EVE Search - [IDEA] Binary Stars

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

[IDEA] Binary Stars

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Reltori Bathel	Posted - 2008.10.17 23:05:00 - [1] Over 50% of all star systems are thought to be part of Binary Systems, please CCP, give us some nice pretty interesting different systems to look at on our travels, i appreciate the coloured space and dust clouds, but binary systems appeal so much more to my inner-physicist. :) Any other cool features of the cosmos we can think up for inclusion?
ShadowDraqon Awesome Industries Group	Posted - 2008.10.18 01:51:00 - [2] /SIGNED trinary systems? visible blackholes in the background of some systems? i agree, space needs more diversity ____________________ I had a sig here, but I NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM nommed it...
Valkerias	Posted - 2008.10.18 08:01:00 - [3] Quasars maybe? Eliminate gate camps, but make flying that system more dangerous in exchange?
Eran Laude Gallente The Aduro Protocol	Posted - 2008.10.18 08:41:00 - [4] Originally by: ShadowDraqon /SIGNED trinary systems? visible blackholes in the background of some systems? i agree, space needs more diversity Go to Skarkon But still, /signed I'd love to see Binary systems
Tiberius Dresari Caldari Acerbus Vindictum	Posted - 2008.10.18 09:04:00 - [5] /signed Maybe a drifting planetoid or comet crossing the gate once in awhile? Though the logistics of installing such things would be quite a sight... comparable to what they're installing in fact, heh.
ShadowDraqon Awesome Industries Group	Posted - 2008.10.18 16:00:00 - [6] Yes comets are needed maybe even minable (ice mining maybe?) and since comets have tails stretching millions of kilometers, they should be visible at huge distances. ______________________ I got killed for my kindness no, rly
Tsual Minmatar Iikhelahii khulemah'lal	Posted - 2008.10.19 00:08:00 - [7] Originally by: ShadowDraqon Yes comets are needed Wondering when those have been anounced back in those long gone days. ******************** Moral is only usefull so far as society demands it from one to accept his presence.
Alexander Vallen	Posted - 2008.10.19 00:29:00 - [8] Originally by: ShadowDraqon Yes comets are needed maybe even minable (ice mining maybe?) and since comets have tails stretching millions of kilometers, they should be visible at huge distances. How dangerous would mining comets be? I mean they're outter surface is vaporizing to create the tail. Chance of damage? (Would that be kinetic?) /Signed
Dylatar Gallente Ocean Eleven Die Asteroiden Pluenderer	Posted - 2008.10.19 01:21:00 - [9] Edited by: Dylatar on 19/10/2008 01:25:07 If you read the background story you will learn, that all of the solar systems we move around here in Eve currently ARE binary systems. Without these gravitational specifications stargates wouldn't be possible. "That can't be, I see no second star, nowhere!" you say? Right, if you again read (but this time not the Eve background, but astronomical background), then you will learn, that stars of a binary system usually have enough distance between each other, that they wouldn't be noticed as a binary system from the view close at one of them. So well, search the brightest dot at the sky where you are, that must be the twin of the star where you are. But I would love to see, neutron stars, pulsars, maybe black holes.
