Alien archeology and other mysteries: Thread 9 - The Canonn

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Zieman

Zieman
nrage said:
True, however where in the first site were those coordinates taken from? The bottom of the central ridge?

First site:
LAT: -31.7877
LONG: 128.9711

The later sites are all closer to 30 than 32 and longitude closer to 30/60 than 32/64, if you were flying at 32 you would not have seen either of these site. Flying at 30 and you would have at least stood some chance.

Second site:
LAT: -29.10
LONG: -30.51

Third site:
LAT: 29.42
LONG: -59.54
Click to expand...
Yes. :)

So, both powers of two and fractions of pi co-ordinate theories should be viewed with scepticism.
Now we have one site supporting one theory and two sites supporting the other - to me it looks like neither theory is the (whole) truth.

For now, this:
Han_Zen said:
It's obviously drawing a tetrahedron in the sky.
450px-%D0%92%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%8D%D0%B4%D1%80.svg.png

North pole is A. The ruin moves thru B, C and D during one orbit. A always points at the same star. The ruin will point at the same star every time it's in B, C and D.

This is the easy part. The difficult part is to put B, C and D in the right spot, in the rotation cycle. I have no idea how to do this. :D

Forget the 32/64 thing. We are splitting a circle in three parts. You can call it -30°, 120°, 2/3 Pi or 1/3 of a circle. It doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
looks promising.
Variables are 'h' and base (point B) longtitude.
 

QorbeQ

QorbeQ
Han_Zen said:
In one local day the moon orbits the planet 23 times but passes over the ruin 22 times. ;)
Click to expand...

Except from what I can tell those passes are all at different angles and are sometimes potentially occluded by the planet. Why isn't that the case in practise?


o7
 

Zieman

Zieman
Stormprooter said:
Kudos to Han_Zen for the inspired diagram - which now begs the question: has anyone searched the alpha site planet any further - specifically at the same/similar latitude and at -9 long and 111 long? If the tetrahedron idea holds true, then something would be there?
I am not going to be able to check anything out for myself until tomorrow evening :(
Damn work and social commitments!
Click to expand...

Might as well go there right away. :)
 
Last edited:

Jintosh

Jintosh
I was wondering about the site 2 issue, and decided that actually, it could be that the bug is not that the site layout is the same, but that the site model and obelisk layout being used should be the one that was at site 1 before the 2.2 patch. I'm also going to say I think that site 4, when i is found, will have the same layout as site 3, just with different erosion patterns and active obelisks.

The reason I think this is down to the Guardians being split in two, leading to the data sites having two architects, and thus two layouts.

Obviously if site 4 has a new layout to the others then this will be shown for the tinfoil speculation it is, but it does, kind-of, make sense with what we know right now. :)
 

Brakhir

B
SpaceGoblin said:
I just realised that I need a break from all this.

Of course the site would not be in daylight for 6.9 days. A "day", wherever it may be - earth, local, some arbitrary location, is not a measure of just hours of daylight!

Cannot brain, has the dumb.

As you where :x
Click to expand...

IMO it's as simple as :
- 6.9 days are earth days (6.9 x 24hours). The planet makes one rotation in 6.9 earth days. Actualy, on the planet (first site), the sun rises every Tuesday. The daylight lasts 1 or 2 "earth days", then the night lasts the remaining 5 earth days.

To make it short :1 "night and day cycle" on the planet = 6.9 "night and day cycle" on Earth.

Is it correct ?
 

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
Stormprooter said:
Kudos to Han_Zen for the inspired diagram - which now begs the question: has anyone searched the alpha site planet any further - specifically at the same/similar latitude and at -9 long and 111 long? If the tetrahedron idea holds true, then something would be there?
I am not going to be able to check anything out for myself until tomorrow evening :(
Damn work and social commitments!
Click to expand...

I don't think there are more ruins on the same planet(or same system for that matter). One ruin will cover a three corners of the 'bottom triangle' in the tetrahedron, during one revolution. There is no need to put out more ruins.

P.S. If you are a believer in angles and red dwarfs and aren't that fuzzy about moons, Synuefe XO-P c22-17 C1 is a very good candidate.

It has:

- Red dwarf star
- Tilt of 28.5°
- 6.4 days year/day

No moon though.
 

SpaceGoblin

SpaceGoblin
Brakhir said:
IMO it's as simple as :
- 6.9 days are earth days (6.9 x 24hours). The planet makes one rotation in 6.9 earth days. Actualy, on the planet (first site), the sun rises every Tuesday. The daylight lasts 1 or 2 "earth days", then the night lasts the remaining 5 earth days.

To make it short :1 "night and day cycle" on the planet = 6.9 "night and day cycle" on Earth.

