It's hatching. Get ... out ... of ... there ... oh you can't. At least hide under your duvet.
Unknown Artefact (or artifact) Community Thread - The Canonn
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
- Status
It's hatching. Get ... out ... of ... there ... oh you can't. At least hide under your duvet.
Meepppppppp decode this sound?
Sorry at work.
Maybe it's the sound of the UA slowly burrowing into your spine.
Clearly, I know what 2 & 3 should be - but I've transcribed what I've been able to understand from it. Both the EKURU samples trim off a dit and a dah from the start. The third one was made by your hand, sir.
1: ... . . --. .-/.--. --- .-. - : Seega Port The three dashes for 'o' are hard to get, imho, but the clue is in the spacing of the tones, eh, warbles.
2: .- ..- .-. ..-/.-/.---- : AURU A 1. Easier to read from the end as the '.----' is very clear, then the '.-' and '..-' and so on. This is all very simple - but the first bit is missing something off the recording, though, clearly. I think this is the original.
3: .- ..- .-. ..-/.-/.---- : AURU A 1. Again - reading from the end. Very similar to 2, but the overall pitch is not the same.
The 'u', 'r', 'a' and '1' are either identical or very close in both, though. The Us in particular are a match.
Btw - if you use the morse generator at http://morsecode.scphillips.com/translator.html, and do a bit of multi-window action, you can get a 'real' morse message containing these patterns to match up pretty much bang on with samples #1 and #2 if you use a WPM and Farnsworth speed of around 13-15. The last '.----' is delayed a bit longer on #2, but it almost nigh-on fits. The Seega Port sample fits even better. Sample #3 matches less well, only slightly, but I would expect that if it were pieced together.
We know the start of the message can be tricky because of the louder 'honk' trailing off, obscuring some of these 'tones', (eh, warbles!) - but I'm posting this to add another voice to the morse argument by showing that I 've gone through the process myself and have literally no knowledge of morse except '... --- ...'.
Last edited:
Get to us whenever you can................but I also admit just a bit I'm keen to find out what you have found
Right - here we go.
First clip - taken from Wishblend's UA sat in EKURU A 1 ... I've trimmed it down to the last bit because it's clearest ... I can hear morse "URU A 1" but - fair enough - some can't.
http://elite.darke.org.uk/unknown_artefact.mp3
Second clip - this is generated from a website which produces clean morse code (deliberately set for a low tone of 300Hz) ... I typed in "EKURU A 1", downloaded the mp3 file and then trimmed the beginning off so this ACTUALLY SAYS "URU A 1" in morse code. No conjecture please. It does.
http://elite.darke.org.uk/real_morse.mp3
Finally, here's the two overlaid with each other. If you guys can't tell that the pulses in the chittering match EXACTLY with the real morse code, then I'll take myself to YouTube and play myself a rickroll...
http://elite.darke.org.uk/overlaid.mp3
Now can we please get on with discussing what it all means!?
I see you've done what I describe at the end of my post - will rep if I can. I spent a while trying to decode for myself (rather than just listening to the earlier posts and nodding my head furiously as it all fit into place!).
Henceforth I think we should call it 'orse code', instead of 'morse code'
The WPM/Farnsworth hint might be useful to any other morse experts we look to get involved if we get any more orse we don't understand...
One thing that's interesting between samples #2 and #3 was that the pitches of the dits/dahs were different I think. Assuming you didn't alter them, what would cause the pitches to be higher/lower? The samples used for #3 - do you know which of the systems were used for each of the letters?
Yes that is what I was after.
There was a lot of posts, so I'm going to just summarise them here:
On "Stylized Morse"
As mentioned previously, the morse is stylised. Any audio morse translation software is going to be listening for "dit dit dit dit dit", not "wip wup wip wup wip". An equivalent of this is if I used OCR software on Wingdings and expected to get Romanised characters out; it's not going to happen. But the underlying Wingding character codes are the same, Wingding A == 65 == Arial A.
Alternatively, ask an Australian and someone from the UK to both say "G'day" and you'll get two very different results which are structurally identical. Doesn't mean one of them didn't say "G'day", they just said it differently.
There *are* slight variations between recordings, but it's only ever in amplitude or pitch; structurally (and that's the important bit) they're the same. For example, if I wrote:
@@@ ### @@@
%%% $$$ %%%
@@@ $$$ @@@
*** ### ***
As representations of different recordings of the same segment.... have I recorded the same thing or not? Consistency of structure is what I looked for primarily. Ultimately, regardless of stylisations, for the letter "A", I listened for "high low", not the exact same noise.
On "Write a galnet post" and see if FD says anything.
Already done, and unsurprisingly, nothing. I've written articles three times now, and nothing has ever been picked up. So, there's numerous explanations;
- I'm a terrible writer (very true, I'm a programmer in my day job, and a radio operator in my secondary job )
- FD don't want to "have their hand forced" just yet.
- Tying it in even slightly to a Power isn't the direction FD want to take.
- FD simply don't have the resources to put towards that sorta thing at the moment.
I don't think FD staying silent is a smoking barrel.
On uninhabited systems
Multiple recordings by wishblend were done in uninhabited systems. At the time, EKURU A 1 was done as a prediction because that's the only system name with letters I knew. Now I have the full alphabet, I could "predict" and uninhabited system relatively easily (not right now though, because I'm going to work).
<snip> Poorly thought through paragraph, which I apologise for.
If it really is morse?
Honestly, I'd be happy to say it's not strictly morse, but a symbol set based off morse, with a set of (as yet, undetermined) rules which cause slight variations within each symbol.
This would be similar to how an english "c" in center is pronounced "ss", but a "c" in "cheat" is more like "tyh". Unfortunately differences in English are quite radical compared to the differences in this. The sort of differences I'm talking about is that three dits (dit dit dit) will be "wip wip wip" with a slightly descending pitch in each one, compared to "wip wup wip wup wip" for 5 dits.
For what it's worth, the "P" symbol is quite "different" from it's morse base, under these circumstances. Listening to multiple recordings, it's supposed to be "dit dah dah dit", but it's coming out more like "dit dah dit dit". This was consistent for any recording with "P". This could be stylisation, or it could be something.
On "hearing what I want to hear"
For whatever it's worth, while dissecting the audio cuts, there were many times when I either played the wrong audio cut, or had the wrong text in a morse translator. Every time this happened I listened and went "Wait, this is completely wrong",, then realised my mistake. If I was just "hearing what I want to hear", surely that wouldn't happen?
On software not finding an answer
Basically, the Mk I. Human Sensor Array isn't a fast heuristic process compared to most software, but it's unquestionably more accurate than software, in my opinion. That's just my opinion though. I can make a computer think a word document is a JPEG image. I can't make myself do that.
From here?
I'm leaving it from here. If people still think it's wrong, I'm not going to try and prove them otherwise. I've put everything I've got into spitting this stuff out, and have had some great help. Some people never will be convinced I think. But if you want to prove me wrong, it's going to take presenting a recording with the listed location that doesn't match up at all. As mentioned, this diagnosis would've failed over 20 recordings ago if I was just "hearing what I wanted to hear".
EDIT: Oh BTW Wishblend, thanks for the Ekuru A 1 recording, as expected (imo) there's stylistic differences, but they're pretty much the same. Happy for anyone else to verify.
On "Stylized Morse"
As mentioned previously, the morse is stylised. Any audio morse translation software is going to be listening for "dit dit dit dit dit", not "wip wup wip wup wip". An equivalent of this is if I used OCR software on Wingdings and expected to get Romanised characters out; it's not going to happen. But the underlying Wingding character codes are the same, Wingding A == 65 == Arial A.
Alternatively, ask an Australian and someone from the UK to both say "G'day" and you'll get two very different results which are structurally identical. Doesn't mean one of them didn't say "G'day", they just said it differently.
There *are* slight variations between recordings, but it's only ever in amplitude or pitch; structurally (and that's the important bit) they're the same. For example, if I wrote:
@@@ ### @@@
%%% $$$ %%%
@@@ $$$ @@@
*** ### ***
As representations of different recordings of the same segment.... have I recorded the same thing or not? Consistency of structure is what I looked for primarily. Ultimately, regardless of stylisations, for the letter "A", I listened for "high low", not the exact same noise.
On "Write a galnet post" and see if FD says anything.
Already done, and unsurprisingly, nothing. I've written articles three times now, and nothing has ever been picked up. So, there's numerous explanations;
- I'm a terrible writer (very true, I'm a programmer in my day job, and a radio operator in my secondary job )
- FD don't want to "have their hand forced" just yet.