ATARI BABY Lords Of Guile	Posted - 2008.10.19 02:01:00 - [10] Originally by: Dylatar Edited by: Dylatar on 19/10/2008 01:28:52 Edited by: Dylatar on 19/10/2008 01:25:07 If you read the background story you will learn, that all of the solar systems we move around here in Eve currently ARE binary systems. Without these gravitational specifications stargates wouldn't be possible. "That can't be, I see no second star, nowhere!" you say? Right, if you again read (but this time not the Eve background, but astronomical background), then you will learn, that stars of a binary system usually have enough distance between each other, that they wouldn't be noticed as a binary system from the view close at one of them. So well, search the brightest dot at the sky where you are, that must be the twin of the star where you are. But I would love to see, neutron stars, pulsars, maybe black holes. And as I think the white dwarfes here are still much too bright and shiny, we could introduce brown dwarfes to get our "dark room" solar systems. dont you think blackholes might hurt background story? LIE
TU144 TEPPOPNCT'CMEPTHNK	Posted - 2008.10.19 02:12:00 - [11] how about stars causing (slow)shield damage... closer you get more the shields take a hit cos of radiaton effects or should that be armor damage like EMP effects ??? CCP made little baby jesus cry by nerfing ghost training
Malik Mantille Minmatar Dark Sun Collective	Posted - 2008.10.19 02:23:00 - [12] Originally by: TU144 TEPPOPNCT'CMEPTHNK how about stars causing (slow)shield damage... closer you get more the shields take a hit cos of radiaton effects or should that be armor damage like EMP effects ??? No because I like my safe spots that are in the middle of the stars... ------
BigWhale Gallente Three WiseMen Association	Posted - 2008.10.19 07:07:00 - [13] I just want my space to be black... :( -- R, U & Y are letters, not words...
Dylatar Gallente Ocean Eleven Die Asteroiden Pluenderer	Posted - 2008.10.19 09:34:00 - [14] Originally by: ATARI BABY dont you think blackholes might hurt background story? How could they? ^^
ShadowDraqon Awesome Industries Group	Posted - 2008.10.19 20:01:00 - [15] How about visible orbital elevators on stations that are at urbanized planets? [covers and waits to be flamed down for lag-causing idea] ______________________ I got killed for my kindness no, rly
Hesod Adee Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.10.19 23:58:00 - [16] Originally by: Dylatar Edited by: Dylatar on 19/10/2008 01:28:52 Edited by: Dylatar on 19/10/2008 01:25:07 If you read the background story you will learn, that all of the solar systems we move around here in Eve currently ARE binary systems. Without these gravitational specifications stargates wouldn't be possible. You mean this article which looks like it was written by someone with no idea what he was talking about ? Lets have a look at what he got wrong: Quote: By creating depleted vacuum, that is, vacuum as found in space but completely stripped of all energy, and then expanding this depleted vacuum to envelop a ship, the ship is capable of moving faster than light through this bubble of depleted vacuum. A depleted vacuum bubble is more than frictionless û it is so anti-friction that things (including light) actually move faster in it than they would in complete vacuum. So apparently the FTL works by removing everything from a volume of space (the definition of vacuum). Then we remove more stuff from it. Yet still leaving behind something to react with our ships to give this negative friction. I really don't think the person behind that article knows what he was talking about because if I can catch errors there, what other errors didn't I catch ? Or how about this: Quote: Alain Embrosius Topher has a degree in applied physics and experimental psychology It's a bit odd that we get an article from someone who isn't an astrophysicist. Quote: Long regarded as a stylish quack with a lot of weird ideas among his fellow scientists, Given that FTL is a technology that is heavily used (and therefore widely understood), why was this written by someone with a questionable reputation ? Though the major problem with all systems needing to be binary systems it that there isn't any explanation of why the FTL used to leave Earth wasn't rediscovered. The wormhole doesn't count as it wasn't in that solar system. So why wasn't the FTL likely to be on more derelict ships than any other system rediscovered ? Quote: "That can't be, I see no second star, nowhere!" you say? Right, if you again read (but this time not the Eve background, but astronomical background), then you will learn, that stars of a binary system usually have enough distance between each other, that they wouldn't be noticed as a binary system from the view close at one of them. So well, search the brightest dot at the sky where you are, that must be the twin of the star where you are. So how far out from one star would you need to be in order to see the other ? Be sure to include how you arrived at that number. Quote: But I would love to see, neutron stars, pulsars, maybe black holes. And as I think the white dwarfes here are still much too bright and shiny, we could introduce brown dwarfes to get our "dark room" solar systems. Those do sound good. ---------------------------------------------- I support skill queues.
