UAs, Barnacles & More Thread 5 - The Canonn
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
- Status
Just an idea: If the UA's points to Merope, should the Barnacles point too? I will try to test this theory right now. For those exploring Merope, try to aproach a PLanet/Moon having the main star Merope selected so it shows on the compass and it possible to align with the landing.
You kidnap and bring him here to brazil , and we force him to drink all the tea in my 40°C weather...
I can't help thinking that this is like a cryptic crossword. Understand the clues, and there should be a strong indication of where one or more manually placed barnacles can be found.
I'm less inclined to go after the randomly generated POI ones. It's entirely possible that somebody could happen on one in the next hour, but as a plan for a concentrated or targeted effort, it's a non-starter if we want things to happen in a sensible timescale.
As for the manually placed ones, the planetary surface area to be covered in the Pleiades is just far too large to systematically cover each and every planet with multiple commanders following pre-planned routes. MB says the barnacles are too small to be seen from orbital flight, so that means flying in normal space at 2-400m/s. If they can be spotted from, say, 500m, then there is a limit to how much width of terrain can be visually scanned while flying in a straight line before stuff away to the sides becomes too difficult to spot - or is to far away to be rendered. (If 500m was the distance at which they were rendered, then the width of the visual terrain scan is 1000m.) If a given planet is 10,000km - 10 million metres - from pole to pole, it would take about 9 hours at 300m/s to cover one meridian with a scan width of 1km. Near the poles, the meridian lines come close together, such that the scan width overlaps. As you move towards the equator, the distance between the meridians increases and the scan width no longer overlaps until you approach the other pole.
For this example planet that's 10,000km from pole to pole, the distance around the equator is about 20,000km (pole to pole is half a circumference, equator is a full circumference). If your scan width is 1km, that means you need to make 20,000 passes over the equator to visually cover the whole surface. You could make less passes in the areas further away from the equator, but the overall flying time would be absolutely gargantuan.
A more efficient method would be to fly in circles parallel to the equator - small circles near the poles, getting gradually larger as you approach the equator. Doing this would mean eliminating the overlap effect that comes with flying along meridians pole to pole - but it's still 10,000 loops around the planet, ranging from a short loop around a pole 500m away - about a 1500m loop taking a few seconds, to 20 million metres at the equator (a full circumference) and taking around 18 hours (for one loop).
It's just too big, too time consuming. An 18 hour flight around the equator, with hundreds of such flights that aren't much shorter (a few km away from the equator) is just too much to expect from people who have real lives to get on with (jobs, families, sleeping). Not only that, but if someone were to attempt to do it, they would eventually lose concentration and could very well miss the thing they're looking for. We're talking weeks, months, even years, of doing nothing but flying over barren terrain that all looks the same.
And there are lots of planets to cover.
To me, any sort of brute force search-everything approach is a non-starter. FD want us to find these things, and I find it hard to believe that a mammoth grind-fest that could be scuppered by a few moments of lost concentration is what they have in mind.
We need to home in on candidate locations, whether that is a particular planet, or particular planetary features.
I'm less inclined to go after the randomly generated POI ones. It's entirely possible that somebody could happen on one in the next hour, but as a plan for a concentrated or targeted effort, it's a non-starter if we want things to happen in a sensible timescale.
As for the manually placed ones, the planetary surface area to be covered in the Pleiades is just far too large to systematically cover each and every planet with multiple commanders following pre-planned routes. MB says the barnacles are too small to be seen from orbital flight, so that means flying in normal space at 2-400m/s. If they can be spotted from, say, 500m, then there is a limit to how much width of terrain can be visually scanned while flying in a straight line before stuff away to the sides becomes too difficult to spot - or is to far away to be rendered. (If 500m was the distance at which they were rendered, then the width of the visual terrain scan is 1000m.) If a given planet is 10,000km - 10 million metres - from pole to pole, it would take about 9 hours at 300m/s to cover one meridian with a scan width of 1km. Near the poles, the meridian lines come close together, such that the scan width overlaps. As you move towards the equator, the distance between the meridians increases and the scan width no longer overlaps until you approach the other pole.