- Tying it in even slightly to a Power isn't the direction FD want to take.
- FD simply don't have the resources to put towards that sorta thing at the moment.
I don't think FD staying silent is a smoking barrel.
On uninhabited systems
Multiple recordings by wishblend were done in uninhabited systems. At the time, EKURU A 1 was done as a prediction because that's the only system name with letters I knew. Now I have the full alphabet, I could "predict" and uninhabited system relatively easily (not right now though, because I'm going to work).
<snip> Poorly thought through paragraph, which I apologise for.
If it really is morse?
Honestly, I'd be happy to say it's not strictly morse, but a symbol set based off morse, with a set of (as yet, undetermined) rules which cause slight variations within each symbol.
This would be similar to how an english "c" in center is pronounced "ss", but a "c" in "cheat" is more like "tyh". Unfortunately differences in English are quite radical compared to the differences in this. The sort of differences I'm talking about is that three dits (dit dit dit) will be "wip wip wip" with a slightly descending pitch in each one, compared to "wip wup wip wup wip" for 5 dits.
For what it's worth, the "P" symbol is quite "different" from it's morse base, under these circumstances. Listening to multiple recordings, it's supposed to be "dit dah dah dit", but it's coming out more like "dit dah dit dit". This was consistent for any recording with "P". This could be stylisation, or it could be something.
On "hearing what I want to hear"
For whatever it's worth, while dissecting the audio cuts, there were many times when I either played the wrong audio cut, or had the wrong text in a morse translator. Every time this happened I listened and went "Wait, this is completely wrong",, then realised my mistake. If I was just "hearing what I want to hear", surely that wouldn't happen?
On software not finding an answer
Basically, the Mk I. Human Sensor Array isn't a fast heuristic process compared to most software, but it's unquestionably more accurate than software, in my opinion. That's just my opinion though. I can make a computer think a word document is a JPEG image. I can't make myself do that.
From here?
I'm leaving it from here. If people still think it's wrong, I'm not going to try and prove them otherwise. I've put everything I've got into spitting this stuff out, and have had some great help. Some people never will be convinced I think. But if you want to prove me wrong, it's going to take presenting a recording with the listed location that doesn't match up at all. As mentioned, this diagnosis would've failed over 20 recordings ago if I was just "hearing what I wanted to hear".
EDIT: Oh BTW Wishblend, thanks for the Ekuru A 1 recording, as expected (imo) there's stylistic differences, but they're pretty much the same. Happy for anyone else to verify.
Last edited:
Uhhh this is the latest galnet news articale....I'm wondering what ships it can be used for and what else it needs..... :
Open Osmium Contract in Abres
The governing authorities for Pangborn Dock in the Abres star system today released an open contract for a staggering quantity of Osmium.
Osmium is a relatively rare transition metal with outstanding hardness and durability properties. It is often used in specialist alloys for starship construction and other heavy industry. While it is uncommon, analysts claim that there is ample supply in circulation for current civilian and military manufacturing requirements. This has led to speculation that a new player may emerge in ship construction or even that a covert build-up of military ships is being prepared.
Dale Torrance, the Business Development Spokesperson for Pangborn Dock, refused to speculate on the rumours:
“Osmium is a material used throughout industry. As the chosen partner in this venture, we are pleased to announce that there will be significant credit bonuses for the successful completion of this contract.”
He then encouraged miners to investigate the contract for more information.
Open Osmium Contract in Abres
The governing authorities for Pangborn Dock in the Abres star system today released an open contract for a staggering quantity of Osmium.
Osmium is a relatively rare transition metal with outstanding hardness and durability properties. It is often used in specialist alloys for starship construction and other heavy industry. While it is uncommon, analysts claim that there is ample supply in circulation for current civilian and military manufacturing requirements. This has led to speculation that a new player may emerge in ship construction or even that a covert build-up of military ships is being prepared.
Dale Torrance, the Business Development Spokesperson for Pangborn Dock, refused to speculate on the rumours:
“Osmium is a material used throughout industry. As the chosen partner in this venture, we are pleased to announce that there will be significant credit bonuses for the successful completion of this contract.”
He then encouraged miners to investigate the contract for more information.
- Status