Well, in about 4.5 billion years or so Andromeda will be a lot brighter.
I don’t wanna wait that long lol
do not forget with your binary system theory…
"## 3 - The principles of jump gate technology.
Jump gates are built around artificial wormholes, created by exploiting gravitational resonances found in binary systems. "
I prefer “Space Opera”.
Much of the information is there to “look good”, not be anywhere near accurate. This includes star data, planet data, orbits of terrestrial and oceanic planets, etc.
Exactly - Eve isn’t Hard Science Fiction any more than the Star Wars universe is (or in many respects, Star Trek). Things are shaped by Narrative rather than by the Science.
Trying to force Real World science into Eve is going to feel very forced very quickly since there’s a lot of the basic physics that is just wrong. If you remember that Eve is a Laser firing Underwater Billiards Simulator more than a space game you’ll be a lot closer to reality.
Terry Pratchett wrote a very good book on the difference between Narrative and Science - The Science of Discworld. People love stories, we truly are Homo Narrens.
So, anyway, Astrometry in Eve. One thing I do like about Eve is that the background star-field is real (ha!) and reflects the relative positions of the stars from your current viewpoint. So, yes in principle you should be able to measure the shift in star positions by using a suitable baseline.
A few of thoughts on this:
- Are we able to measure the angles and differences between two stars? We need a “very long way away” reference point and measure the angular difference between that and the target star. Is this going to be possible on a flat computer screen at an unknown and possibly inconsistent field of view?
- Are we going to be able measure accurately enough? With a baseline of 2AU the angular shift we need to identify at 1.3ly is about 1 arc second. That’s 1/3600th of a degree. That gives us the order of magnitudes we would need to measure.
- Is the star field shown in game dynamically generated or is it a static background image generated once and pushed to the client (which is going to computationally easier)? That’s probably the more interesting question and one we may be able to determine if we can find two very close stars - no parallax effect => statically generated background - or at least one that is only generated from one point of view in the system.
I will leave progressing this to others!
I thought thats what Alastair was already doing?
Funnily enough this is definitely not the biggest non-issue the people of this forum ever witnessed.
4 Likes
Is that the one where the wizards at the Unseen University accidentally create our universe, then do a Steve Irwin and stick their fingers in it to see what happens?
Yep. The second book is also worth your time.
1 Like
All of the Terry Pratchett books are worth the time, even the non Discworld ones.
3 Likes
I also believe this will be the case, but it’d be fun to confirm it 
Only SOME of the starfield is real. We have yet to confirm all the OTHER stars are likewise real.
I call them the mapped-stars and the rest are just the starfield for now…until we know if they are mapped or part of the background-skybox.
THAT is one of the biggest mysteries I hope the Jita Observatory will figure-out.
Not all stars are always visible, even within your field of view in first person.
As you look at a star it sometimes blinks out nearer to your center-of-view. I don’t know the reason for this, but it’s well observed, and only some stars…further complicating the discoveries.
Furthermore it seems you can only see with set-destination the Mapped Stars up to 17 jumps. After that it will need to be determined the HARD WAY if the other Mapped Stars are still visible in the starfield.
The other annoying part is you can ALMOST harmonize the Background-Skybox to the Mapped Starfield.
But not perfectly, and that bothers my OCD…I wish they’d improve that…
The background skybox is consistent between regions, so there is ability to place them in the New Eden Map…but it’s difficult to place perfectly because the Mapped Starfield doesn’t line up with the background skybox well.
- We can, certainly within the Mapped Stars but harmonizing that to the broader starfield has been more difficult. At times the broader starfield behaves like they are also mapped stars, but in other instances I feel like the broader starfield behaves like the background skybox in that they completely change when the skybox changes. But I have seen NON-MAPPED Stars change position when jumping through systems. Other stars become harder to find… WE CAN FIGURE THIS OUT but haven’t yet.
- We have systems that are 200AU across so arguably we can get the degree of resolution down to 1/36ths of a degree but what does that equal in PIXELS? Which will ultimately be what we need to determine if the mapped starfield changes within systems?
- This can be determined by #2 given a sufficiently big system. There are systems with 100AU radii so worst comes to worse we can simulate a 100AU shift, if we can find orbitals on opposite ends, that would give us 200AU shifts.
If the location of stars of other systems on the skybox does actually move depending on where you are within a system I would be happily surprised.
Happily surprised, like when I first noticed that the lines forming strange constellations were actually the route I set out, and that other systems were actually visible on the skybox. That’s one of the things I noticed as a few-days-old newbie that really amazed me of this game.
Agreed, I’m really hoping to get to the bottom of this sooner than later. Will take an excursion.
Can we estimate how many pixels per degree? I am pretty sure that near Piekura is a 100+AU system, and Piekura to Mara is supposedly only 0.9ly in distance, so we have a strong candidate if there are a few pixels of expected parallax.
There may be other stronger candidates as well.
How big is New Eden?
Exactly 6,56GB on my HDD 
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.