For this example planet that's 10,000km from pole to pole, the distance around the equator is about 20,000km (pole to pole is half a circumference, equator is a full circumference). If your scan width is 1km, that means you need to make 20,000 passes over the equator to visually cover the whole surface. You could make less passes in the areas further away from the equator, but the overall flying time would be absolutely gargantuan.
A more efficient method would be to fly in circles parallel to the equator - small circles near the poles, getting gradually larger as you approach the equator. Doing this would mean eliminating the overlap effect that comes with flying along meridians pole to pole - but it's still 10,000 loops around the planet, ranging from a short loop around a pole 500m away - about a 1500m loop taking a few seconds, to 20 million metres at the equator (a full circumference) and taking around 18 hours (for one loop).
It's just too big, too time consuming. An 18 hour flight around the equator, with hundreds of such flights that aren't much shorter (a few km away from the equator) is just too much to expect from people who have real lives to get on with (jobs, families, sleeping). Not only that, but if someone were to attempt to do it, they would eventually lose concentration and could very well miss the thing they're looking for. We're talking weeks, months, even years, of doing nothing but flying over barren terrain that all looks the same.
And there are lots of planets to cover.
To me, any sort of brute force search-everything approach is a non-starter. FD want us to find these things, and I find it hard to believe that a mammoth grind-fest that could be scuppered by a few moments of lost concentration is what they have in mind.
We need to home in on candidate locations, whether that is a particular planet, or particular planetary features.
Clever. I like it.
I already suggested that. Unfortunately for that to really work the planet would have to be tidally locked to the star, and there are no such planets in Merope.
Bananarcle?
I have been uncovered !!! HAAALP!!!
Thats off course a problem unless we are looking for running barnacles.....
Quick, start looking for huge footprints
So here is my reasoning for the Barnicles probably being located on Metal Rich, low-gravity planets in misty craters. First lets try to to reason why they might be located in nebula. So first what are nebula. Well according to wikipedia a nebulae " is an interstellar cloud of dust, hydrogen, helium and other ionized gases." Which means they will have interesting elements in them. The younger the nebula is the more probable it is for it to contain interesting elements since more time has passed for supernovaes etc. to fuse these elements and distribute them to the cloud. Guess what. Astronomicaly speaking the Pleides is a rather young nebula formed of stars mostly younger than 600 My which means it should contain interesting elements.
Now over to earths own barnicles. These eat plancton which floats near them by sending out a fan shaped arm and pulling it in. So obviously our own Barnicles(tm) doesn't eat plancton, but we can safely assume that the name given to them is descriptive of some of their properties. So what do they eat. Well, we know that they are connected with the meta-alloys and it wouldn't be too far afield to believe that these meta-alloys are obtained from the Barnicles since Barnicles consist of meta-alloys. Given that, this would imply that the Barnicles have to "eat" or obtain these metals in some way and given that they are named Barnicles it is probable that the way they obtain these metals is by filtering dust through some kind of internal conjestion system. Guess where it is a lot of dust floating around for them to filter? Well that would be my reasoning for why they are located in nebula. Taking this further, metal rich planets have a description that specifically states that there is a lot of metal close to the surface so it would make sense that the Barnicles are on such planets. If the gravity is low, then there will be more dust, hence low g planets might be favourable. Also this is why misty craters might be good since gravity will pull the dust down in these areas creating a higher concentration.
Now someone has suggested that there might be more Barnicles on high g world because of the shape these take if we assume the trailer depicts one of them. I would like to make an argument against this by again looking at the barnicles of earth. Despite the "normal" gravity of earth the usual barnicles has a similar shape not because of the gravity, but one of the reasons is to not get "blown away" by passing debris and strong currents so that they remain in a part of the ocean that is beneficial for their survival. I'm thinking this might be the reason for our space Barnicles shape as well. Even in the case of a meteor impact the shape would make the resulting shockwave much less likely to shake the barnicles up and move them from their misty craters (or whatever location they might prefer).
