I don't think there's a universal formally agreed-upon definition, it's more of a short-hand for "stupidly big and bright unstable star undergoing mass loss."
RV Sonnenkreis - Decoding Universal Cartographics
- Thread starter Jackie Silver
- Start date
I don't think there's a universal formally agreed-upon definition, it's more of a short-hand for "stupidly big and bright unstable star undergoing mass loss."
Hypergiants are technically size 0 (not sure if that's official or not, but that's the general usage). I'm pretty sure they're using the VI classification incorrectly in ED, for reasons I mentioned earlier (all the B/A/F subdwarfs would have formed at the start of the universe and would have become red giants or WDs by now).
In addition to luminosity class VI, I have found luminosity classes VA, VAB + VB for almost all Herbig AE/BE stars, luminosity classes VA VAB + VB for all T Tauri stars, and luminosity classes IVAB + IVB for many T Tauri stars.
Luminosity classes I found so far for Herbig AE/BE stars:
Code:
VA VAB VB VI
AEBE0 * * * *
AEBE1 * * * *
AEBE2 * *
AEBE3 * *
AEBE4 (*) * * *
AEBE5 * (*) * *
AEBE6 * *
AEBE7 * * * *
AEBE8 * * *
AEBE9 * * *Luminosity classes I found so far for T Tauri stars:
Code:
IVAB IVB VA VAB VB VI
TTS0 * * * *
TTS1 * * * *
TTS2 * * * *
TTS3 * * * *
TTS4 * * * * *
TTS5 * * * * *
TTS6 * * * * * *
TTS7 * * * * *
TTS8 * * * * *
TTS9 * * * * *If necessary I can provide at least one example system per table cell. (*) means I have not been able to travel.
Yep, you're right, and I already knew you were right when I wrote it, so I don't know why I wrote it! I've found V variants in both TTS and Ae/Be. I can only assume I forgot to write "almost" at the beginning of that sentence.
Editted due to annoying predictive text on my phone!
Editted due to annoying predictive text on my phone!
Last edited:
Hi Jackie, Esviandary, et al.,
The commander's log / player journal now includes the star luminosity class when scanning a stellar body, which should allow you to validate your findings for the HR distribution.
Thanks to Howard Chalkley for including this in the latest version of the journal - he even messaged me to check exactly what we wanted, now that's dedication to the community!
Cheers
The commander's log / player journal now includes the star luminosity class when scanning a stellar body, which should allow you to validate your findings for the HR distribution.
Thanks to Howard Chalkley for including this in the latest version of the journal - he even messaged me to check exactly what we wanted, now that's dedication to the community!
Cheers
Really? that's great, it's about time! Though I guess it doesn't update the entries for what's already been scanned does it...
Alas, no.
I'm investigating the scale height of the galaxy at the moment - these are very (very!) preliminary results from near Sol:
I assumed the plane to lie at -20 and measured the density at points as close to every 50 ly vertically from that, up to a kylie over the plane.
The blue markers are measured density values.
The fit line there is for a scale height H = 250 light years, which is considerably smaller than the "real" neighbourhood value which I think is ~1000 light years.
In other words, Elite's galaxy is compressed more towards the plane than the Milky Way is.
That said, this is very rough and ready.
I will carry out more measurements as I make my way out to rejoin DECE.
I assumed the plane to lie at -20 and measured the density at points as close to every 50 ly vertically from that, up to a kylie over the plane.
The blue markers are measured density values.
The fit line there is for a scale height H = 250 light years, which is considerably smaller than the "real" neighbourhood value which I think is ~1000 light years.
In other words, Elite's galaxy is compressed more towards the plane than the Milky Way is.
That said, this is very rough and ready.
I will carry out more measurements as I make my way out to rejoin DECE.
Last edited:
I made a mistake on the graph above (I had forgotten to multiply by 4/3 on one of the values and it skewed things up, so I'll need to look at fit curves again); I'm on my third data-gathering run now, I'll get plenty more data and post again. It might be - this would make sense given what was said in the talk - that we're seeing a combination of thick and thin disk scaling put together.
After gathering another two sets of data, here's a better fit, using a combination of thin disk and thick disk profiles:
In this case for the fit line the thin disk is modelled as containing 75% of the zero-height density's stars and has a scale height of 100 light years, the thick disk contains the remaining 25% and has a scale height of 500 light years.
Those probably aren't the actual values, but the fit is much better. When close to the plane the thin disk dominates and vice versa away from the plane, but the Forge galaxy is still much more compressed vertically than the real one, where the thin disk scale height is supposedly closer to 1000 light years.
