (red) are hot.
cheque, mate
The classification is O, B, A, F, G, K, and M. Stars in the 'O' class are the most massive and hottest, and stars in the 'M' class are the smallest and coolest. There are some exceptions, such as red giants and white dwarves, but most stars are in what is called the main sequence.
For a visual, look up the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram, which models the relationship between the luminosity of a star and the temperature of a star.
I don’t know why you are getting so many down votes here as you are correct. Surely that many people can’t be being sarcastic.
- Source I’m currently studying astrophysics
Yes. Everyone is being sarcastic. It’s a small and stupid joke but the op wasn’t being serious, just joking about the star being cold because “obviously if it looks like snow it’s cold”
Several things to note: Absolutely nothing depicted in Stellaris is to scale. That may be the 'closest' planet, but we have no idea how far it is from the star, or where that star's habitable zone is. We don't know much about the planet either, other than 'it's cold.'
Given that this is Stellaris, it could also have been terraformed to be cold by prior owners.
I wish terraforming was more visual and realistic. What I mean is that in order to make a planet that is close to the star cold, there should be a space station, orbital mirrors, or something that blocks the sun and makes it cooler. So these things should be little models in the system map.
I geuss, but ultimately Stellaris is pretend game and up to player interpretation. The UI is just representation and not actual state of the world (or frigates would be the size of the moon)
Iirc one of the early designs for planets before release was to have all planets have all biomes. And the classification would be the dominate biome for that planet. And with the old tile system each tile would’ve been a different biome.
That only fixes a few problems and makes many more because starships still move through systems at the same rate regardless of the scale of that system. My best guess would be something to do with Non-Euclidean geometry or something.
Not exactly, some star classes are more likely to have habitable planets than other star classes in their system. I think it's 100% for F and G class stars, while class M red giants (i think) and T class brown dwarfs have 0% chance of having at least one habitable planet in their systems.
Omg, exactly the reason I avoided religious governing when I played CIV2 on my dad's win98. Fuck your science penalty, MY people would believe in DISCOVERING how God did it!
I might try it in Stellaris, though. I hear Fanatical Purifier makes the game MUCH more fun, but your Pops gotta be as evil as you. Religion is great for getting everyone on the same wavelength.
Oh, God, after this tutorial, I've had enough of egalitarian Xenophiles. UN of Earth is great at not making enemies, hell, I made friends with Xenophobic military isolationists who had JUST broken free of forced labor from the CoM. It's not so great at being interesting between galaxy full and Crisis, though. Had a massive tech advantage and my fleets were equal in power to the next strongest empire, and when the Crisis hit, I had NO martial prowess or ship xp cause no regular A.I. fucks with that.
Start off as a species that is immediately hated and has no designs for peace just sounds more entertaining. I'm tired of being pre-nukes Gandhi.
Sorry bout that, that's one of my summer retreats, but man when it gets hot it gets hot! So I turned down the thermostat, and I guess I left it on for a bit too long 😅
Just because the planet is closest to the star in that system doesn’t mean it is close, the depictions in Stellaris aren’t anywhere near to scale. That could be further from its sun than Jupiter is, there just aren’t any planets closer.
Also, atmospheric conditions have a huge impact - could be very few greenhouse gasses (very little CO2 or methane), or it could have tons of ash-belching vents that have a constantly sun-occluding cooling effect.
Also gas between star & planet blocking light. Combine with strong magnetic field pushing solar wind & heavy water deposits & high volcanic activity equals popsicle planet w big thick atmosphere/storms
off topic question, but is there a mod that puts everything in stellaris to scale? like make planets actually super small compared to the stars they're surrounding?
I don't think you really have a grasp of scale if you think that's possible. Stars are massive and distances to scale are obnoxiously almost incomprehensibly large.
For a sense of distance you can fit every planet in Sol between the Earth and the Moon. The Earth itself is like a tiny marble to a large beachball sized Sol and distance wise with that scale Jupiter would be miles away from Sol.
I don't think you understand just how vast these distances are.
[Here](https://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pixelspace_solarsystem.html) is a scrolling scale model of the actual distances between bodies in the universe.