Is it correct ?
Click to expand...

Probably - however, as observed, my brain is not reliable for these observations atm [rolleyes]
 
Last edited:

Goose4291

Banned
Goose4291
Random thought.

The Guardians used and developed proper ai tech, as well as bioengineered weapons.
Is it possible the Thargoids were created by the guardians who wiped them out, whilst keeping some of their trade secrets? I find it odd that a culture reliant on bioengineering like the 'goids would have the know how and savvy to build a AI unit such as DORIS in Elite: Mostly Harmless
 
Last edited:

Zieman

Zieman
Jintosh said:
I was wondering about the site 2 issue, and decided that actually, it could be that the bug is not that the site layout is the same, but that the site model and obelisk layout being used should be the one that was at site 1 before the 2.2 patch. I'm also going to say I think that site 4, when i is found, will have the same layout as site 3, just with different erosion patterns and active obelisks.

The reason I think this is down to the Guardians being split in two, leading to the data sites having two architects, and thus two layouts.

Obviously if site 4 has a new layout to the others then this will be shown for the tinfoil speculation it is, but it does, kind-of, make sense with what we know right now. :)
Click to expand...
Data from sites seems to be divided in three blocks, so it makes sense that there are three different sites. And by the looks of Ram Tah's system clues, there are three planets hosting each of the ruin types.

So I like to call "site 1" as Alpha 2 (closest to us, 1st found, containing the second=middle data sets), "site 2" as Beta 2 (second cluster, middle data sets) and "site 3" as Beta 1 (second cluster, beginning data sets).

Leaves Alpha 1 & 3, Beta 3 and Gamma 1-3 to be found (one Gamma system given by Ram Tah).

9BSmM4G.png
 
Last edited:

CMDR Aurynn

C
Unusual concentration of POIs at Synuefe XO-P C22-17 AB 3, coords 29.6684 by -69.4865. Anyone nearby to help search the area? My computer is very old and barely loads the textures when searching planets. :-(
 

Rampant

Rampant
QorbeQ said:
Ok, I give up.

I can't for the life of me work out how the moon at the alpha site (Synuefe XR-H) always rises and sets over the same point.


o7
Click to expand...


It means that either:

1. The planet axial tilt and the moon orbital inclination are the same, or;

2. These properties are ignored by the render of the orbit in game.

That would be my understanding, anyway.

Yours Aye

Mark H
 

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
Brakhir said:
IMO it's as simple as :
- 6.9 days are earth days (6.9 x 24hours). The planet makes one rotation in 6.9 earth days. Actualy, on the planet (first site), the sun rises every Tuesday. The daylight lasts 1 or 2 "earth days", then the night lasts the remaining 5 earth days.

To make it short :1 "night and day cycle" on the planet = 6.9 "night and day cycle" on Earth.

Is it correct ?
Click to expand...

That planet is tilted about 90°. this means that depending on where the Y-Dwarf is in it's orbit, one of the poles is constantly lit and the other constantly dark. The ruin is a bit to the south and I think the Main star is more or less north east(don't hold me to this) at the moment. This should mean that night is longer than day. This will change, but very slowly.
 

BL1P

BL1P
I am unsure as I have only done this 3 times so could just be an error.
But... I think at site 3, G4 and E3 are the same combo of Cas and Orb but... If you do either E or G first you cannot do the other one.

Last time I did G first and E would not complete, this time I did E first and G will not complete.
I can not remember what I did on the first run. :(
I could just be getting the clusters mixed up.

Needs more testing.
Will do the run a 4th time to find out :)
 
Last edited:

kayahr

kayahr
New Theory

I have a new theory and I don't like it at all. I hope I'm proven wrong...

What we know so far:

  • We have one system which was found by following star constellations seen in a trailer video. One ruin was found in this system. While I see a good chance finding the right system by matching star constellations chances for finding the one and only ruin in the system without any capable sensory equipment and with an estimated visual discovery range of 4 km are very very low.
  • We were given four more systems to search. Even more planets with a very low chance to find a SINGLE ruin on it. We suspect one ruin in each system and we already found half of them in a very short time. This smells fishy.
  • The second ruin is identical to the first ruin.
  • We know we have to find 101 data entries.
  • We know we can find 11-13 data entries per ruin in Solo and FD said it is a bug that we can get more in PG/Open.