Ezekiel Sulastin Gallente Art of War Exalted.	Posted - 2008.10.20 01:17:00 - [17] Originally by: BigWhale I just want my space to be black... :( This. ----
Dylatar Gallente Ocean Eleven Die Asteroiden Pluenderer	Posted - 2008.10.20 07:50:00 - [18] Originally by: Hesod Adee Lets have a look at what he got wrong: Quote: By creating depleted vacuum, that is, vacuum as found in space but completely stripped of all energy, and then expanding this depleted vacuum to envelop a ship, the ship is capable of moving faster than light through this bubble of depleted vacuum. A depleted vacuum bubble is more than frictionless û it is so anti-friction that things (including light) actually move faster in it than they would in complete vacuum. So apparently the FTL works by removing everything from a volume of space (the definition of vacuum). Then we remove more stuff from it. Yet still leaving behind something to react with our ships to give this negative friction. I really don't think the person behind that article knows what he was talking about because if I can catch errors there, what other errors didn't I catch ? Well, space is pretty empty, but empty doesn't mean theres nothing in that case. The average density of the universe is about 10 E−27 kg/m¦, thats about 1 atom per m¦. But that includes the whole universe, with different regions, and within this regions also different densitys. Averages always include extremes on both sides. The emptiest places within the universe are the voids with much less than 1 atom per m¦. But the average density within a galaxy already is a million atoms per m¦. Within a solar system this again raises much more. Still too less to see it with our eyes, but that doesn't mean there is nothing. I have two nice videos here from a tv-docu series (sorry, it's only available in German). Btw for all german speaking people its a very nice series - Prof. Harald Lesch explains many atsronomical and physical issues there, in a way also non-scientists can understand. 1. BR Alpha - Alpha Centauri: Ist das Weltall wirklich leer? 2. BR Alpha - Alpha Centauri: Gibt es L÷cher im Weltraum For all interested, heres a Link to the complete Episodes Archive Originally by: Hesod Adee Or how about this: Quote: Alain Embrosius Topher has a degree in applied physics and experimental psychology It's a bit odd that we get an article from someone who isn't an astrophysicist. AFAIK you can't study astrophysics. Just because it doesn't exist, it's a synthetic word just like plasma physics, high energy physics or anything else. They all are just specializations in differnt ways, but they're all based on the same physical laws. So no matter in what direction you specialize later, you just study physics - nothing more, nothing less. You don't need any other physics to descripe the universe than the physics you need to tell why your coffee cup falls down to the floor when you loose your grip on it. Originally by: Hesod Adee So how far out from one star would you need to be in order to see the other ? Be sure to include how you arrived at that number. Hm ok, I did some more search and must correct my statement. Distances between the binary stars vary wide, so there are different possibilities. The both extremes are: 1. The stars are that close that theiy "touch" each other, so gravtitational pull makes it possible the heavier one extracts material from the other. Binary stars close to each other orbit around their boths gravitational center in between them. They don't orbit, but dance around each other. 2. The star with less mass orbits around the heavier one, but in much bigger distance than at option 1). Distances observed go up to 1000 AU distance in between them. In this case the 2nd star viewed from the 1st would just be a small spot. For sure the brightest of all stars visible from there, but just viewed as a star.
Dylatar Gallente Ocean Eleven Die Asteroiden Pluenderer	Posted - 2008.10.20 07:56:00 - [19] In addition to my posting above (arrived at maximum length) o_O Stable planets can exist on both extremes of binary stars. Binary stars very close together have the possibility of planets on orbits far outside. They will just orbit around the gravitational center of both stars. Orbits too close to them won't be stable. On the other hand if the binary stars are far away from each other, plantes can have a stable orbit around one star separately, maybe on both. They just must have enough distance in between of them so the planets arent influenced too much by the other star they're not orbiting. I have no numers on this about the distances between the stars, and how far out the planet orbits can go without getting stability problems. Guess this would be work for solar system simulations.