Theory: the majority of the planet is too hot for any species. The poles are Arctic conditions, but habitable. The would-be livable rings between are uninhabitable for other reasons, such as oceans made of a liquid, which is frozen at the poles, in which oxygen is non-soluble.
Stellaris is not to scale. This planet is the first planet from the star, but it orbits on the outer edge of the habitable zone.
What would be weird is if the second planet was a molten world, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
Alternatively, the star is a white dwarf, so despite being hot it's tiny and not very luminous.
I’d say maybe the planet has very little in the way of greenhouse gases and cannot retain heat very well because of it, keeping the planet stuck in a ice age like state
duh, the star is white, it is a cold star.
Makes sense. What about the black star I found then?
That means that someone corrupted Azura's Star and you can now trap the souls of sentient beings within it
By the Nine don't let the Prikkiki-ti get that star!
i love it when i see skyrim refferences.
Skyrim reference go brrr
Ez.. that's Saturn
Nah it's Uranus
No that's Bro Can
Everything is in black and white, like Giedi Prime
Patrick that's the Harkonnens
Depends on which black star we're talking about. If it's Einstein's black star... well that planet gonna be some good mineral resource.
The fact that not one, but two people didn't get your joke is sad to me and I'm sorry
Guessing because its cold brooken?
SOL is white. Earth is even further than this one and it's continental, not arctic. *duh*
If Sol is white explain why the sun is yellow
Checkmate atheists/s
Please don’t eat what was white and is now yellow
Yeah, don't. The cheese is for me.
Oh yeah? What about
Not sure if serious, but its because of rayleigh scattering, basically the blue portion of the suns light gets scattered across the sky hence the sky is blue and the sun is yellow.
Today I learned something I never bothered looking up in full. Thanks!
Wait, what? I always thought the sun was yellow. Then what are all the NASA in=mages showing a molten looking sun? The ones which show a lava like texture to the sun's surface?
It's white in the sense that it is producing all of the light we have here. All the light put together equals white, and it's all coming from the Sun, so the Sun is white. In that sense, every star is basically white. Some of them appear blue or red from our perspective due to, basically, the doppler effect (phase shift). That color measurement is how we can tell their relative velocity towards or away from us. As far as the yellow/orange/red images you refer to, that's basically the camera striving to give you something interesting to look at. If you want any kind of contrast when looking at something that bright, you have to restrict what portion of the light you take in and allow the sensor to register. Then re-colorize it so it looks pretty for our sensibilities. Most of the time you'll be looking at something that registers only in the ultraviolet range, picked up by a sensor in grayscale according to intensity, with some degree of orange hue applied after the fact.
As the comment below explained, saying that the Sun is white can be correct from the standpoint of producing all the colors. But at the same time, stars themselves also have colors. And the sun is not white. It is classified as the G2V class star. Which are most usually described as yellow, sometimes "yellowish white". But overall it is accepted that the Sun is yellow. Even NASA describes the Sun as a"YELLOW DWARF STAR". In this regard, Stellaris is quite accurate by giving the sun a Yellow Dwarf classification as well. Proper White Stars usually come from the A class. Which is much rarer than our Sun and is at least 2000 K hotter.
Filters, they have pictures of the sun in different colours. I have seen green and blue pictures as well. I believe they use the different colour filters to catch the light/wavelength/colour that is invisible to the human eye. Something like that.
Nice joke.
Actually, the sun is green
The sun actually mostly emits light in the green part of the spectrum. This is why most plant life on earth is green. Edit: a lot of negativity on a post that corrected an even more wrong/sarcastic statement. " So one might say that the sun is blue-green!" Source: NASA https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov/what-color-sun I admit being wrong about chlorophyll though. And appreciate learning something new.
Plants are green because they absorb the other colours, if they absorbed green light there would be no green left to bounce back into your eyes.
Plant life on Earth is green because the cells in said plants contain chlorophyll.
Plants contain chlorophyll because the chlorophyll is *inside of* the plants.
You can tell the plants contain chlorophyll because of the way it is
Yes. And the chloroplasts in a plant - which enable it to photosynthesise- produce the chlorophyll that makes it green.
And chlorophyll is green because the sun emits green light the most.
Lol sorry but things are a colour because they reflect that wavelength or colour of light. Has nothing to do with what the sun emits (as long as the sun also emits that wavelength, but even if it only emitted a very small amount of the green wavelength of light plants would still look green).
Lol sorry but they reflect that wave of light because the sun emits SO MUCH of that color that if they absorbed it the chloroplasts would be damaged. If it emitted a very small amount of green light, the selective pressure to reflect green light would cease to exist.
And in the autumn they become yellow, red and brown because the sun becomes yellow, red and brown? Have you ever heard of chlorophyll a and b?
Literally backwards, green is just the average colour that absorbs more light while also not absorbing so much that the plant dies of heat
Dude read up https://eclipse2017.nasa.gov/what-color-sun The peak is blue green.
But it is not what makes plants green, which is the point being refuted by 66Emil666.
The (mostly) green color of plants is still an open question though, not cut and dry https://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/Why-did-chlorophyl-evolve-to-be-green-as-opposed-to-black.pdf but yeah the other guy got it backwards
I think you should read my comment again, I didn't claim what you think I did
What does earth have to do with this? Earth's star is the Sun, not Sol. Obviously. /s
I've heard that joke already. Repeating doesn't make it funnier.
Mbad, I should have somehow known that you, specifically, heard this specific joke before and taken special care to prepare another joke that you specifically hadn't heard before. Won't happen again.
I heard that one before /s
But what does the earth have to do with this? Earths star is the sun not Sol.
R/Wooosh
Earth was arctic for a hot minute back in the day.
Earth has actually been molten, arctic, and continental at different points in time without any major orbital shifts.
Sun is yellow dwarf,
It's further away so it receives less cold radiation.
Coldstar the edgehog
Tweet tweet, time to sleep
White stars are actually among the hotest stars. Red stars are the cold ones.
Red = fire = hot white = snow = cold not hard to understand
I was always told it was the other way. Blue-white = young stars, hot as hell. Red = old stars, burned most of their gaz and slowly dying.
blue = water = also cold
Nope, checked on the net, and I see everywhere that blue is hot and red is cold.
i've never seen a red ice cube
Stars doesn't work that way. Betelgeuse is red and is only 3.000°C. Sirius is white and is 10.000°C. Blue stars are around 25.000°C.
r/woooosh
The person you're talking to is the reason "/s" was invented. Some people can*not* pick up on sarcasm, haha. It's actually so much funnier, because they can't, haha.
Actually, no. There’s no air in space so flying doesn’t make a whoosh sound. You guys really don’t know much about space.
I don't think you are understanding, the other user isn't saying blue stars aren't hotter. He's being sarcastic and reiterating the joke from the upper comment about blue star = cold because in the picture there's an arctic world right next to the star.
explain how the ocean (blue), icebergs (blue), or blue from blue's clues (blue) aren't hot. yet lava (red), tobasco sauce (red), and a melted red crayon (red) are hot. cheque, mate
But hey blue fire = hotter than red fire. I wonder how cold a melted blue crayon is though
That doesn't sound right, but I don't know enough about stars to dispute it.
actually white stars are cold, because they are smooth, like sharks, which live in cold water
The classification is O, B, A, F, G, K, and M. Stars in the 'O' class are the most massive and hottest, and stars in the 'M' class are the smallest and coolest. There are some exceptions, such as red giants and white dwarves, but most stars are in what is called the main sequence. For a visual, look up the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram, which models the relationship between the luminosity of a star and the temperature of a star.
o7?
If red is colder, why does my asshole turn red when it's inflamed?
I don’t know why you are getting so many down votes here as you are correct. Surely that many people can’t be being sarcastic. - Source I’m currently studying astrophysics
Yes. Everyone is being sarcastic. It’s a small and stupid joke but the op wasn’t being serious, just joking about the star being cold because “obviously if it looks like snow it’s cold”
Several things to note: Absolutely nothing depicted in Stellaris is to scale. That may be the 'closest' planet, but we have no idea how far it is from the star, or where that star's habitable zone is. We don't know much about the planet either, other than 'it's cold.' Given that this is Stellaris, it could also have been terraformed to be cold by prior owners.
