Double Helix
- Thread starter Kalfor
- Start date
Viper61 said:Marty, you're not thinking 4th dimensionally!!!!!!!!! Or in this case, 3 dimensionally. . . space isn't planar. Actually I don't think we know where the Mantu are in regards to the Kilrathi.
C-ya
Space may not be planar, but the Milky Way Galaxy has the vast majority of its stars concentrated in a comparitively thin disk (about a thousand light years thick compared to the galaxy's seventy thousand light year diameter). I would expect that the Milky Way is thus only a few sectors "thick" (maybe four sectors--two above and two below the galactic equator).
LOAF> I'm pretty sure you didn't read that.
Oh yeah, I forgot your amazing powers of knowing everything I ever read! Its not because I read it that it was true, you know. Someone must have fed some bullshit somewhere and I read it
Viper61> Marty, you're not thinking 4th dimensionally!!!!!!!!! Or in this case, 3 dimensionally. . . space isn't planar
Yeah...thats why I said "Or is it overlaping?" In that case, the sector would be in the same place, but above (or maybe below). Still, the wcp map mentions its a projection. after all, you cant have (yet!) a 3d map that would give us the correct distances. There is no scale of distance in the map. 1 inch of distance between 2 stars doesnt always mean x light years
Oh yeah, I forgot your amazing powers of knowing everything I ever read! Its not because I read it that it was true, you know. Someone must have fed some bullshit somewhere and I read it
Viper61> Marty, you're not thinking 4th dimensionally!!!!!!!!! Or in this case, 3 dimensionally. . . space isn't planar
Yeah...thats why I said "Or is it overlaping?" In that case, the sector would be in the same place, but above (or maybe below). Still, the wcp map mentions its a projection. after all, you cant have (yet!) a 3d map that would give us the correct distances. There is no scale of distance in the map. 1 inch of distance between 2 stars doesnt always mean x light years
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
You can do a 2D map of 3D space with a proper scale of distance - look at the original Claw Marks map - there's just no real point to doing so on a *jump* map.
One complaint I have about the "Akwende projection" is that if only the connections between star systems (mathematically, this is studied in topology) is important, they arranged the map rather oddly. I'd assume you'd want to make a map for navigation with the minimum number of confusing crossing and intersections, but apparently the artist who did the WCP map wanted to make sure it looked as complicated as possible... cool, but not rational.
I keep thinking there must be some other secret to the Akwende projection's jump line layout, like some weird 4th dimensional physics, but I guess that's just wishful thinking. And how do you choose which systems go into which quadrants/sectors? I'm thinking that it's mainly a political decision, but otherwise, there doesn't seem to be much sense to it.
Incidentally, I suppose if you wanted to try, you could use the names of various systems and map them to real stars, in the cases where there's a match, and build up a 3-D star chart that way (the Hippoarcos satellite collected a lot of data that would be helpful), then draw in the lines and guess about the positions of the other stars. However, I hesitate to do so because it might turn out that the WCP map is impossible (what if an artist used a star in another galaxy, or something).
Incidentally, despite the fact that MOO3 was kinda boring, the star map could be rotated in 3D (using the keyboard... it wasn't entirely obvious in the UI). So if you want an example of a 3D starchart that can also be used as a 2D map, you could look at that. I always thought it'd be cool to have a "starchart navigator" for the WCP map, so you could find systems without having to scan the whole map, or automatically compute jump routes, or whatever.
I keep thinking there must be some other secret to the Akwende projection's jump line layout, like some weird 4th dimensional physics, but I guess that's just wishful thinking. And how do you choose which systems go into which quadrants/sectors? I'm thinking that it's mainly a political decision, but otherwise, there doesn't seem to be much sense to it.
Incidentally, I suppose if you wanted to try, you could use the names of various systems and map them to real stars, in the cases where there's a match, and build up a 3-D star chart that way (the Hippoarcos satellite collected a lot of data that would be helpful), then draw in the lines and guess about the positions of the other stars. However, I hesitate to do so because it might turn out that the WCP map is impossible (what if an artist used a star in another galaxy, or something).
