Gravity, Our Ships, Water and my coffee

[Old Duck]

I want Elite Dangerous to be closer to The Expanse than to those other over done franchises.

Better turn off your FSD and fly shieldless then (and remove all those HRPs while you're at it).

In my headcannon, the FSD generates gravity by applying differential frame shifting across the hull, kinda like lift generated over a wing. Of course this only works while in supercruise, so like an airline, that's when the seatbelt lights go out and I announce, "It is now safe to walk around your cabins" to my passengers.

ps - it's MY headcannon, so you can't argue with it

 

[Quantis Trap]

Better turn off your FSD and fly shieldless then (and remove all those HRPs while you're at it).

In my headcannon, the FSD generates gravity by applying differential frame shifting across the hull, kinda like lift generated over a wing. Of course this only works while in supercruise, so like an airline, that's when the seatbelt lights go out and I announce, "It is now safe to walk around your cabins" to my passengers.

ps - it's MY headcannon, so you can't argue with it

My head cannon basically agrees I think. With both Super Cruise and Frame Shift the passengers are in a warp bubble where the inertia is either non existent or massively damped.

But that's, of course, a totally different concept than creating a gravity or inertia.

 

[Morbad]

You cant perma accelerate at 1g. You'll be achieving relativistic speeds rather soon. Time travel for the masses, sure... in one direction only

Relativity is exactly why it's possible to accelerate at 1g indefinitely and never reach the speed of light.

The game already ignores time dilation (I've tried it!) and we'd see plenty of other game breaking effects before relativistic relative velocities. Point was that our ships could just accelerate as long as fuel holds out as an explanation for simulated gravity, if not for the handwavium of velocity caps.

 

[Quantis Trap]

Relativity is exactly why it's possible to accelerate at 1g indefinitely and never reach the speed of light.

The biggest handwavium in Elite Dangerous is that it completely blasts away the relativity theory with Super Cruise and Frame Shifting. It was necessary to get around faster from anywhere to anywhere and not use worm holes for everything.

I believe this gravity situation doesn't absolutely need handwavium. It just needs some common since.

 

[Old Duck]

Relativity is exactly why it's possible to accelerate at 1g indefinitely and never reach the speed of light.

Somebody do the math - how long can we maintain a 1g acceleration before time dilation becomes problematic?

The solution to this "problem" (if it is a problem) is simple enough, if you start going too fast, just accelerate in the opposite direction (flip the ship around), and rinse and repeat until you get where you need to go. A waste of fuel, but you'll have "gravity"!

Of course all of this is arbitrary in ED, where ships are not designed with "downward" G-inducing acceleration in mind (though our magical vertical thrusters probably could achieve this).

ps - I set my AG fields to 0.5 in Space Engineers (to save power), and that's more than enough gravity to walk around and pour coffee and feel basically "normal". We really don't need 1G all the time, especially if we have some sort of anti-atrophy drugs in the future to prevent muscle loss and other low G side-effects.

 

[Morbad]

In my headcannon, the FSD generates gravity by applying differential frame shifting across the hull, kinda like lift generated over a wing. Of course this only works while in supercruise, so like an airline, that's when the seatbelt lights go out and I announce, "It is now safe to walk around your cabins" to my passengers.

ps - it's MY headcannon, so you can't argue with it

Can I point out that it seems to violate Occam's Razor?

Why not just say the ship is constantly accelerating within it's local warp bubble? The fuel consumption is already covered and the limiter that applies in normal space could just apply to normal space.

I believe this gravity situation doesn't absolutely need handwavium. It just needs some common since.

I don't think ships need simulated gravity at all to explain coffee machines, because most ships that only carry half a day's worth of fuel are going to spend most of their time docked, probably somewhere that has gravity (simulated or otherwise).

 

[Old Duck]

Why not just say the ship is constantly accelerating within it's local warp bubble? The fuel consumption is already covered and the limiter that applies in normal space could just apply to normal space.

Because I would end up walking on the back wall instead of the floor?

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Somebody do the math - how long can we maintain a 1g acceleration before time dilation becomes problematic?

The solution to this "problem" (if it is a problem) is simple enough, if you start going too fast, just accelerate in the opposite direction (flip the ship around), and rinse and repeat until you get where you need to go. A waste of fuel, but you'll have "gravity"!

Of course all of this is arbitrary in ED, where ships are not designed with "downward" G-inducing acceleration in mind (though our magical vertical thrusters probably could achieve this).

ps - I set my AG fields to 0.5 in Space Engineers (to save power), and that's more than enough gravity to walk around and pour coffee and feel basically "normal". We really don't need 1G all the time, especially if we have some sort of anti-atrophy drugs in the future to prevent muscle loss and other low G side-effects.

Just alternate flight vectors and you gobble up that acceleration you did when flying north by accelerating south.

 

[Quantis Trap]

All this talk about flying to create inertial force (fake gravity the hard way) is kind of a side track from the original thread.

 

[Morbad]

Somebody do the math - how long can we maintain a 1g acceleration before time dilation becomes problematic?

A lot longer than most ED ships have fuel for.

