Webster Dictionary definitions for sun and solar system beg to differ.
Just like “moon” no longer refers to just THE Moon, but has been accepted for some time as a reference to any celestial body (of a certain size) that orbits a planet.
EDIT: for me, a star is “a star” when referring to it from outside its system, like from light-years away, and that same star is “the sun” when referring to it from within its solar system.
Luke is standing on Tatooine looking at the sunset and it has 2 suns. He’s not looking at the starset (that’s not even a word).
Eventually enough people didn’t know better and it got accepted as correct… but it’s still not correct. There’s many terms like this. For example are people using “feelings” and “emotions” as if they meant the same thing.
I do not accept the equal opinions of the masses as truth. Otherwise 2+2 could eventually become 5, if just enough people believed it.
But, perhaps your level of acceptance should match the quality of the posting that you can reasonably expect from the forums where you are. I.E. if you’re on a professional physics or astronomy forum, by all means, star is not sun, but EVE’s General Discussion?
And some definitions aren’t “opinion of the masses.” Gage and gauge, pliers and plyers, sure. 2 + 2 = 5, those are not opinions, those are mathematical definitions of numbers, addition, equality, the number 2, and the number 5, specifically. Opinion of the masses won’t change those, but different mathematical constructs might, and for valid reasons.
I’m not knowledgeable enough to give you an example with numbers, but going from geometry to non-euclidean geometry changes the definition of “parallel” and other such terms, validly.
And if you’re interested in studying these constructs, you’d have to accept their changed definitions. At least, in order to understand what the hell they’re trying to say, whether true or not.
Because CCP were not doing a direct or even close aproximation of our universe, only pretty game. Probably also technical reasons were in the play too, just like with moons not rotating anymore because of game mechanics of drilling platforms staying in place all the time. Planets only rotating around their own axis. What is rather funny as in remerkably not understanding their main target, as their audience in majority are space nerds, or so I would like to fool myself.
Maybe the target is just people who like to mess with others.
Not really talking about the motions of the solar system, just the accuracy of the contents. I know as humans we don’t really like change and this includes what we think a typical solar system should looks like, however in the known universe single star solar systems are quite rare. So why doesn’t EVE reflect what is known, is there some lore i don’t know that explains this? Does CCP ever plan to change this?
Star systems with two or more Stars haven’t Planets and Moons due to gravitational field divergence, which isn’t a good condition for orbital fly mechanic. To keep the EVE space a bit realistic CCP should implements Null-Sec systems without Moons
There are star systems with 3 or more stars like Pleiades:
– on the pic, made by Hubble, we can see many galaxies in the background. One among the most obvious is situated near middle at d/4 distance towards bottom left corner.
Synopsis
The Pleiades (also known as the Seven Sisters and Messier 45), are an open star cluster containing middle-aged, hot B-type stars located in the constellation of Taurus. It is among the nearest star clusters to Earth and is the cluster most obvious to the naked eye in the night sky.
The cluster is dominated by hot blue and extremely luminous stars that have formed within the last 100 million years. Astronomers estimate that the cluster will survive for about another 250 million years, after which it will disperse due to gravitational interactions with its galactic neighborhood.[