Incidentally, despite the fact that MOO3 was kinda boring, the star map could be rotated in 3D (using the keyboard... it wasn't entirely obvious in the UI). So if you want an example of a 3D starchart that can also be used as a 2D map, you could look at that. I always thought it'd be cool to have a "starchart navigator" for the WCP map, so you could find systems without having to scan the whole map, or automatically compute jump routes, or whatever.
Edfilho
Cry some more!
I thought the WCP map tried to show the aproximate places of each starsystem in the sector. We probably don't know how the galaxy would "look" when seen from "above" the disk.
but i never really thought about this problem this deeply. Maybe the WCP Map dosnt' really make sense. But it surelly looks cool.
but i never really thought about this problem this deeply. Maybe the WCP Map dosnt' really make sense. But it surelly looks cool.
LeHah
212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
Haesslich said:
The problem with that statement is that the jump points are marked as "corners" on the holomap. It doesn't take into effect the length of the distance because that would need an obscenely larger holotank or a much smaller diagram. So that means that the lines traced out are the realspace (as opposed to jumpspace) distances.
Edfilho
Cry some more!
Yeah, I really liked to invent new routes in wc1. but that was only possible in the Z plane before a dogfight. After the first furball, you would lose orientation of the carrier's "equator", and so going "up" to avoid enemies (or ambush them) wouldn't work. But the best thing was avoiding asteroid fields or leaving the enemies for AFTER your escorted ally jumped.
This kind of trick wasn't possible on the full 3d WCs, because the space between the nav point didn't really exist, game-wise.
This kind of trick wasn't possible on the full 3d WCs, because the space between the nav point didn't really exist, game-wise.
Haesslich
Spaceman
Edfilho said:
Negative. The map states that "This map does not portray the absolute position of individual systems, as exact galactic positioning is irrelevant when considering current methods of interestellar travel. Rather, it is set up as a base navigational aid in plotting jump routes. Star systems on this map are organized according to galactic-sector and sector-squadrant to which each system belongs and its position relative to other systems in that region" - the latter suggests that the 'position' is related to its place on the jump lines. The Akwende map is only to show how jump points link together to form routes, so to get from Sol to Enigma would require jumps through Talos, Ella, then Callimachus, rather than having to go in 'direction X 500 light years, tilting 'down' 25.3 degrees, etc.
The information that we have regarding jump travel indicates that the amount of time spent in jump transit is vastly shorter than the amount of time spent in realspace transit traveling from the jump point where one arrives in a system to the jump point where one departs for the next system. This implies that, for example, a route involving three jumps and 2 billion kilometers of realspace travel may be quicker than a route involving two jumps and 10 billion kilometers of realspace travel. Since jump transit time does not seem to require significantly longer periods of time to transit longer jump lines, it makes sense that the Akwende projection regards all jump lines as being of equal length.
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
LeHah said:
I'm not really sure which map you mean - all the WCM maps are 3D system maps that have only three or four systems each.
LeHah said:
I agree with Ijuin that jump lines shouldn't be based on transit time since it's much shorter than normal space transit time, except on one point: jump transit times aren't just vastly shorter than normal transit times, they're effectively instantaneous (it says so on the WCP map). Basically, the two ends of a jump line are actually the same point in space, but they appear separated in normal space--kinda like pinching together two parts of a napkin. Another piece of supporting evidence is that the Enigma jump line is extremely long, but there's no logical way to make it shorter, regardless of whether or not it would take longer to jump through.
The main thrust of my original question wasn't with intersector/quadrant jumps, but what the organizational principle of placing star systems within quadrants, which seemed rather haphazard. Haesslich's quotation from the map answers that question: there is some sort of relative position amongst systems within a quadrant.
I'm not really satisfied by that answer, since position even within a quadrant really shouldn't matter in jump navigation. The only alternative reason why relative position within a quadrant might matter is possibly because there might be some non-jump drive that would work between systems within a quadrant; that sounds pretty bogus to me, though, considering what we do know.
I still theorize that it was just a matter of artistic interpretation.
LeHah
212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
Bandit LOAF said:
I meant that the lines drawn on the holotank maps wasn't to measure distance. It was to measure time to get from one jump point to the next. But then I realized that such an idea is wrong, because the lines that connect the jump points angle off, denoting a change in direction.
Ignore me.
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
The speed at which they're drawn (in the case of the movie), however, probably denotes time.