How jump works

[Sigtrygg]

Yes, it's a logical fallacy. You deliberately argue from ignorance, because you believe it is reasonable.

No. I reasonably expect there to be evidence, there is none, so not ignorance, absence.

I don't believe jump space is a small room, or that the exact composition of the plasma in it is an elephant.

Where would you go to find a reasonable description like those? You wouldn't, they are silly disingenuous statements. Hence the fallacy.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Maybe we need a logic and philosophy sub forum... or thread at least.

Then others wouldn't have to suffer four pages of our discussion. you may have missed the intent of the thread which was to rationalise the different sources.

Your claim is they don't need it.

My version which I posted a version of back on page 1:

The Jump process requires a ship's jump drive to tear a hole in normal space in order to enter the hyperspace of the jump dimension(s).

In order to do this the jump drive capacitors must be energised, a fusion plant, antimatter plant or battery fills the jump capacitors - these are the EPs HG states the jump drive requires to operate.

Next, the capacitors discharge (creating the exotic particles) and the power plant has large amounts of hydrogen fed through it to generate the enormous amount of energy needed to facilitate the jump (this is the bit in MWM's article but missing from the MgT rules). Some of this fuel is actually used as coolant and to carry away fusion products.

A collector gathers jump quantum field excitations, or exotic particles, from the fundamental fields of spacetime (personally I would go back to requiring a star but hey ho), these are stored in special accumulators. When there are sufficient particles to power the jump drive the ship may jump or continue to gather particles until the accumulators are full.

Due to the nature of the jump tear using this method a bubble of n-space is dragged into hyperspace and is maintained by the cable network in the hull.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

It is not a belief, it is a fact that marc's article doesn't mention it

That is not what I said, I said it's your belief that its so important it has to be mentioned in every description.

If it were not, would I be wasting so much time discussing it?

I don't doubt you believe that.

All. No. I can see that trap a mile away. But in any in depth discussion, such as a definitive article or rule book "explanation" I would reasonably expect it to be mentioned.

Yes, that is your belief.

Here is where we disagree. I think Marc's article is an in depth discussion, much more so than a brief statement in T4's flawed FF&S, further expanded upon by the MT SOM. If a hydrogen filled bubble was a necessity for the jump drive then I would reasonably expect Marc's article and the MT SOM to mention it - neither does so.

Yes, we disagree about if every detail must be mentioned in every article. The description in JTAS is still brief compared to SOM or T5, but they are still incomplete.

I'm not talking about belief, I am using the text as it is written to identify contradictions that need to be addressed. many others recognise them as contradictions.

You are discussing what you believe the text should have included, but doesn't. That is vastly different from simply using the text.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Where would you go to find a reasonable description like those? You wouldn't, they are silly disingenuous statements. Hence the fallacy.

I was just paraphrasing you own motivation for the fallacy:

In other cases, it's false—if we would reasonably expect to find evidence if something existed, then the absence of that evidence can be taken as evidence of absence. For instance, if someone claims there's an elephant in your living room, but you look around and see no elephant, that absence of evidence is strong evidence that there is no elephant."

I find your usage of the word "reasonable" rather unreasonable.

 

[Sigtrygg]

That is not what I said, I said it's your belief that its so important it has to be mentioned in every description.

It is not a belief. I do not believe in any work of fiction.

I don't doubt you believe that.

I do not believe anything that is fictitious.

Yes, that is your belief.

No, as I have no beliefs based on fiction.

Yes, we disagree about if every detail must be mentioned in every article. The description in JTAS is still brief compared to SOM or T5, but they are still incomplete.

And none mention a hydrogen filled bubble... where it is reasonable to expect that they would do so, so evidence of absence.

You are discussing you believe the text should have included, but doesn't. That is vastly different from simply using the text.

No, it is not a belief.

I have identified provably inconsistent statements that are contradictory.

Your argument is based on your inferences and house rules rather then the rules as written.

 

[Condottiere]

I stated that on CotI many years ago, then it became canon.

As I recall, it was the logical conclusion, after going over High Guard.

Whether that was the intent or not, of Mongoose.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

And none mention a hydrogen filled bubble... where it is reasonable to expect that they would do so, so evidence of absence.

It is your belief that it's reasonable. That is not a provable statement.

I have identified provably inconsistent statements that are contradictory.

Based on your belief of what is reasonable. Your belief is not a settled, proven fact, hence not a base for a logical proof.

If you can do the proof without using "it's reasonable to expect", I'm eager to hear it.

Your argument is based on your inferences and house rules rather then the rules as written.

If you want to call using all of canon a house rule, instead of rejecting the sources you believe are unreasonable, sure.

 

[Sigtrygg]

It is your belief that it's reasonable. That is not a provable statement.