I make the following assumptions (Which may be wrong, it's just a theory):

  • I assume the second ruin is not a bug. It is completely unimmersive to have two ruins with the exact same damages but lets assume it is working as intended.
  • I assume that obelisks getting activated randomly in PG/Open is some kind of up-scaling. The more players are in the instance the more obelisks need to be activated so all players have something to do. In Solo this is not necessary, the few initial obelisks are enough. Though we don't know how to reactivate them. Would be very bad game design to expect the player to relog to try again...
  • FD said Solo mode is working as intended, PG/Open is not. So there are 11-13 data entries to be found in each ruin. Which means there must be nine different ruins.
  • I assume we found the ruins WAY to fast if there are only five because the chances for finding five tiny ruins on dozens of large planets just by visually scanning with maybe 4 km range is astronomically low.
  • I assume nobody cheated.
  • I assume the locations of the ruins are fixed like persistent POIs and they are not placed manually by FD right in front of some player at a given time. Because that would be SO lame!


So my theory at last is:

  • There are nine different ruin layouts. In each one we can find around 11-13 data entries.
  • These ruins are spread to a lot of planets in the said systems. Each ruin procedurally chooses one of the nine available layouts.
  • There are multiple ruins to be found on a single planet. This increases the chance to find one by brute force drastically and would explain why we find them so quickly.
  • As soon as we find one ruin on a planet we immediately stop searching the planet or the system for more. That's why we so far found one ruin per system.
  • We see patterns for the ruin locations because we are searching in patterns. Most people thought the second ruin must be on a planet with a moon. So we searched planets with a moon and we found a ruin on a planet with a moon. Means nothing. Other planets were searched as well by single Commanders but the majority concentrated on the same patterns so chances that we then find exactly these patterns are very high.
  • There are a lot of duplicated ruins. We already found one duplicate, maybe the next one is again a duplicate of ruin 1 or ruin 3 or maybe we are lucky and get one of the other seven layouts.


Why I don't like this theory at all:

It would mean the puzzle is much simpler as we think. We are not too stupid to understand the puzzle, the puzzle just isn't a puzzle at all. No special meanings in ruin layouts, no special meanings in monolith locations and so on. No missed clues about the exact ruin locations. No secret way to activate more obelisks. Just a special POI procedurally choosing one of nine layouts and placed in a few systems with enough duplicates to make it probable enough to find them all in a few weeks with pure luck instead of skills. There may be nothing more to Ram Tah's mission than looking long enough for the nine different ruins, scanning 11-13 obelisks with the right combination of artifacts and that's it.

That would be so incredibly lame. I really hope my theory is completely wrong and there is a lot more to the ruins and I really hope the duplicated ruin is simply a bug.


And finally

I'm getting quite frustrated by this ruin hunt because whatever we find we never know if it is working as intended or not. FD confirmed the PG/Open bug but never fixed it. Why? Disappearing messages after scanning are annoying as hell but still unfixed. The found duplicate ruin smells like a bug but we don't know. FD changed the layout of the first ruin AFTER it was found but we don't know why. Was it also a bug? Or just not pretty enough? Wasn't there a way to fix the problem (Whatever the problem was) in an immersive way without crudely changing a site which was already cartographed by the community? I really like mysteries but unfortunately most of the current mysteries are more about bugs and game design and not about the Guardians.
 

Han_Zen

Han_Zen
QorbeQ said:
Except from what I can tell those passes are all at different angles and are sometimes potentially occluded by the planet. Why isn't that the case in practise?


o7
Click to expand...

I don't know?

I would go to the equator of the planet, at the same longitude as the ruin and see where the moon passes. It could be that the moon has a moving equinox, due to the tidal lock. Meaning that the orbit is locked to the parent planet and not fixed in space?
 

QorbeQ

QorbeQ
Rampant said:
It means that either:

1. The planet axial tilt and the moon orbital inclination are the same
Click to expand...

The orbit of the moon is in relation to the equator of the planet that it orbits isn't it, not the virtual equator of the star system or galaxy? If it's in relation to some plane other than the planet's equator then that might account for it, but only if the planet's axial tilt cancelled out the moon's orbital inclination exactly.

I'll see if there's anything I can calculate to check that, but suitable observations of the orbit lines in-game should suffice to see where the equator and various orbits lie in relation to other planes.

Rampant said:
2. These properties are ignored by the render of the orbit in game.

That would be my understanding, anyway.
Click to expand...

I'd really like to think that they're accounted for. The moon orbits the planet which can be seen taking place in supercruise. The planet rotates, which again can be seen taking place in supercruise. Supercruise-to-surface alignment matches. I think it's all there, it just isn't making any sense to me right now.


o7
 
Last edited:

yowl

Y
Han_Zen said:
It's obviously drawing a tetrahedron in the sky.
North pole is A. The ruin moves thru B, C and D during one orbit. A always points at the same star. The ruin will point at the same star every time it's in B, C and D.
Click to expand...
If the ruins contain something that points to star, i.e. 0 degrees, then it will also point to the star at every point between B,C, and D. The ruins do not rotate on the surface after all.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom