Never seen one. However there are landable bodies with active volcanism (according to descriptions in System Map), so looking into such bodies may bear fruit.
-v
UAs, Barnacles & More Thread 5 - The Canonn
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
- Status
Never seen one. However there are landable bodies with active volcanism (according to descriptions in System Map), so looking into such bodies may bear fruit.
-v
Thinking about MBs comment "And to those asking why nebulae - it's quite logical if you think about it".
Nebulae are 90% hydrogen, 10% helium and and 0.1% heavy elements such as carbon, nitrogen, magnesium, potassium, calcium, iron.
http://www.seasky.org/celestial-objects/nebulae.html
I think that the barnacles are harvesting hydrogen to provide their energy source. They can't collect from stars as they are too hot and would melt the meta alloy structure. A planet in a nebula is the next best thing so what attributes should that planet have?
This is probably at odds with most other theories.
Nebulae are 90% hydrogen, 10% helium and and 0.1% heavy elements such as carbon, nitrogen, magnesium, potassium, calcium, iron.
http://www.seasky.org/celestial-objects/nebulae.html
I think that the barnacles are harvesting hydrogen to provide their energy source. They can't collect from stars as they are too hot and would melt the meta alloy structure. A planet in a nebula is the next best thing so what attributes should that planet have?
- Not too close to the star as too hot
- Not sure what effect stellar winds would have on the gas - possibly a planet a long way from its star would be better?
- Fairly high gravity to attract hydrogen gas
This is probably at odds with most other theories.
There are planets marked with Volcanism-Geysers, and the full list of the ones I've filtered it down to is:
| System | Location | Dist From Star | Orbit Parent | Orbit Parent Type/Atmosphere | Surface Temp | Tidally Locked (to orbit parent) | Type | Gravity | Volcanism | Volatiles | Ice | Rock | Metal |
| Maia | A 7 | 2,622.53 | A | Class B/15569K | 545 | Yes | High Metal Content World | 1.96 | Silicate Vapour Geysers | No mention | 66.80 | 33.20 | |
| Maia | B 1 B A | 346,779.63 | B 1 B | Rocky Body | 97 | Yes | Rocky body | 0.06 | Silicate Vapour Geysers | Lost most | 96.80 | 3.20 | |
| Maia | B 2 C | 350,951.31 | B 2 | Barycentre | 91 | No | Rocky body | 0.09 | Silicate Vapour Geysers | Lost most | 91.00 | 9.00 | |
| Maia | B 2 D | 350,951.31 | B 2 | Barycentre | 91 | Yes | Rocky body | 0.09 | Silicate Vapour Geysers | Lost most | 91.00 | 9.00 | |
| Maia | B 3 A | 350,768.72 | B 3 | Class 3/757K | 176 | Yes | Rocky body | 0.14 | Silicate Vapour Geysers | Lost most | 91.00 | 9.00 | |
| Taygeta | 4 | 226.65 | Taygeta | Barycentre | 1388 | Yes | Metal Rich body | 3.15 | Silicate Vapour Geysers | No mention | 99.60 | ||
| Taygeta | 5 B | 1,637.10 | 5 | Class Y Dwarf/672K | 648 | Yes | Rocky body | 0.25 | Silicate Vapour Geysers | Lost most | 90.50 | 9.50 | |
| Taygeta | 7 | 1,676.87 | Taygeta | Barycentre | 561 | Yes | Rocky body | 2.90 | Silicate Vapour Geysers | No mention | 66.90 | 33.10 | |
| Taygeta | 8 A | 2,136.65 | 8 | Class Y Dwarf/693K | 564 | Yes | Rocky body | 0.24 | Silicate Vapour Geysers | Lost most | 91.00 | 9.00 | |
| Pleione | 6 | 476.84 | Pleione | Barycentre | 789 | Yes | High Metal Content World | 1.25 | Silicate Vapour Geysers | No mention | 66.50 | 33.50 | |
| Pleiades Sector KC-V c2-14 | 2 A | 1,976.29 | 2 | Class 1/116K | 96 | No | Icy Body | 0.06 | Carbon Dioxide Geysers | Many | 81.90 | 16.50 | 1.60 |
Yep, I think we have now officially crossed the line separating the sublime from the ridiculous. Yes yes yes I know, for some its the enjoyment of the search. There has however got to be a reasonable time-line to every endeavour, especially considering the current circumstances of operating in a complete void, fueled only by an occasional comment from the Dev team.