No, it is not a belief, it is a rational expectation of the evidence to be there, Since the evidence is not where it can be reasonably expected to be - not reasonably believed to be - then there is no evidence.

Based on your belief of what is reasonable. Your belief is not a settled, proven fact, hence not a base for a logical proof.

It is not my belief, it is my expectation of their being reasonable evidence. Hence the fallacy within your argument and my logical proof.

If you can do the proof without using "it's reasonable to expect", I'm eager to hear it.

It is reasonable to expect is a perfectly valid argument for the logical proof.

If you want to call using all of canon a house rule, instead of rejecting the sources you believe are unreasonable, sure.

You are using sources beyond the boundaries of the discussion, and tying them together as I did up thread, a house rule.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

No, it is not a belief, it is a rational expectation of the evidence to be there, ...

Your "rational expectation" is not my "rational expectation", it's your belief of what a "rational expectation" is.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Then your rational expectation isn't a rational expectation. I don't believe, I accept evidence to gain understanding, and when the evidence changes then the current understanding changes.

 

[Condottiere]

As I recall I was the first on CotI or the TML to suggest it.

My earliest mention of it I can find is September 8th 2012...

I'm not disputing your claim to fame.

What I'm describing is how I reached my conclusion, after reading High Guard.

 

[MasterGwydion]

It is your belief that it's reasonable. That is not a provable statement.



Based on your belief of what is reasonable. Your belief is not a settled, proven fact, hence not a base for a logical proof.

If you can do the proof without using "it's reasonable to expect", I'm eager to hear it.

I can.

CRB page 157,

"Jump travel is the only known means by which a vessel may travel faster than light. To jump, a ship creates a bubble of hyperspace by means of injecting high-energy exotic particles into an artificial singularity. The singularity is driven out of our universe, creating a tiny parallel universe that is then blown up like a balloon by injecting hydrogen into it. The jump bubble is folded around the ship, carrying it into the little pocket universe."

This states that in order to jump hydrogen is used to inflate the bubble of realspace around the ship

"Divert Power: A jump drive requires a tremendous amount of power to function, which must be supplied by the ship’s power plant."

This states that the power must be supplied from the power plants.

So, far, using just the CRB, no contradictions. The problems occur when other books are brought into play.

High Guard page 15

"Jump drives create a bubble of hyperspace by means of injecting high-energy exotic particles into an artificial singularity. The singularity is driven out of our universe, creating a tiny parallel universe that is then blown up like a balloon by injecting hydrogen into it. The jump bubble is folded around the ship, carrying it into a ship-sized pocket universe that collapses after about one week, bringing the ship back into normal space several light-years from its original position."

Still no contradiction as they basically say the same thing as page 157 of the CRB.

High Guard page 44

"HIGH-EFFICIENCY BATTERIES 10% of power plant cost Ship-board batteries are designed to store power until needed. They can be recharged in any round with excess Power not being used by other systems. This Power can then be used in subsequent rounds as if they were being produced by the power plant; simply add the amount of Power stored within the batteries (they need not be completely drained) to the Power the ship has available that round."

This is where the contradictions start to come into play as using these batteries to power the jump drive directly contradicts the CRB where it says that power must be supplied from the power plants, as the batteries are not a power plant.

High Guard page 83

"COLLECTORS These are accumulators, sweeping up exotic particles captured by a canopy and removing the need to carry separate fuel for the jump drive."

This states that fuel carrying separate fuel for the jump drive is no longer necessary. That means that there is no hydrogen-filled jump bubble, where is the hydrogen coming from, as hydrogen is no longer carried to be used by the jump drive. This directly contradicts page 157 of the CRB, where it says that after the creation of the singularity, using "exotic particles", the singularity is expanded by filling it with hydrogen. No hydrogen, no jump bubble.

These are just a few of the contradictions I was able to find and verify with book and page number. If these are contradicted elsewhere, let Me know.

 

[Sigtrygg]

I'm not disputing your claim to fame.

What I'm describing is how I reached my conclusion, after reading High Guard.

I didn't mean to post that without changing it. It does read as me being up my own backside to coin a phrase. I apologise for the blatant self agrandisement.

 

[Terry Mixon]

I didn't mean to post that without changing it. It does read as me being up my own backside to coin a phrase. I apologise for the blatant self agrandisement.

Everyone toots their own horn from time to time. By your phrasing, it’s more being hoist on your own petard as I’d come around to bedevil you. No worries.

 

[swordtart]

Surely you* can believe fiction and cannot "believe" facts. Belief does not require proof. Facts are not a matter of belief they are are a matter of... well... fact. A fact needs to be immutable and independently verifiable and preferably discoverable. Very little in Traveller is immutable (things change from edition to edition, even when Marc Miller has had sole custody. It is not independently verifiable as outside the Traveller game / or a specific setting for the game it doesn't exist. It is not independently discoverable as it is whatever the person who wrote it down chose to write. Discussing it is as close to discussion of religion as you can get without actually being one (and it but a hop skip and a jump from science fiction to Scientology).