ShadowDraqon Awesome Industries Group	Posted - 2008.10.20 16:44:00 - [20] Edited by: ShadowDraqon on 20/10/2008 16:47:12 Originally by: Hesod Adee Quote: By creating depleted vacuum, that is, vacuum as found in space but completely stripped of all energy, and then expanding this depleted vacuum to envelop a ship, the ship is capable of moving faster than light through this bubble of depleted vacuum. A depleted vacuum bubble is more than frictionless û it is so anti-friction that things (including light) actually move faster in it than they would in complete vacuum. So apparently the FTL works by removing everything from a volume of space (the definition of vacuum). Then we remove more stuff from it. Yet still leaving behind something to react with our ships to give this negative friction. I really don't think the person behind that article knows what he was talking about because if I can catch errors there, what other errors didn't I catch ? "Stripped of all energy" And what friction are you talking about? It says frictionless. ______________________ I got killed for my kindness no, rly
Hesod Adee Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.10.20 22:43:00 - [21] Originally by: Dylatar Well, space is pretty empty, but empty doesn't mean theres nothing in that case. So why didn't he use hard vacuum instead of depleted vacuum ? And the anti-friction property doesn't exist with a hard vacuum. From here Quote: A depleted vacuum bubble is more than frictionless û it is so anti-friction that things (including light) actually move faster in it than they would in complete vacuum. Quote: I have two nice videos here from a tv-docu series (sorry, it's only available in German). I don't speak german, so it is of no use to me. Quote: Originally by: Hesod Adee Or how about this: Quote: Alain Embrosius Topher has a degree in applied physics and experimental psychology It's a bit odd that we get an article from someone who isn't an astrophysicist. AFAIK you can't study astrophysics. just like plasma physics, high energy physics or anything else. They all are just specializations in differnt ways, but they're all based on the same physical laws. So no matter in what direction you specialize later, you just study physics - nothing more, nothing less. You don't need any other physics to descripe the universe than the physics you need to tell why your coffee cup falls down to the floor when you loose your grip on it. Just because it doesn't exist, it's a synthetic word Conceded. Quote: Originally by: Hesod Adee So how far out from one star would you need to be in order to see the other ? Be sure to include how you arrived at that number. Hm ok, I did some more search and must correct my statement. Distances between the binary stars vary wide, so there are different possibilities. The both extremes are: Ok, we could have some binary systems that we don't view as binary. Though over thousands of systems that are all apperantly all binary systems, shouldn't we have at least one that has the stars close enough together to be seen as a binary system ? Originally by: ShadowDraqon "Stripped of all energy" And what friction are you talking about? It says frictionless. 1 - What type of energy are you talking about, and how does it get around Mass-energy equivalence ? 2 - It wasn't frictionless, it was 'anti-friction'. As interacting with it speeds you up. Pity there isn't anything there to rub against. ---------------------------------------------- I support skill queues.
Dylatar Gallente Ocean Eleven Die Asteroiden Pluenderer	Posted - 2008.10.21 11:17:00 - [22] Edited by: Dylatar on 21/10/2008 11:18:18 Originally by: Hesod Adee 1 - What type of energy are you talking about, and how does it get around Mass-energy equivalence ? 2 - It wasn't frictionless, it was 'anti-friction'. As interacting with it speeds you up. Pity there isn't anything there to rub against. Thats all good questions, but we always should keep in mind that this is Eve Online, not a Science Award. Science fiction lives from technologies that can't be built yet and often can't be explained how it should work (if it would work for real anyways). So all science fiction storys go different tactics. Either it isn't explained in general how the technology works, it just works and doesn't answer questions - or it is explained by using that advanced science that can't be verfied yet. By using real physical base knowledge and a good portion of phantasy. The last option is best used by as much techno-babble as possible (Star Trek is the best example for this.) Because if you're stuck to the realitys knowledge, you won't get any science fiction. And nothing more it is, a fiction. :)
Hesod Adee Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.10.22 03:16:00 - [23] Originally by: Dylatar Edited by: Dylatar on 21/10/2008 11:18:18 Originally by: Hesod Adee 1 - What type of energy are you talking about, and how does it get around Mass-energy equivalence ? 2 - It wasn't frictionless, it was 'anti-friction'. As interacting with it speeds you up. Pity there isn't anything there to rub against. Thats all good questions, but we always should keep in mind that this is Eve Online, not a Science Award. Science fiction lives from technologies that can't be built yet and often can't be explained how it should work (if it would work for real anyways). So all science fiction storys go different tactics. Either it isn't explained in general how the technology works, it just works and doesn't answer questions - or it is explained by using that advanced science that can't be verfied yet. By using real physical base knowledge and a good portion of phantasy. The last option is best used by as much techno-babble as possible (Star Trek is the best example for this.) Because if you're stuck to the realitys knowledge, you won't get any science fiction. And nothing more it is, a fiction. :) True. Currently the evidence presents us with two possible outcomes: 1 - Eve physics have diverged a bit from real life and the guy writing the article had no clue what he was talking about. 2 - Eve physics have diverged further from real life than the above assumption requires, but the guy who wrote that article was correct. Far enough that all systems can be binary systems even though none of them show an obvious second star. So which do you trust, your eyes, or this article in question ? ---------------------------------------------- I support skill queues.
