Alien archeology and other mysteries: Thread 9 - The Canonn

[CMDRDethalis]

I have solved the relics. I will not jump into my SRV until I crack obelisks algorithm in WolframAlpha.

Edit: my sin was to announce "Master key" and not posting it. The reason was that I have lost it in front of me. Ive been marked as a person having Paraidolia. Later I figured out that pictures looks different on my big screen TV and my laptop (different GFX options, ambiental light etc). So I was frustrated for not being able to keep my promise and was marked as a troll.

Edit: there is one layout for the ruins, and another one for the relics and beacons. Figure out the relics layout and You will see what is obstructing obelisks resolving.

Elaborate please... the ruins are pretty much a blur to me atm... although i think the patterns of the obelisks layout and the beacon layouts are related but something that we are bot seeing is there somewhere... so please if you have an idea let us know

 

[HSeldon]

Alright.. been doing this for the past 2 days or so.
One problem with getting a relatively precise lat, lon is trying to be consistent using the nav track of my ship pointing up at 90 degrees and keeping it in the "middle" of the target reticule.

PLEASE forgive the nit-picking but a retiCULE is a small handbag. The targetting dufa is a recTICLE. I know only a typo, but people tend to copy them until the language is just a mushy mess and that pains me. "nucular" anyone?

No offence intended, Admiral.
*salute*[up]

 

[Mokonzi]

Just drawing everyone's attention to something that keeps getting missed.

Michael Brooks confirmed that there is a bug with the way we got 36 out of the 101 messages, implying that the 13 we got in Solo are the only ones we should get.

A few seem stuck on the idea that we should get 36 and have been basing their theories on that.

MB very rarely comments in this thread. The fact he did and revealed that there is an issue points to the fact that without telling us that we would lose an element of the puzzle to help us solve things.

Connected to that I noticed that if we divide the 101 presumed results by 8 then we have 12.625. If we work on the assumption that each eventual ruin site has a similar amount of unlockable data, then 12-13 would be the expected result for each site. We have that with the original ruins site.

For that reason, I'd suggest moving away from theories based around the 'mistaken' 36. If we assume that MB was wrong with his bug assessment, then we may as well discard hard facts from the rest of the puzzle in which case we have an unsolvable mess.

 

[tecknogyk]

Has anyone looked into the planets that are not landable? Just wondering if there are any similarities. Since this is their communication network I'm wondering if they would've placed them close to inhabitable worlds. If this has already been looked into I apologize, just thought it might be worth mentioning.

 

[Eizor]

Ok.. I was back on the planet with the original ruins and flew down from around 300km to see if there were some kind of landmarks or anything indicating there were something special nearby.
And when I came down to the ruins excpecting to see the usual stuff, I noticed there were no sound, nothing.. just the significant landmarks of the "planets" or whatever its supposed to be. Took a couple screens.

A simple relog on the surface fixed the issue though.

View attachment 113676

View attachment 113677

 

[Han_Zen]

why are we subtracting and dividing things?

I'm not sure yet.

I think the ideal system has a 90°/60°/30°(it's really 120°) relationship. The rest are corrections for an imperfect system.

I hope it can be used to approximate the target latitude of other ruins, to narrow the search.

 

[ArchEmperor]

Ok.. I was back on the planet with the original ruins and flew down from around 300km to see if there were some kind of landmarks or anything indicating there were something special nearby.
And when I came down to the ruins excpecting to see the usual stuff, I noticed there were no sound, nothing.. just the significant landmarks of the "planets" or whatever its supposed to be. Took a couple screens.

A simple relog on the surface fixed the issue though.

View attachment 113676

View attachment 113677

Your images looks completely black or partially black until I load them into Photoshop and press auto tone, then image pops up immediately.
What can be the problem?

 

[creativesamurai1982]

I know this has prob been asked before, So sorry in advance. Iv just finished collection all the data at the ruins site (13 Obelisks in solo) can i hand in the data iv collected so, get my reward and continue with looking for the missing data at the next site once its been found?

 

[Brakhir]

Just drawing everyone's attention to something that keeps getting missed.

Michael Brooks confirmed that there is a bug with the way we got 36 out of the 101 messages, implying that the 13 we got in Solo are the only ones we should get.

A few seem stuck on the idea that we should get 36 and have been basing their theories on that.


MB very rarely comments in this thread. The fact he did and revealed that there is an issue points to the fact that without telling us that we would lose an element of the puzzle to help us solve things.

Connected to that I noticed that if we divide the 101 presumed results by 8 then we have 12.625. If we work on the assumption that each eventual ruin site has a similar amount of unlockable data, then 12-13 would be the expected result for each site. We have that with the original ruins site.

For that reason, I'd suggest moving away from theories based around the 'mistaken' 36. If we assume that MB was wrong with his bug assessment, then we may as well discard hard facts from the rest of the puzzle in which case we have an unsolvable mess.

100% agree with that.

Something is still not clear about the solo mode : is there a mechanism to reset the 15 obelisks without logout/login (or leave the site in SC to reset instance) ?
- If no then the game mechanic is a bit strange to me
- If yes then either it's a bug (because it doesn't work) or this is something we all missed and finding it out can bring new clues

 

[Eizor]

No idea. I just converted the bmp images from the screens to jpg in paint and uploaded them.

 

[iamgingerbear]

No idea. I just converted the bmp images from the screens to jpg in paint and uploaded them.

we must have similar monitors, i've got 2 screens and on my second monitor the pics are dark but on my game one they are fine. Must be something with settings that we have as people have said the same thing about my screenies

 

[zarking]

I'm still thinking about the scan data types, alpha, beta etc. There are five of them, and now we have five sites to find ruins on.
I know they appear random, but is there something we've missed.
Do they appear in a certain sequence, or in certain areas? I'm going to have another mess with this.

 

[Rampant]

Alright.. been doing this for the past 2 days or so.

I'm trying to see if the orbital mechanics of the stellar bodies (main star, parent star of the planet, moon) and other systems mentioned by Ram Tah may orbit in such a way that lines up with a Ruin site (since they're attuned to the environment and this is a popular concept in many Earthly historical sites)

If 2 or more of these sites intersected with the point then that means I could use their orbits to identify a site.
For a visual idea of what I'm thinking about
http://www.askamathematician.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/greatcircles.jpg

To test this I used the first Ruins site as my basis for testing this theory.

To get the orbital path I used the following site to get the intersection point of two great-circle paths.
http://www.movable-type.co.uk/scripts/latlong-vectors.html

And the antipode from here
https://www.antipodesmap.com/

I've since used a modified version of the movable type page that has the functions I need and only returns the data in a decimal format

One problem with getting a relatively precise lat, lon is trying to be consistent using the nav track of my ship pointing up at 90 degrees and keeping it in the "middle" of the target reticule.

In order to get around this I used the target reticule to get "close" to having it directly overhead and ensure that my ship is below the drp height as seen here but with the targeted body directly above
http://i.imgur.com/mGIwAeT.jpg

By being below this point I activated a jump it would give me an Escape vector that's 90 degrees and since the reticule for that and the selection reticule are the same size I can get a close approximation to the exact location.

I would line these up perfectly and then note my exact lat and lon.
http://i.imgur.com/ZyLNZ0Q.jpg

After a certain amount of time (less for a fast moving moon or longer for an almost stationary sun) I repeat this process and record the 2nd set of lat/lon. Using these 2 I can get a bearing to use to try and calculate a path.

I've been doing this to get the "Intersection of two great-circle path" as found at the Movable Type latlon-vectors page and write down the lat, lon and it's antipode

You can view my results here
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/51002357/Calculations.xlsx

While doing these I'm looking for any that have intersections that are relatively close to the Ruins (-31.7877, -128.9711) since the method for capturing these isn't really precise so one that's (-30.1001, -130.1234) would be close enough.

So far I've done this on the original site with the 4 systems as well as every "star" in SYNUEFE XR-H D11-102 and the moon and none quite match up.

What it's looking like, however, is that my great-circle isn't the correct way to derive a ground path for stars and other bodies. If anybody knows how to best proceed with doing that I'm open to suggestions.