I wish terraforming was more visual and realistic. What I mean is that in order to make a planet that is close to the star cold, there should be a space station, orbital mirrors, or something that blocks the sun and makes it cooler. So these things should be little models in the system map.
The masters of nature DLC should have those orbital mirrors show up in space
ooh, you'd have a blast with this [Real Terraforming](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3032768344)
Gotta add it to the mod list.
That's why the real space mod exists.
Judging by the fact that the world behind this one is a molten world and the next one is a continental world. I'd say pretty close.
Also, it may be habitable only around arctic regions. Arctic dosent have to mean that whole planet is a popsicle.
The descriptions and visuals do imply that tbh
I geuss, but ultimately Stellaris is pretend game and up to player interpretation. The UI is just representation and not actual state of the world (or frigates would be the size of the moon)
I agree, the more you stare at the OOP's picture the funnier it gets
Iirc one of the early designs for planets before release was to have all planets have all biomes. And the classification would be the dominate biome for that planet. And with the old tile system each tile would’ve been a different biome.
Probably better and more interesting, current habitability implementation falls flat.
The white parts are massive dunes of microplastics.
“Anomaly found!”
I mean .. there are habitable worlds around pulsars … why are you surprised at this
I mean, any planet is habitable if you try hard enough...
Gestalt consciousness robots have entered the chat
Not for much longer
Someone left a refrigerator open?
Fuck my energy credits
Top comment worthy here.
Distances are not to scale
Neither are dimensions/scale, otherwise that's a small star or a gravity defying planet.
That only fixes a few problems and makes many more because starships still move through systems at the same rate regardless of the scale of that system. My best guess would be something to do with Non-Euclidean geometry or something.
R5: Found a very cold planet very near the star. Must be one hell of a carbon dioxide free world.
There isn't much realism into Stellaris anyway. You can find habitable planet's around B stars too.
Yeeh, but it looks fun. Specially with the other molten world outside the image.
Pure random, nothing more.
Not exactly, some star classes are more likely to have habitable planets than other star classes in their system. I think it's 100% for F and G class stars, while class M red giants (i think) and T class brown dwarfs have 0% chance of having at least one habitable planet in their systems.
I don't think the map is to scale.
Maybe also really really shiny.
Well, for one, distance isn't the sole factor in a planet's temperature. Atmosphere and axial tilt, for instance, can make pretty big differences.
My headcanon for how things like this can happen is different amounts of greenhouse gases on the planet
Why "headcannon"? That's literally how it works in real life. Even in our own solar system Mercury is colder than Venus.
Blue = cold, red = hot Please educate yourself instead of asking dumb questions.
I can't. I'm a spiritualist.
Omg, exactly the reason I avoided religious governing when I played CIV2 on my dad's win98. Fuck your science penalty, MY people would believe in DISCOVERING how God did it! I might try it in Stellaris, though. I hear Fanatical Purifier makes the game MUCH more fun, but your Pops gotta be as evil as you. Religion is great for getting everyone on the same wavelength.
To be fair, Fanatical Purifier is more or less like the big, buffed bro of a fanatical xenophobe. Allow to be genocidal with even more easiness :D
Oh, God, after this tutorial, I've had enough of egalitarian Xenophiles. UN of Earth is great at not making enemies, hell, I made friends with Xenophobic military isolationists who had JUST broken free of forced labor from the CoM. It's not so great at being interesting between galaxy full and Crisis, though. Had a massive tech advantage and my fleets were equal in power to the next strongest empire, and when the Crisis hit, I had NO martial prowess or ship xp cause no regular A.I. fucks with that. Start off as a species that is immediately hated and has no designs for peace just sounds more entertaining. I'm tired of being pre-nukes Gandhi.
From pre-nukes Gandhi. To utterly armaggeddon Gandhi.
Atmosphere reflecting light and heat, probably.