Lorentz factor - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

g-Acceleration Calculator - Linear Motion

Calculation of the g-force at accelerating or braking in a straight line motion. Enter three values at start speed, end speed, time and acceleration. The fourth value will be calculated.

rechneronline.de

~4246 hours to reach 0.5c which would make time onboard 86.7% of the rate of a stationary (relatively speaking) observer.

Because I would end up walking on the back wall instead of the floor?

Not if the local acceleration was "up".

 

[Ashnak]

The biggest handwavium in Elite Dangerous is that it completely blasts away the relativity theory with Super Cruise and Frame Shifting. It was necessary to get around faster from anywhere to anywhere and not use worm holes for everything.

Alcubierre drive - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

read the references - especially

The warp drive: hyper-fast travel within general relativity

It is shown how, within the framework of general relativity and without the introduction of wormholes, it is possible to modify a spacetime in a way that allows a spaceship to travel with an arbitrarily large speed. By a purely local expansion of spacetime behind the spaceship and an opposite...

arxiv.org

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

All this talk about flying to create inertial force (fake gravity the hard way) is kind of a side track from the original thread.

No it's not, we just put the proper gravitas into place.

 

[Northpin]

Somebody do the math - how long can we maintain a 1g acceleration before time dilation becomes problematic?

Long enough not to be worthy of a game mechanic

Relativity is exactly why it's possible to accelerate at 1g indefinitely and never reach the speed of light.

Just alternate flight vectors and you gobble up that acceleration you did when flying north by accelerating south.

Yea, but why bother? SuperCruise is fast enough, generally faster than it takes me to reach the office, even if we take the extremes (huttons vs the traffic during a rainy morning when everyone is using their 4-wheeled umbrella)
So, not long enough to be dying for a Coffee

Want some coffee? Just spot the nearest planet with at least 0.3g and setup a picnic

 

[Chrystoph]

I believe this gravity situation doesn't absolutely need handwavium. It just needs some common since.

Yeah, umm, you realize that the entire thrust argument doesn't work because the plane of thrust and the ship's axis are parallel, not perpendicular?

In order for forward thrust to apply as a gravity simulation, you need the ship to be built in a vertical stack a la skyscrapers, as opposed to the current horizontal design a la a fighter.

Thrust as currently applied in a straight line flight places "down" against the after bulkhead. Just another point in my belief that gravity control is part of the game, if not the Lore.

 

[Nadreck]

To drink coffee in deep space:

Tilt nose down so your destination is "above" the ship (if you care which direction you're going in).

Apply 1g using vertical thrusters.

Make and drink coffee.

Put mug away, kill thrust.

...At least that would work in our universe. ED's weird speed limit on normal-space acceleration would be an issue, you'd have to fly in circles.

 

[Ashnak]

Yeah, umm, you realize that the entire thrust argument doesn't work because the plane of thrust and the ship's axis are perpendicular, not parallel?

No, they're not
Just because your ship's main thrusters are aligned in conventional "fighter" style doesn't mean that you don't have 5 other sets of thrusters, enabling you to accelerate in any direction in space (and rotate around any axis).
And the ventral thrusters are able to lift off your ship under any planet's gravity - tested up to 11 g

 

[Chrystoph]

Since I'm feeling my Wheatios this morning...

Publishing of the 9.77G landable:

https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDangerous/comments/3xdd8w

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDangerous/comments/3xdd8w/977g_planet_anyone_1400ly_from_sol/


Escape Velocity Calculator using information from the REDDIT:

I don't recall anyone boasting a ship capable of 62,189 m/s but the planet has been landed on and lifted from. Given that straight numbers won't do it and that you can't activate the FSD while in Mass Lock, I am open to suggestions alternative to, in this case, gravity negation.

 

[Ashnak]

Escape velocity doesn't have anything to do with this. You can enter SC once you're sufficiently high above the surface (although, that deep in a gravity well, it'll be abysmally slow) and out of mass lock. Speed isn't critical, only power to the engines is.

---

Oh, and completely off topic: a Mamba at 34,256 m/s

 

[Chrystoph]

Yeah, umm, you realize that the entire thrust argument doesn't work because the plane of thrust and the ship's axis are parallel, not perpendicular?

In order for forward thrust to apply as a gravity simulation, you need the ship to be built in a vertical stack a la skyscrapers, as opposed to the current horizontal design a la a fighter.

Thrust as currently applied in a straight line flight places "down" against the after bulkhead. Just another point in my belief that gravity control is part of the game, if not the Lore.

No, they're not
Just because your ship's main thrusters are aligned in conventional "fighter" style doesn't mean that you don't have 5 other sets of thrusters, enabling you to accelerate in any direction in space (and rotate around any axis).
And the ventral thrusters are able to lift off your ship under any planet's gravity - tested up to 11 g

So, you propel your ship principally using your ventral thrusters?

Personally, I think that putting your argument forward should disqualify you as a pilot because you are obviously a hazard to navigation and likely to get your ship stuck in the mail slot on a regular basis.

 

[CMDR Yates]

Mail-slot type selective force field over the top of the cup and cafetière.