Words are mutable. "Powering a jump drive" could mean as much as the electricity that powers my gas cooker. It isn't fuel, it is just the stuff that makes the spark fire and the fan to spin. Without it the cooker doesn't work, but it doesn't actually cook anything. Very rarely do I see words used in Traveller being exclusively defined and even when they are they are often used in a non-rigorous way as people who makes science fiction games are not necessarily scientists and scientists are not necessarily good at making games.

If I can also address the elephant in the room. The claim is that there is an elephant. The evidence is that I cannot see one. That is not the absence of of evidence it is the absence of elephant.

But this is nevertheless fascinating.

*the hypothetical you, not the specific you.

 

[Condottiere]

I didn't mean to post that without changing it. It does read as me being up my own backside to coin a phrase. I apologise for the blatant self agrandisement.

I don't mind that, why do you think I push the Venture Drive at every opportunity?

I recall what seemed a rather nasty accusation of plagiarism, which I'll assume was due to negligence.

 

[Bense]

Where is this Darrian ship detailled, by the way? First I've heard of it, not that I have any problem with it.

It's in the Great Rift set - the Deep Space Exploration Handbook, pg. 45 (old version) or pg. 46 of The Great Rift Book 2 (new).

Zarelinung-class Interstellar Vessel, a TL15 1,500 ton research vessel. "Only a handful were ever built."

"The heart of the design is a collector-based jump system, which harvests excotic particles to power the jump drive rather than consuming fuel. The ship's range is thus limited only by powerplant endurance and shipboard stores." It carries fuel for 28 weeks of power plant operation.

It's kind of a media-friendly science ship designed to show off Darrian technology and do PR work as well as do real science. Using the collector system is therefore probably as much for the "wow" factor as it is practical.

The illustrations and deck plans in the two versions are very different from each other but the stats and flavor text look the same.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Annic Nova is a ghost ship and a mystery. I'm not aware that it's origin was ever really nailed down, probably deliberately so. It was crewed by aliens of an unknown species and used alternative technology.

Did it come from another dimension? Did it come from a distant part of our galaxy? Or another galaxy? Or the future? Or the distant past?

But all its existence means is that there are alien technologies that can be used to enter jumpspace without hydrogen fuel. Might those be discoverable by scientists of Charted Space? Sure. Especially if the sole example of a collector powered J-Drive were to be studied and reverse engineered... eventually. The ship also has no M-Drive and is moved using the reaction drives of its small craft, acting as tugs, further reinforcing its alien, non-standard technological heritage. Whoever they are have discovered a way to enter jump space without using a large hydrogen volume, but they do not appear to have discovered M-Drives or Hydrogen Fusion. On the other hand, their spacesuits have oxygen regeneration built into the fabric, so that's nice. And they have discovered crayon technology.

It still uses Jump Space. It does not invalidate the statement about that being the only known way to travel faster than light.

Marc told the secret history of the Annic Nova in an interview, it is available on Spotify still. I'll dig out the link:

fast forward to 34 minutes for the Annic Nova story - summary in the spoiler:

Spoiler

A Vilani merchant/explorer family, back when the Vilani only had jump 1, misjumped far from home and crashed. Fortunately rescue was at hand from a very high TL race, a race that had never discovered the secrets of jump. The crew were returned to health, and their ship studied.
The aliens reverse engineered the jump drive and improved on it in several ways and then constructed the Annic Nova. It was equipeed with a jump2 drive, a jump 3 drive and the most impressive of all an Hieronymus nexus. This nexus allows two jump drives to combine their rating, the jump distance maximum is the rating of one drive raised to the power of the other, so 3² or 9 parsecs.
They returned to Vilani space and gifted the jump 2 drive - they kept the secret of the jump 3 drive and the Hieronymus nexus within their family...

 

[Bense]

That's pretty bizarre.

Marc told the secret history of the Annic Nova in an interview, it is available on Spotify still. I'll dig out the link:

That's pretty bizarre. Did he ever put it in print somewhere?
I have seen it said that the numbers used on the Annic Nova were ancient Vilani, so that pointed to this sort of thing, but I hadn't ever heard the rest of this.

 

[WHULorigan]

That's pretty bizarre.


That's pretty bizarre. Did he ever put it in print somewhere?
I have seen it said that the numbers used on the Annic Nova were ancient Vilani, so that pointed to this sort of thing, but I hadn't ever heard the rest of this.

The "Hieronymous Device" as well as the ANNIC NOVA are both (independently) mentioned as legendary items of uncertain provenance or function in the background material for the Galaxiad Setting for T5.