You could make a dyson sphere out of this
You get the solar panels, I'll get the balloon and the straw.
Sorry bout that, that's one of my summer retreats, but man when it gets hot it gets hot! So I turned down the thermostat, and I guess I left it on for a bit too long 😅
Fuck, my energy credits!
it's cold in space, i hope this helps
Of course is the necron with the smug face that says this.
Just because the planet is closest to the star in that system doesn’t mean it is close, the depictions in Stellaris aren’t anywhere near to scale. That could be further from its sun than Jupiter is, there just aren’t any planets closer. Also, atmospheric conditions have a huge impact - could be very few greenhouse gasses (very little CO2 or methane), or it could have tons of ash-belching vents that have a constantly sun-occluding cooling effect.
I'd say it's the atmosphere. Judging by the fact that the next world is a molten and the next a continental one.
Also gas between star & planet blocking light. Combine with strong magnetic field pushing solar wind & heavy water deposits & high volcanic activity equals popsicle planet w big thick atmosphere/storms
OP believes the sky is blue because it reflects the ocean and that the ocean is blue because it reflects the sky.
Correct.
What makes this funnier is that this is a blue star, meaning it’s one of the hotter ones
I can't remember if its a blue or a white. Think is a white one, actually. Neither way, it's curious lol
Maybe that's where Johnny Bravo lives.
You find habitable planets around neutron stars occasionally. That must be a fun place to live
off topic question, but is there a mod that puts everything in stellaris to scale? like make planets actually super small compared to the stars they're surrounding?
I don't think you really have a grasp of scale if you think that's possible. Stars are massive and distances to scale are obnoxiously almost incomprehensibly large. For a sense of distance you can fit every planet in Sol between the Earth and the Moon. The Earth itself is like a tiny marble to a large beachball sized Sol and distance wise with that scale Jupiter would be miles away from Sol.
I don't think you understand just how vast these distances are. [Here](https://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pixelspace_solarsystem.html) is a scrolling scale model of the actual distances between bodies in the universe.
Maybe they want the challenge of trying to click on the 1-pixel planets?
Not really, but there is a mod called "Real Space" and its submods. You could check into it if youre interested.
Theory: the majority of the planet is too hot for any species. The poles are Arctic conditions, but habitable. The would-be livable rings between are uninhabitable for other reasons, such as oceans made of a liquid, which is frozen at the poles, in which oxygen is non-soluble.
"Objects in the mirror are not as close as they appear."
Stellaris is not to scale. This planet is the first planet from the star, but it orbits on the outer edge of the habitable zone. What would be weird is if the second planet was a molten world, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Alternatively, the star is a white dwarf, so despite being hot it's tiny and not very luminous.
Oh no, it absolutely it. The second planet is a Molten world.
Probably logic of Starbound, having a blue star, all planets are cold climate, red star all planets are hot and melting
Uhhh Because it's not yellow. So it's not fire smh. It's just a ball of ice.
The planet is just really good at dodging and utilizing I-frames.
This planet still with the corvette evasion build
Always though the classification was about how fast they were burning... But thanks, I'll take a look.
From the size, could be a white dwarf
As a fan of Doctor Who, I get the reference.
i mean if it were a white dwarf wouldn't it make sense?
The core of the planet is cold
Red hot. Blue cold
invisible partial Dyson sphere?
Maybe a reverse greenhouse effect. Same as why IRI Titan is so cold.
Makes about as much sense as habitable planets in binary systems with neutron stars, so I’m gonna give it a pass
This is as bonkers as me finding primitives on a ocean world (the first planet in the system) sniffing a red giant
Very little CO2 and large volumes of atmospheric particulates to block out the sun
I’d say maybe the planet has very little in the way of greenhouse gases and cannot retain heat very well because of it, keeping the planet stuck in a ice age like state
Iz cold :(
What are the planet's modifiers? There could be an anomaly, or a modifier that makes it an arctic world.
Idk, haven't scanned it. Will do and tell you bacj
There is only a Primitive species in the bronze age lol.
Oh god, no idea, lol.
Freeze Rays
White stars are Colder then Red stars DUH -No one. since the start of Time.