Esiel Caldari	Posted - 2008.10.24 04:33:00 - [24] I thought of this a long time ago http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=663629. It died a quick death, perhaps you will do better than me.
Opertone Caldari SIEGE. United Legion	Posted - 2008.10.24 05:19:00 - [25] black holes? natural worm holes? comets once in a while? rotating planets? maybe planet V can rotate once in 360 days, and planet X does a full spin in 1020 days? space asteroids in a form of space debris? which your mining ships have to tank Space Radiation near sun? Star Solar wind. planet gravity pull?
Kuolematon Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United	Posted - 2008.10.24 06:57:00 - [26] Originally by: Dylatar If you read the background story you will learn, that all of the solar systems we move around here in Eve currently ARE binary systems. Ty for pointing this out. Every now and then some noob comes along with this binary idea and we can get to shoot it down due silly EVE lore. "The Amarr are the tanking and ganking floating rods of ~~gold~~crap"
Yong Qi	Posted - 2008.10.24 11:01:00 - [27] /signed Binary or w/e .. doesn't matter. I want more varieties in space and things to look at an other natural phenomena's that occur out there.. space in eve is beautiful in the first five minutes.. then it fades...until you realize that after 5 months in-game that space existed with more beauty, complexity than what you've been staring at. comets, black holes etc.. also make some of them random and everywhere.. make certain gates or parts between warp that stop you and show you something beautiful and chaotic at the same time non destructive and end up rewarping to your destination... W/E it is to give our monotonous and boring travels more interesting.
Hesod Adee Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.10.24 22:58:00 - [28] Originally by: Kuolematon Originally by: Dylatar If you read the background story you will learn, that all of the solar systems we move around here in Eve currently ARE binary systems. Ty for pointing this out. Every now and then some noob comes along with this binary idea and we can get to shoot it down due silly EVE lore. Then other people come along and shoot down that 'article' as being written by someone who didn't have a clue what he was talking about by referring to other Eve lore and that there isn't a single binary system in game. Or should we trust the lore over our own eyes ? ---------------------------------------------- I support skill queues.
Illectroculus Defined	Posted - 2008.10.25 00:19:00 - [29] Someone suggested mining comets might be dangerous what with all the outgassing and stuff. Well I'm sorry to ruin your idea but if they're far enough from the sun then they're not outgassing andtherefore nice and safe - kinda like ice fields. Binary stars are unlikely to have stargates because close binaries stir up the protoplanetary disc and inhibit planet formation so there woudn't be any resources worth building a jump gate for. Distant binaries (where the stars are > 1000 AU apart) could have planets and might exist. Quasars are distant active objects, nobody has seen a quasar that's still active, they probably only exist in the early universe.
Tiberius Dresari Caldari UNAS Corp	Posted - 2008.10.25 02:41:00 - [30] Originally by: Dylatar But I would love to see, neutron stars, pulsars, maybe black holes. Actually, there seems to be a black hole located on the star map. "Ginnungagap" I believe it's called, and in the description states "... can be seen very clearly in the Konora system, located very close to it." Metropolis region, if you want to take a look.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.