My hope is to find that the ruins are tied somehow to the location of the stars or other systems and if so we can greatly reduce the search area for the other landable bodies by calculating any associated paths and intersections and then specifying locations to search

Here's the problem. If I use different lat/lon for the same object but still and the calculated bearings I get different intersection coordinates so obviously my method for trying to approximate the ground track of the bodies is off.

So I present to you what I've been thinking and gathered in the hopes somebody can help me get consistent measures that we can then use to look for any possible intersections.

Perhaps a better way of working out a haversine formula for identifying the great-circles and intersections or maybe something I hadn't thought of.

This is *EXCELLENT* work, CMDR.

Your method does do a very good job of obtaining and describing any moons that orbit your survey planet, and also a pretty good snapshot of any parent bodies that your planet revolves around.

It doesn't, however, help with other stars from other systems far away, because the sky-track of those stars is tied pretty much solely to the pole star and your planet's spin and don't in fact prescribe a great circle. I'm not sure whether this is what you were doing from your description, despite the fact that it is better written than most!

For example, if you look at the pole star it will be fixed in space. (or prescribe a very small circle.) When Polaris is viewed from, say 60° north latitude on Earth, it appears to be motionless as the night sky rotates. Stars that are close to Polaris will appear to prescribe a circle in the sky, centred on Polaris. Stars that are slightly further away from Polaris will also prescribe a slightly bigger circle, and concentric with the smaller circles of closer stars, still having Polaris as the circle centre.

So an observer at 60° North would see Polaris fixed. They would have permanent line of sight with any stars that were within 60° viewing angle from Polaris. Assuming that stars are permanently "visible" form Earth, the observer would also see part of the circles prescribed by all stars between 60° and 120° from Polaris rise and set on a 24hr cycle.

Hope that makes sense.


Actually, what I'm most interested to know about the new systems offered by Ram Tah - are they permanently visible from the alpha xenohenge, or do they rise and set? Are they close enough to the south pole star (within 30°) to prescribe a circle that is always visible from the xenohenge?

Sadly, I'm still 12,000 Ly from home on my way back from far side of the core, so can't test that for myself...

Yours Aye

Mark H

 

[AdmlAdama]

This is *EXCELLENT* work, CMDR.

Your method does do a very good job of obtaining and describing any moons that orbit your survey planet, and also a pretty good snapshot of any parent bodies that your planet revolves around.

It doesn't, however, help with other stars from other systems far away, because the sky-track of those stars is tied pretty much solely to the pole star and your planet's spin and don't in fact prescribe a great circle. I'm not sure whether this is what you were doing from your description, despite the fact that it is better written than most!

For example, if you look at the pole star it will be fixed in space. (or prescribe a very small circle.) When Polaris is viewed from, say 60° north latitude on Earth, it appears to be motionless as the night sky rotates. Stars that are close to Polaris will appear to prescribe a circle in the sky, centred on Polaris. Stars that are slightly further away from Polaris will also prescribe a slightly bigger circle, and concentric with the smaller circles of closer stars, still having Polaris as the circle centre.

So an observer at 60° North would see Polaris fixed. They would have permanent line of sight with any stars that were within 60° viewing angle from Polaris. Assuming that stars are permanently "visible" form Earth, the observer would also see part of the circles prescribed by all stars between 60° and 120° from Polaris rise and set on a 24hr cycle.

Hope that makes sense.


Actually, what I'm most interested to know about the new systems offered by Ram Tah - are they permanently visible from the alpha xenohenge, or do they rise and set? Are they close enough to the south pole star (within 30°) to prescribe a circle that is always visible from the xenohenge?

Sadly, I'm still 12,000 Ly from home on my way back from far side of the core, so can't test that for myself...

Yours Aye

Mark H

I appreciate it. I am indeed trying to see if these things line up over the ruins. But without having access to the ruins.

This way it can be repeated later (if applicable)

Tricky when you consider a fast orbiting body will have a certain "circle" for a star today. But a different one a week later due to how the planet has moved in the solar system.

So any flaws or suggestions keep them coming. I figured there were people with much stronger math skills than I.

- - - Updated - - -

PLEASE forgive the nit-picking but a retiCULE is a small handbag. The targetting dufa is a recTICLE. I know only a typo, but people tend to copy them until the language is just a mushy mess and that pains me. "nucular" anyone?

