And maybe when they do have 2 sets of data, you get both signals overlapping.
Will answer a very interesting Schrodingeresq question. Does an Obelisk have specific data BEFORE you scan it ?
More Audio followed by the results of the scan required.
Alien archeology and other mysteries: Thread 9 - The Canonn
- Thread starter Ian Phillips
- Start date
- Status
And maybe when they do have 2 sets of data, you get both signals overlapping.
Will answer a very interesting Schrodingeresq question. Does an Obelisk have specific data BEFORE you scan it ?
More Audio followed by the results of the scan required.
The word you are looking for is Ratio
(is "rapporto" in italian as well, like in french, you know, we are relatives) Moreover, it is interesting to know that the english word "Ratio" comes directly from latin "Ratio", that means proportion, but we French and Italians use another word, even if our tongues come directly from latin...
However, I've put everything about the Obelisk's spectrogram signal, on the Front Page.
Last edited:
Hi Commanders, I actually had some spare seconds to look at the audio, I need a longer recording as the 13 minute sample does not loop the pattern so I don't think all the message is in that sample.
View attachment 113418
Here is a small section in detail, a deliberate pattern for sure.
View attachment 113418
Here is a small section in detail, a deliberate pattern for sure.
Last edited:
The word you are looking for is Ratio
Moreover, it is interesting to know that the english word "Ratio" comes directly from latin "Ratio", that means proportion, but we French and Italians use another word, even if our tongues come directly from latin...
'Ratio' is used to describe the rapport in greater detail.
The English language is a bit of a mongrel. Where French & Italian can point directly to Latin roots, English latinate is commonly derived from the French, and is not always a direct descendant.
Last edited:
The gravity is too low for it to contain an atmosphere.
I tried a different approach to verify Mengy's measurements. I aimed my ship directly downward and hovered over various points of interest, recording the planetary coordinates of each one. I also double checked several of these measurements in my SRV and they were all a match within ~0.0002 degrees, so I think the technique is reliable.
Using those coordinates along with the radius of the planet, we can then calculate distances between points without having to worry about things like where the "center" of a parked ship is considered to be. So we start by dividing the planet's circumference by 360 to find the linear surface distance per degree:
Next, we can compute the "distance" in degrees between any two coordinate pairs and use the conversion factor above to translate that into the linear distance in meters. Technically we're working in spherical coordinates which would complicate such calculations, but since we're working over such a small area I think we can treat our coordinates as if they were cartesian. So let's try verifying the distance from the center (peak) of the north pyramid to the center of the large circle:
Not what I expected. But maybe there's too much imprecision in our measurements; the planet radius is rounded to the nearest kilometer, and our coordinates are probably only accurate to ~0.0005 degrees. Just to be on the safe side, let's subtract 1km of radius and round our coordinates to 0.001 degree in such a way so as to minimize the calculated distance, in order to establish a lower bound:
Oh dear. Even allowing for a very wide margin of error, the shortest that distance could be according to this surveying method is almost 73 meters further than Mengy's measurement -- an error of almost 20%.
Of course it's possible that there's some additional confounding factor that invalidates the assumptions of this survey; the planet might not be perfectly spherical, or the published radius might be incorrect. But I think it's worth double checking, perhaps by having two commanders in SRVs try to repeating Mengy's measurements; SRVs being much smaller than ships might reduce one potential source of error.
Using those coordinates along with the radius of the planet, we can then calculate distances between points without having to worry about things like where the "center" of a parked ship is considered to be. So we start by dividing the planet's circumference by 360 to find the linear surface distance per degree:
Code:
radius = 1122 kilometers
circumference = PI * 2 * 1122 ~= 7049.7339 kilometers
arclength = 7049.7339 * 1000 / 360 ~= 19582.5942 meters per degreeNext, we can compute the "distance" in degrees between any two coordinate pairs and use the conversion factor above to translate that into the linear distance in meters. Technically we're working in spherical coordinates which would complicate such calculations, but since we're working over such a small area I think we can treat our coordinates as if they were cartesian. So let's try verifying the distance from the center (peak) of the north pyramid to the center of the large circle:
Code:
arc = ((-31.7804 - -31.7865)^2 + (-128.9001 - -128.9236)^2)^0.5 degrees
arc = (0.0061^2 + 0.0235^2)^0.5 degrees
arc = (0.00058946)^0.5 degrees
arc ~= 0.02427880 degrees
distance = 0.02427880 * 19582.5942 ~= 475.44 metersNot what I expected. But maybe there's too much imprecision in our measurements; the planet radius is rounded to the nearest kilometer, and our coordinates are probably only accurate to ~0.0005 degrees. Just to be on the safe side, let's subtract 1km of radius and round our coordinates to 0.001 degree in such a way so as to minimize the calculated distance, in order to establish a lower bound:
Code:
radius = 1121 kilometers
circumference = PI * 2 * 1121 ~= 7043.4508 kilometers
arclength = 7043.4508 * 1000 / 360 ~= 19565.1409 meters per degree
arc = ((-31.781 - -31.786)^2 + (-128.901 - -128.923)^2)^0.5 degrees
arc = (0.005^2 + 0.022^2)^0.5 degrees
arc = (0.000509)^0.5 degrees
arc ~= 0.02256103 degrees
distance = 0.02256103 * 19565.1409 ~= 441.41 metersOh dear. Even allowing for a very wide margin of error, the shortest that distance could be according to this surveying method is almost 73 meters further than Mengy's measurement -- an error of almost 20%.
Of course it's possible that there's some additional confounding factor that invalidates the assumptions of this survey; the planet might not be perfectly spherical, or the published radius might be incorrect. But I think it's worth double checking, perhaps by having two commanders in SRVs try to repeating Mengy's measurements; SRVs being much smaller than ships might reduce one potential source of error.
Last edited:
Earth gets a lot of cosmic dust daily, so I expect that to fall similarly onto these ruins. And I think you don't need an atmosphere to get erosion- the day/night variation will cause heating/cooling of the structure which will contribute over a long time. Plus any meteorite impacts will throw up dust which will could fall onto the structure, plus dust/debris from any weapon impacts.
We have no idea how old these ruins are; in the David Braben video I think he said we would find archeology from long-dead races, so possibly millenia or thousands of millenia have passed.
Last edited:
For those interested, here's what the Ruins look like at various altitudes:
it's not exact, but may assist those searching elsewhere!
o7
it's not exact, but may assist those searching elsewhere!
o7
Last edited:
That reminds me of music staves. I can see 10 lines running across the image which matches a musical stave but maybe that's too much assumption.
I've removed the right channel as it is identical, Blue markers indicate message separators - which may be words or numbers but act as a delimiter - I've identified the start of the message as shown, but I think we need at least a 30m recording to get the entire message - see below. - This is showing the entire 13min recording zoomed out. Is anyone able to collect a longer sample?
View attachment 113420
View attachment 113420
in few words: another misterious thing impossible to spot from high orbit.
i wonder how it was discovered...
yes, i know the triangulation, bla bla...
Last edited:
Seismic erosion by meteor impacts.
I'll head out now
I figured that sleep is overrated and sat here till 2am this morning.
I will provide a short analysis when I finished work.
incl: 56mins recording, different obelisks, different types, states of obelisk, patterns etc.
The word you are looking for is Ratio
Moreover, it is interesting to know that the english word "Ratio" comes directly from latin "Ratio", that means proportion, but we French and Italians use another word, even if our tongues come directly from latin...
However, I've put everything about the Obelisk's spectrogram signal, on the Front Page.
Thank you! Awesome!
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Make sure to have an eye on your fuel stat of the SRV!
My recording ended abruptly with an explosion yesterday.
(tabbed out of game, didn't notice)
+1 Thank you commander!
Make sure to have an eye on your fuel stat of the SRV!
My recording ended abruptly with an explosion yesterday.
(tabbed out of game, didn't notice)
ooh, would have forgot about that, thanks. I'll synth for efficiency!
any specific spot to record from or is any of them fine?
I'd suggest to focus on one obelisk for now, to get a full signal repeat if there is any.
So the marked position in my first post (now front page) would be good.
(would link to but am in a hurry sry)
Good luck and thanks alot!
Here is a close up of how I think the message is separated, sorry my drawing skills are lacking but hope this makes sense. will be able to do a lot more once we have the whole sequence (Recording)
View attachment 113428
Thoughts?
View attachment 113428
Thoughts?
There is a longer sequence here https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...9-The-Canonn?p=4752875&viewfull=1#post4752875
I know we've seen something similar before but I was thinking each "word" might be a line of an image with the thick blocks denoting start/end - but they are different lengths suggesting not but they are indeed "words"
I know we've seen something similar before but I was thinking each "word" might be a line of an image with the thick blocks denoting start/end - but they are different lengths suggesting not but they are indeed "words"
Last edited:
- Status