Tell you what, if the intention is merely to stretch time as opposed to missing a piece if the puzzle, well then, ..............
Was this a hint or just a Lovecraft reference?Michael - if we offer to buy you pizza and erect a life-sized Cthulu statue for outside the office, will you give us another hint?
Tempting - there should be a statue to the elder gods on every street corner
Michael
http://biblehub.com/2_chronicles/28-24.htm
There's nothing at Merope 2C 28:24 though.
B 1 B A its only 0.06g that's why ppl are not focusing there. Barnacle in the trailer is in roughly 1g planet.
Last edited:
dynamicbob
Banned
The problem is that there are lots of logical reasons why the barnacles might be in nebulae. It's very easy to go from knowing the answer back to the clues, but not so easy following the clues to the answer. A quick list of some properties of nebulae:
- They contain younger stars
- They contain a higher density of free-floating elements
- They are easily recognisable at large distances compared to individual stars
- The dust makes it harder to find things inside them
- They are more attractive to human explorers, especially the novice ones
- They feature relatively prominently in human mythology
And I'm sure that there are many more. When we know the answer as to why the barnacles are where they are we'll be able to go "yeah it's obvious now", but working forwards with so little information is a very difficult thing to do.
I just added another table to a separate sheet (in the same document). I don't have time to add all the systems at the moment but I got it started with a few. I'll try to add more systems when I have time, but other Cmdrs can feel free to pitch in as well.
Last edited:
I never saw so few replies when i come back from sleeping. seems more and more are given up (at reasons i think ) realizing that there is not enough substantial clues allowing us to solve the problem by thinking.
Searching can be fun, when you have data to go from. searching for searching, hopping to fall onto the barnacles is not really fun.
I mean it's like the clue saying that it's logical to found them nebulaes.... yeah for someone who knows them, we do not know a thing about them only some nickname proposed by some explorer we never heard off anymore. So from that point how could it be logical?
Just saying.
Searching can be fun, when you have data to go from. searching for searching, hopping to fall onto the barnacles is not really fun.
I mean it's like the clue saying that it's logical to found them nebulaes.... yeah for someone who knows them, we do not know a thing about them only some nickname proposed by some explorer we never heard off anymore. So from that point how could it be logical?
Just saying.
Last edited:
TBH I disagree. The fact of having to explore without knowing where is making me realise the awesomness of the planets itselves up to a point that I did not experience when Horizons was launched. Maybe they are giving up but the truth is that it was well worth.
So yes, it seems to be a crazy blind-search but every finding makes us be closer to the final goal!
CMDR Tunotemetas
Angle on the thrusters of the SRV
I have read a lot about the importance FD place in the audio in this game as well as people reporting 'strange sounds' that later turn out to be known phenomenon. Would it be worth us (if it has not already been done) compiling a list/library of known in-game stellar sounds and their cause just to make it easier to eliminate something you hear that sounds strange?
Last edited:
There was a post recently, talking about one of the youtube vids, where it was discussed that the trailer was 'cinematic' and 'not in game footage'.
Was this the case in the clip shown with the barnacles? If so, it might be wise to sort down to 1G planets, wouldn't it?
I don't believe Michael has confirmed any barnacle type objects appear as random PoIs. My way of reading what he's written suggests we have hand placed fixed barnacles, and randomly generated fixed barnacles.
I could be wrong though as he's pretty vague on a good day
I asked the same yesterday.
From the angle of the wheels on the SRV. Or something like that. I'm a pilot, not a sciencist so for me it's just magic.
- Status