I'm of an age where I'm just about to get more money from the government each week to spend on computer hardware. All my life Astronomy has been on my bucket list of interests to indulge later on. It's always later on because I live in a large town in the south of England, where the light pollution (and the weather most of the year) spoils any view of the wide black yonder. But now I am little more than 1,000 ly from Sagittarius A* and getting beyond the jump, scoop, scan mentality of just getting there. This area has so much interesting stuff in it simply because of it's nature. Dense in stars and their types because they are so close - or because they haven't gone that far? There's a question that has only occurred as I am writing. And one of many.
I came across a star that simply glowed on the galaxy map, and it was not possible to select it as a target for a jump. My interest was piqued. I wanted it to be a neutron star, so thought I had better find out what a neutron star is (apart from being a good earner for an explorer). So I looked it up. And while I was at it I looked up Wolf Raynet stars and a bunch of other stuff I didn't know about. Turned out it was a pair of white T Tauri stars - or should that be T Tauri binary. I don't know but I will find out. But to the point, I was educating myself. The game was stimulating me to learn
And that leads me to another thought train. There are a lot of moaners on here. Not least those who do it because the latest patch does not include what they are waiting for next. They seem to think some of this stuff can be done by the developers in just a couple of weeks since the last big patch. More and more I realise just how much realism is in here. They must surely have astronomers on the staff because there is no real moaning, that I have noticed, about accuracy. That may be the wrong word I know because mostly it's guesstimates. But as the only game that has, or has attempted, to map the whole galaxy ED must attract a lot of astronomers - whether they be amateurs or professionals. I haven't noticed them complaining. So they must be doing a lot of stuff right.
This is not a game it's a simulation
I came across a star that simply glowed on the galaxy map, and it was not possible to select it as a target for a jump. My interest was piqued. I wanted it to be a neutron star, so thought I had better find out what a neutron star is (apart from being a good earner for an explorer). So I looked it up. And while I was at it I looked up Wolf Raynet stars and a bunch of other stuff I didn't know about. Turned out it was a pair of white T Tauri stars - or should that be T Tauri binary. I don't know but I will find out. But to the point, I was educating myself. The game was stimulating me to learn
And that leads me to another thought train. There are a lot of moaners on here. Not least those who do it because the latest patch does not include what they are waiting for next. They seem to think some of this stuff can be done by the developers in just a couple of weeks since the last big patch. More and more I realise just how much realism is in here. They must surely have astronomers on the staff because there is no real moaning, that I have noticed, about accuracy. That may be the wrong word I know because mostly it's guesstimates. But as the only game that has, or has attempted, to map the whole galaxy ED must attract a lot of astronomers - whether they be amateurs or professionals. I haven't noticed them complaining. So they must be doing a lot of stuff right.
This is not a game it's a simulation
)
![[VR] Frank_G](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/59/59394.jpg?1553527111){kind=avatar}