I might of course be completely off on this, but since the search area is so big I think it is worth having a discussion on what locations to prioritize the search in.
Now over to earths own barnicles. These eat plancton which floats near them by sending out a fan shaped arm and pulling it in. So obviously our own Barnicles(tm) doesn't eat plancton, but we can safely assume that the name given to them is descriptive of some of their properties. So what do they eat. Well, we know that they are connected with the meta-alloys and it wouldn't be too far afield to believe that these meta-alloys are obtained from the Barnicles since Barnicles consist of meta-alloys. Given that, this would imply that the Barnicles have to "eat" or obtain these metals in some way and given that they are named Barnicles it is probable that the way they obtain these metals is by filtering dust through some kind of internal conjestion system. Guess where it is a lot of dust floating around for them to filter? Well that would be my reasoning for why they are located in nebula. Taking this further, metal rich planets have a description that specifically states that there is a lot of metal close to the surface so it would make sense that the Barnicles are on such planets. If the gravity is low, then there will be more dust, hence low g planets might be favourable. Also this is why misty craters might be good since gravity will pull the dust down in these areas creating a higher concentration.
Now someone has suggested that there might be more Barnicles on high g world because of the shape these take if we assume the trailer depicts one of them. I would like to make an argument against this by again looking at the barnicles of earth. Despite the "normal" gravity of earth the usual barnicles has a similar shape not because of the gravity, but one of the reasons is to not get "blown away" by passing debris and strong currents so that they remain in a part of the ocean that is beneficial for their survival. I'm thinking this might be the reason for our space Barnicles shape as well. Even in the case of a meteor impact the shape would make the resulting shockwave much less likely to shake the barnicles up and move them from their misty craters (or whatever location they might prefer).
I might of course be completely off on this, but since the search area is so big I think it is worth having a discussion on what locations to prioritize the search in.
Imagine for a moment if everyone who had a theory did this, and posted to the thread multiple times with teasers. It would be pretty ridiculous, no? Please stop. Post your theory or don't, but the thread has more than enough litter.
I've officially given up - I'm off to get ready for the Distant Worlds trip.
Hmm, true.
Possible UA spotted in Netherlands ....
http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/1040/Den-Haa...s-geluid-houdt-West-Nederland-in-de-ban.dhtml
Turn your sound on
Edit: though more such sound were recorded around the world
http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/1040/Den-Haa...s-geluid-houdt-West-Nederland-in-de-ban.dhtml
Turn your sound on
Edit: though more such sound were recorded around the world
Last edited:
There'll probably be 20 more pages to read before I finish this post, but if I don't start it I'll never get my thoughts out.
Firstly, FDev do try to be somewhat scientifically accurate when designing things and I think Michael has given us enough clues, but we are perhaps not making the right educated guesses about where the barnacles can be found or even what they actually are, so here's my conjecture based on the hints we do know about so far (plus some facts about the Pleiades):
Barnacles create Meta-Alloys using an organic process - this doesn't mean the barnacles are true living organisms, as such, but could be genetically engineered multi or single cellular organisms.
In fact as the Pleiades stars are (as far as we know) about 100 million years old there should be no indigenous life there yet based on our own geological/evolutionary history (multi-cellular life didn't kick off until the last 500 million years in the 4500 million year history of the earth, although the Proterozoic (2500-500 years old) saw increasing complexity in organisms). My bet would be that the "barnacles" have been put there deliberately for a couple of reasons, 1. the conditions are right for them to produce meta-alloys and 2. there are no indigenous life forms that might interfere/infect/eat them.
The description of "barnacles" probably only suggests their shape i.e. soft bodied organisms in a cone like hard structure that they secrete themselves (they would likely have to be grown somewhere else to develop at least the start of a shell before being "planted") and I'd go as far as to suggest that they secrete meta-alloys as their "shells" and this is their sole useful purpose.
I don't buy the nebula thing as food - the volume of "space" that would have to pass through any filtration system would be mind bogglingly big in order to accumulate enough useful elements to produce meta alloy shells (or any other significant matter for other uses e.g. "food"). Of course you could hide things from distant observation in a nebula, so that could be a reason, but we have as a species got pretty good at using differing EM spectra to see through space dust etc.
Another major factor in my thinking is being organic "factories" (not necessarily lifeforms with a full reproductive cycle) there are going to be some fundamental requirements for their "ecological niche" to keep them functioning:
1. A main chemical element capable of forming complex long chain molecules e.g. carbon, but also silicon can exhibit similar chemistry.
2. A fluid medium to act as the main ingredient for cells e.g. water (not sure if there are other candidates).
3. Given the barnacles are being sited for some reason in a vacuum (other than we can't land on atmospheric worlds yet), a means to protect the cells either by encasing a multi-cellular organism in a large shell or a lot of single celled organisms in a matrix of fused hard shells (a bit like coral) - I like the latter as it could actually meet the meta-alloys description (not sure about the easily machined comment - that's a whole other topic being an amateur/semi-pro CNC machinist ). Anyway a fluid based cell would get a pretty hard time exposed to a vacuum.
4. A source of nutrients (better than 1 molecule per cm cubed ), which would have to act as a metabolic fuel and a source of material for growth
5. A source of fluids to build new cells from
6. Protection from radiation either by location or by the organism's shell(s)
So given that barnacles have been hand placed in specific locations that "make sense" (they do don't they Michael?) what planetary conditions can we find that might meet the conditions above?
My best guess is geysers or vents, as these are the only likely source of fluids (regardless of whether the animations for their eruptions are in).
Where can we find these?
Many geysers and vents have deposits around them that are brightly coloured due to concentrations of dissolved minerals when compared to the surrounding rocks (even those on IO and Triton exhibit this)
Geysers and vents usually occur around areas of active igneous geology either as a result of internal planetary heat or recent impacts.
We know that FDev have modeled tectonic plate boundaries to some extent so mountain ranges, rift valleys with bright colored patches on them or around the rims or bottom of craters with either fissures/cracks or holes in them. Anything that looks like a sunken caldera (see pics of the top of Olympus Mons on Mars for reference and look around the edges.
I have been personally looking on Pleione 6 since the weekend (I did start on Pleione 3A, but encountered a lot of CTDs and other weirdness that made that too hazardous).
If these thing are being "farmed" then I would expect some kind of protection around them, unless being hidden in a nebula was deemed enough.
Personally I'm not convinced the trailer sequence are barnacles (happy to be proven wrong) - that looks more like a half buried chandelier like structure, but I am hedging my bets by surveying Pleione 6 in case the >1G world has merit The planet also has bright patches on its sunny side and the regolith is brown in places. There are also misty craters in places, but not everywhere.
I'm going to continue surveying the place until either I find a barnacle or someone else finds one somewhere else and we can get more data on the "right conditions".
BTW - this is awesome stuff and I've seen more CMDRs in a few days than I have since release
Firstly, FDev do try to be somewhat scientifically accurate when designing things and I think Michael has given us enough clues, but we are perhaps not making the right educated guesses about where the barnacles can be found or even what they actually are, so here's my conjecture based on the hints we do know about so far (plus some facts about the Pleiades):
Barnacles create Meta-Alloys using an organic process - this doesn't mean the barnacles are true living organisms, as such, but could be genetically engineered multi or single cellular organisms.
In fact as the Pleiades stars are (as far as we know) about 100 million years old there should be no indigenous life there yet based on our own geological/evolutionary history (multi-cellular life didn't kick off until the last 500 million years in the 4500 million year history of the earth, although the Proterozoic (2500-500 years old) saw increasing complexity in organisms). My bet would be that the "barnacles" have been put there deliberately for a couple of reasons, 1. the conditions are right for them to produce meta-alloys and 2. there are no indigenous life forms that might interfere/infect/eat them.
The description of "barnacles" probably only suggests their shape i.e. soft bodied organisms in a cone like hard structure that they secrete themselves (they would likely have to be grown somewhere else to develop at least the start of a shell before being "planted") and I'd go as far as to suggest that they secrete meta-alloys as their "shells" and this is their sole useful purpose.
I don't buy the nebula thing as food - the volume of "space" that would have to pass through any filtration system would be mind bogglingly big in order to accumulate enough useful elements to produce meta alloy shells (or any other significant matter for other uses e.g. "food"). Of course you could hide things from distant observation in a nebula, so that could be a reason, but we have as a species got pretty good at using differing EM spectra to see through space dust etc.
Another major factor in my thinking is being organic "factories" (not necessarily lifeforms with a full reproductive cycle) there are going to be some fundamental requirements for their "ecological niche" to keep them functioning:
1. A main chemical element capable of forming complex long chain molecules e.g. carbon, but also silicon can exhibit similar chemistry.
2. A fluid medium to act as the main ingredient for cells e.g. water (not sure if there are other candidates).
3. Given the barnacles are being sited for some reason in a vacuum (other than we can't land on atmospheric worlds yet), a means to protect the cells either by encasing a multi-cellular organism in a large shell or a lot of single celled organisms in a matrix of fused hard shells (a bit like coral) - I like the latter as it could actually meet the meta-alloys description (not sure about the easily machined comment - that's a whole other topic being an amateur/semi-pro CNC machinist
). Anyway a fluid based cell would get a pretty hard time exposed to a vacuum.4. A source of nutrients (better than 1 molecule per cm cubed
), which would have to act as a metabolic fuel and a source of material for growth5. A source of fluids to build new cells from
6. Protection from radiation either by location or by the organism's shell(s)
So given that barnacles have been hand placed in specific locations that "make sense" (they do don't they Michael?) what planetary conditions can we find that might meet the conditions above?
My best guess is geysers or vents, as these are the only likely source of fluids (regardless of whether the animations for their eruptions are in).
Where can we find these?
Many geysers and vents have deposits around them that are brightly coloured due to concentrations of dissolved minerals when compared to the surrounding rocks (even those on IO and Triton exhibit this)
Geysers and vents usually occur around areas of active igneous geology either as a result of internal planetary heat or recent impacts.
We know that FDev have modeled tectonic plate boundaries to some extent so mountain ranges, rift valleys with bright colored patches on them or around the rims or bottom of craters with either fissures/cracks or holes in them. Anything that looks like a sunken caldera (see pics of the top of Olympus Mons on Mars for reference and look around the edges.
I have been personally looking on Pleione 6 since the weekend (I did start on Pleione 3A, but encountered a lot of CTDs and other weirdness that made that too hazardous).
If these thing are being "farmed" then I would expect some kind of protection around them, unless being hidden in a nebula was deemed enough.
Personally I'm not convinced the trailer sequence are barnacles (happy to be proven wrong) - that looks more like a half buried chandelier like structure, but I am hedging my bets by surveying Pleione 6 in case the >1G world has merit
The planet also has bright patches on its sunny side and the regolith is brown in places. There are also misty craters in places, but not everywhere.I'm going to continue surveying the place until either I find a barnacle or someone else finds one somewhere else and we can get more data on the "right conditions".
BTW - this is awesome stuff and I've seen more CMDRs in a few days than I have since release
Last edited:
Something weird just happened. I was ~4km up surveying Atlas B3, when I suddenly found my self instantly transported 518km up with a warning message saying that I needed a permit to land here! It doesn't say that I need a permit in the System Map!
If you're taking into account nebula cloud contents, be aware these elements are incredibly sparse. If you were to take a volume the size of the planet earth, inside a dense nebula, the sum total of all the nebula cloud would be less than 1 kilogram of matter.
The only reason we 'see' Nebulae is because the light that passes through it is very slightly scattered. Scattered by such a small amount that from light years away all you get is a tiny frequency shift. From inside the Nebula itself you don't get that affect. A 'Barnacle' would, in 100 years, perhaps be able to gather 1 milligram
- Status