Still, a major caveat; I don't yet have any surveys from closer to the plane. I have one hapless volunteer on the job (I'm stuck out in the boondocks of Distant Angosk right now) but if anyone else would like to grab some data for !!science!!, please let me know!
In this case for the fit line the thin disk is modelled as containing 75% of the zero-height density's stars and has a scale height of 100 light years, the thick disk contains the remaining 25% and has a scale height of 500 light years.
Those probably aren't the actual values, but the fit is much better. When close to the plane the thin disk dominates and vice versa away from the plane, but the Forge galaxy is still much more compressed vertically than the real one, where the thin disk scale height is supposedly closer to 1000 light years.
Still, a major caveat; I don't yet have any surveys from closer to the plane. I have one hapless volunteer on the job (I'm stuck out in the boondocks of Distant Angosk right now) but if anyone else would like to grab some data for !!science!!, please let me know!
Last edited:
Plotted with a couple more surveys from CMDR Rollo Rhadium (circles):
"... Still, a major caveat; I don't yet have any surveys from closer to the plane. I have one hapless volunteer on the job (I'm stuck out in the boondocks of Distant Angosk right now) but if anyone else would like to grab some data for !!science!!, please let me know! ..."
Just returning from a short trip to the Outer Rim. From next week sometime I am willing to 'do my bit' for a few weeks - given a description of what is needed
Just returning from a short trip to the Outer Rim. From next week sometime I am willing to 'do my bit' for a few weeks - given a description of what is needed
Cool - the process I'm using is to get the density at a series of points above the plane.
To find the density, look at the navpanel. If there are more than 50 star systems within 20 light years, only the first 50 systems will be shown. Otherwise, the navpanel will show all systems within 20 light years.
This gives us two ways of finding the density:
1) For dense areas where there are more than 50 star systems, look at the last star system in the list, and see what its distance ("r") from your ship is. This lets us estimate the density as rho = 50 / ((4pi/3) * (r^3))
2) For sparse areas where there are less than 50 star systems, count how many star systems ("n") are visible in total in the navpanel. This lets us estimate the density as rho = n / ((4pi/3) * (20^3))
Neither method is perfect, but in practice they're good enough for our purpose.
I am treating the plane as being at a height of (-20) on the galmap. For my surveys (and the ones that Rollo has done) we went up from this in 50 ly increments (roughly) up to 980 light years above the plane, so roughly -20, 30, 80, 130, 180, ..., 980
At each point we record either the distance of the furthest star in the navpanel if there are over 50, or otherwise the number of stars in the navpanel.
It would be helpful to get the names and full coordinates of each system, but only the absolute height above or below the plane is absolutely needed, plus either "r" or "n" as above.
I hope this makes sense...
To find the density, look at the navpanel. If there are more than 50 star systems within 20 light years, only the first 50 systems will be shown. Otherwise, the navpanel will show all systems within 20 light years.
This gives us two ways of finding the density:
1) For dense areas where there are more than 50 star systems, look at the last star system in the list, and see what its distance ("r") from your ship is. This lets us estimate the density as rho = 50 / ((4pi/3) * (r^3))
2) For sparse areas where there are less than 50 star systems, count how many star systems ("n") are visible in total in the navpanel. This lets us estimate the density as rho = n / ((4pi/3) * (20^3))
Neither method is perfect, but in practice they're good enough for our purpose.
I am treating the plane as being at a height of (-20) on the galmap. For my surveys (and the ones that Rollo has done) we went up from this in 50 ly increments (roughly) up to 980 light years above the plane, so roughly -20, 30, 80, 130, 180, ..., 980
At each point we record either the distance of the furthest star in the navpanel if there are over 50, or otherwise the number of stars in the navpanel.
It would be helpful to get the names and full coordinates of each system, but only the absolute height above or below the plane is absolutely needed, plus either "r" or "n" as above.
I hope this makes sense...
But how does it relate to the original maps in Elite?
Anyone found a way to cross reference the sector coordinates in that to the latest game?
Anyone found a way to cross reference the sector coordinates in that to the latest game?
Does it matter where in the galaxy this is done, or do you have specific areas you’re looking at gathering data? I’m heading back to Colonia and could probably take some readings around that area if they’d be useful?
Do you mean the first Elite, set in entirely fictional galaxies, or FE2/FFE, set in the Milky Way?
If memory serves, in the latter case, the galaxy was a thin pancake. There isn't really any good way to convert coordinates from there to here. (Looking for Miackce or Veliaze perhaps?)
Update: huh, I just realised that there, the galaxy was so flattened that sectors didn't even have three coordinates, only two.
Last edited:
Readings from different parts of the galaxy would be very useful. So far the results seem to be consistent everywhere, but it would be nice to be sure!
Yeah, apologies... Meant FE2/FFE