No offence intended, Admiral.
*salute*[up]

None taken. o7

 

[Factabulous]

I know this has prob been asked before, So sorry in advance. Iv just finished collection all the data at the ruins site (13 Obelisks in solo) can i hand in the data iv collected so, get my reward and continue with looking for the missing data at the next site once its been found?

Yes it has been asked before - see the FAQ on page 1 for more common questions! Answer is yes you can hand it in, just go back to Felice Dock when you want to restart and you will get a fresh mission with another 4 weeks to complete.

 

[Harry Kruth]

Ok.. I was back on the planet with the original ruins and flew down from around 300km to see if there were some kind of landmarks or anything indicating there were something special nearby.
And when I came down to the ruins excpecting to see the usual stuff, I noticed there were no sound, nothing.. just the significant landmarks of the "planets" or whatever its supposed to be. Took a couple screens.

A simple relog on the surface fixed the issue though.

View attachment 113676

View attachment 113677

Your images looks completely black or partially black until I load them into Photoshop and press auto tone, then image pops up immediately.
What can be the problem?

I can see the pics, maybe you have lower gamma on your tv/monitor?

Anyway, the same "obelisk displacement" bug happened to me yesterday, with the same solution. (re-logging)
It was in Solo mode FYI

 

[JethroGuardian]

Here's an approach I haven't seen yet, maybe it's tin foil, but here we go...

In Culture 12 we learned from Rah Tah that, “It seems that the guardians had a particular fascination with geometric shapes, which they used to illustrate connections between themselves and the world around them. This predilection manifested itself in their technology as well - specifically their monolith network. With this data and the help of the galactic community we've partially mapped the monolith network, which formed the backbone of their communications technology, and discovered that they too are arranged in geometric patterns. Whilst this does not give us full access to the network, I believe it is the first step to unlocking the entire system and maybe more.”

Now of the four new star systems that Ram Tah told us to go hunt in, 3 of them (B2-4, D101, and C22-17) form a near equilateral triangle. (Any 3 points in space will form a triangle, but these are suspiciously equidistant/equilateral.) I wondered if there is a star at the center of this triangle? Shouldn't the network have a center?

The closest center I could find is IC 2391 SECTOR CQ-Y C18, which is 37.6ly from D101, 37.6ly from C22-17, and 48.7ly from B2-4. It happens to be a G6 star, similar to our Sun (a G2). Not perfectly center, but the closest.

http://images.akamai.steamuserconte...939/EA4EE7CD92048FF492EA759E3B31AB79DFFA7D52/

Upon warping in to check it out, it so happens there is an Earth-like world in the system.

http://images.akamai.steamuserconte...798/D601002493CFC8060F2B49BE98F6964BD0FCB947/

I flew to it and around it, but no contacts and nothing odd on the night side. Two ringed gas giants, two ice worlds, and an asteroid belt are also in the system. And this is anti-climatic, but now I have to go to bed…so I'll explore more tomorrow.

But what are the odds of an ELW happening to be there? ELWs are so rare it doesn't seem like a coincidence. Maybe it’s the Guardians homeworld? (Tin foil hat time I know). Or maybe another nearby star is a closer center I didn't see? And what about a third star to look for that completes an equilateral triangle with SYNUEFE XR-H D11-102 (the first ruins site) and SYNUEFE ZL-J D10-119 (the fourth new system from Ram Tah)? He flat out said they are arranged in geometrical patterns, so maybe the new systems he announced were a clue to find another star system(s).

Hey if nothing else, checking out new systems is a nice break from flying around planets.

-CMDR Jethro Guardian

A quick follow-up on my previous post regarding the spatial locations of the new Ram Tah systems and their geometric arrangement. Before I was searching for a system that lay at the center of the three that form an equilateral triangle (B2-4, D101, and C22-17). I realized that there should be two other systems that would form the vertices of an equilateral tetrahedron (3D triangle) with the 3 given to us by Ram Tam.

The distances between B2-4, D101, and C22-17 are 69.97ly, 72.30, and 70.88ly. So I tried to find the two closest systems on either side that would also be ~71ly equidistant from these three systems.

One vertex for a tetraheadron is IC 2391 Sector BF-A c0. The distance to the three Ram Tah systems are:
69.61ly to D101
72.56ly to B2-4
70.27ly to C22-17
It’s a K star with three ringed gas giants, 2 ice worlds, and 13 moons (7 of them landable).
http://images.akamai.steamuserconte...550/2AB692FA30EEF23AB2CD1AD4BFC50ED7C993D684/

The other tetrahedron vertex is IC 2391 Sector ZF-W b2-6. The distance to the three Ram Tah systems are:
69.32ly to D101
69.40ly to B2-4
69.73ly to C22-17
http://images.akamai.steamuserconte...156/187A497DF9608DCC2700FF2A951E28D388119B4F/
It’s a M star + T dwarf system, with a single planet, which is a gas giant with ammonia-based life. No landable bodies.

Here’s a screenshot of the layout of the three given by Ram Tah and the two vertices I found: http://images.akamai.steamuserconte...421/DD697DFCBBB7E3DA90FB7FBCE3DB3C2775DB7697/

Searched the new systems for a beacon or anything anomalous, but no luck. Maybe it’ll be helpful down the road.

 

[Iron Orchid]

I know that the relics/artefacts don't degrade (but do in other places) near the ruins (not sure that this is the case for the whole moon) . Could this be used as an indicator that we have the right planet(s)?

Edit: doesn't work tried two planets artefact didn't degrade on either. I sure that they used to.

 

[CMDR Cylixx]

No idea. I just converted the bmp images from the screens to jpg in paint and uploaded them.

There IS an issue where ruins or other surface features can take a long time or even require a re-log before they load. I am not sure if it is a bug or latency related, but it sure as hell would be difficult to find anything that had no embankments or mounds. I have personally seen obelisks and ground tiles take up to a minute before ghoulishly materializing in front of me.

If you DO find something that looks unmistakably like a ruins foundation but with no accompanying obelisks or features, then I would suggest a re-log before dismissing it.

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

Based on my hypothesis:

Spoiler

I have searched the co-ordinates of the following planets below (with help from CMDR Madwax): -32 by -64 and -64 by -32 and 32 by 64 and 64 by 32.

Once these have all been done on all the landable planets, the search will be extended to:

-32.xxxx / -32.xxxx
32.xxxx / 32.xxxx
-64.xxxx / -64.xxxx
64.xxxx / 64.xxxx

-32.xxxx / -128.xxxx
-128.xxxx / -32.xxxx
32.xxxx / 128.xxxx
128.xxxx / 32.xxxx

-64.xxxx / -128.xxxx
-128.xxxx / -64.xxxx
64.xxxx / 128.xxxx
128.xxxx / 64.xxxx

Synuefe ZL-J d10-119

• 1 (Metal-Rich)
 -32.XXXX / -64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 -64.XXXX / -32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 64.XXXX / 32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 32.XXXX / 64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
• 2 (Metal-Rich)
 -32.XXXX / -64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 -64.XXXX / -32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 64.XXXX / 32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 32.XXXX / 64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)

• 7 D (CMDR Madwax)
 -32.XXXX / -64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 -64.XXXX / -32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 64.XXXX / 32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 32.XXXX / 64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
• 7 C (CMDR Madwax)
 -32.XXXX / -64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 -64.XXXX / -32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 64.XXXX / 32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 32.XXXX / 64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)

• 11 A
 -32.XXXX / -64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 -64.XXXX / -32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 64.XXXX / 32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 32.XXXX / 64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
• 11 B
 -32.XXXX / -64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 -64.XXXX / -32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 64.XXXX / 32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 32.XXXX / 64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
• 11 C
 -32.XXXX / -64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 -64.XXXX / -32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 64.XXXX / 32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 32.XXXX / 64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
• 11 D
 TBA

• 14 B
 -32.XXXX / -64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 -64.XXXX / -32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 64.XXXX / 32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 32.XXXX / 64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
• 14 C
 -32.XXXX / -64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 -64.XXXX / -32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 64.XXXX / 32.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)
 32.XXXX / 64.XXXX (60-68 – 28-34)