Solar System Vs. Galaxy
POSTED BY: MadJack
UPDATED: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 17:41
VIEWED: 40136
PAGE 2 of 14
Star within a cluster are definitely closer than a light year apart, but there's a problem with that scenario too. In star clusters, the stars are often too dense to form planets (such as in globular clusters), and those are too far away to get to in a reasonable time.
If you want to talk about less dense clusters, just stellar associations, then there is a good chance that there could be planets and stars within a reasonable travel time. The closest star to our own, Proxima centauri, is a little over 4 ly (I think), but we are in a very low density stellar environment. This is not characteristic of the Milky Way as a whole.
As for the total number of planets around a single star, I find it really hard to belive that there could be these 70 inhabitable worlds in a single solar system. Also, if that were the case, the alliance would always be nearby. They wouldn't really be able to be "at the corner of no and where" anywhere they went. Making a habitable planet that far from the sun would require far too much ozone gasses to be livable, if they're also supposed to be that far from the core.
As for travel times, we also need to concern ourselves with whose reference frame the travel time is observed from. I mean, they have to be traveling fast, regardless of FTL sppeds or not. some substantial fraction of the speed of light. that's going to cause some time dilation (moving objects age slower). I think this is a whole bag of worms that no one in the television industry wants to tackle, just because it would make things far too complicated. For an example, if they were traveling at a good portion of light speed, then they would age only a few days to travel from planet to planet, say, whereas the people waiting for their goods would have to wait months if not years. It doens't quite make commerce very easy if there weren't FTL travel.
Also these people must be at least able to travel out of the solar system. The reavers made it out to the edge of the galaxy and back. Sure it might have taken a generation or two to do it, but they made it. Granted, it is a few thousand light years out.
So they still need to be able to get pretty fast, maybe not FTL, but at least PFF (Pretty Freakin' Fast), or maybe PGF or PRF (Pretty Gorram Fast; Pretty Ruttin' Fast). But once you cross the line to anything even a significant fraction of light speed, you run into many of the same issues (not to mention the mass of the ship becoming enormous)
Well, there's my extend version of 2 creds on the issue...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I agree. Serenity can go PGF.
Arawaen
Um, I'm lost. Uh, I'm Angry. And I'm Armed.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Arawaen:
Are stars within a cluster less than 1 LY apart? FTL still seems necessary to me in a cluster. Even light speed is not that fast when you are talking interstellar distances and the travel times given in the show.
It is my understanding that even in a star cluster, you still need FTL. Any star cluster where the stars are closer aren't going to have stable planetary orbits. The planets will get stripped from their parent star to go wandering all over the place.
You need those kinds of separation between stars, or else they start knocking loose planets.
Which means you got a bunch of planets, with no suns. Which means ice balls, airless rocks, and gas giants, and NO HEAT! No terriforming, at least above ground.
"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Some of the aspects of the show seem to imply that FTL is necessary. Others (notably the way Serenity is depicted in flight) seem to imply that FTL has not been achieved. To be honest I think this is just an oversight, something that wasn't really considered in the conception of the show or rather was considered to be unimportant. From the evidence in the episodes I'd say Serenity is not capable of FTL and lives in a solar system that is (somehow) very densely populated with planets and moons. If the show had continued I doubt we'd have ever been given any explanation.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Grounded:
Some of the aspects of the show seem to imply that FTL is necessary. Others (notably the way Serenity is depicted in flight) seem to imply that FTL has not been achieved. To be honest I think this is just an oversight, something that wasn't really considered in the conception of the show or rather was considered to be unimportant. From the evidence in the episodes I'd say Serenity is not capable of FTL and lives in a solar system that is (somehow) very densely populated with planets and moons. If the show had continued I doubt we'd have ever been given any explanation.
Well, I would disagree. Just because it does not look like all the common conceptions of FTL flight don't mean nothing.
But I do think you are right. This is just not important to the Firefly story/series. It is only geeks like me and you that get bugged by this kind of thing.
"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Indeed, I don't believe it's important to the overall storyline at all, but the tech interests me, and I like to discuss it.
As far as the planets in a cluster being stripped from their respective gravity wells, I think this is only true of very densely-packed clusters.
But then, what the hell do I know... I'm anything but an astrophysicist or even amateur astronomer. I'm just a geek with a lot of curiosity and a knapsack filled with useless information. 
"Have good sex!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:
Well, I would disagree. Just because it does not look like all the common conceptions of FTL flight don't mean nothing.
Well the crew consistently refer to 'burn' which tends to suggest (at least to me) traditional fuel-burning propulsion. The CGI seems to be consistent with that as well, visually.
Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:
It is only geeks like me and you that get bugged by this kind of thing.
That's half the fun :) If it was all perfectly correct then we wouldn't get to play the sci-fi elitists ;)
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I always assumed that the 'Firefly Effect' was the signature of an FTL igniting.
Obviously they don't use 'jumpgates' or 'hyperspace', bit it is possible that there is some sort of FTL. That might explain why the shuttles and other spaceships need carriers for long journies and don't have capability of reaching anywhere on their own.
Simon: I've never shot anyone before.
Book: I was there, son. I'm fair sure you haven't shot anyone yet.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Grounded:
The crew of Serenity seem to just be getting by so we can also assume that they can't afford to skip back and forth between nearby systems i.e. they need to work locally.
That assumes a whole host of other things though, including how close the various planets are to each other, which is a critical piece of information we just don't have. They could be in one system, but on the other hand they might be on opposite sides of the galaxy. It might take days at ten times the speed of light, or days only just below the speed of light.
We also don't know the nature of their travel technology. Moving from opposite ends of the galaxy might be easier than cutting through the middle. It might be faster to go farther than it is to travel a shorter distance. This isn't just dependent on technology either, their routes could also be dictated by Alliance presence, tolls, taxes, and all sorts of other things.
They also seem to travel at slower speeds between points. Possibly there are navigational requirements that only allow full speed to be achieved between certain local positions. Hazards to the space lanes, jump points (ala Wing Commander), or who knows what else. Try explaining the Internet to someone from 1504... they're missing too many intervening pieces of technology for any of it to make much sense, even if you could sit them down and show it to them.
We're missing far too much information to put forward anything but wild speculation here. Which is good. I'm tired of too many answers. That was always my problem with the past several iterations of Star Trek.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME