Jump Shadowing/Masking

Tenacious-Techhunter said:
Gravitons are the predominant theory for transmission of gravitation from one body to another.

Stop infecting myself and others with your ignorance! Read a damn book!

It doesn't matter who believes in them, they're still unproven - expecting and hoping that they exist is not the same as knowing they do. They may be the best idea anyone's come up with so far, but until there's any actual evidence for them specifically they're still as hypothetical as a tachyon (particularly since we have so much trouble understanding the nature of gravity in the first place compared to all the other forces). And using them as an explanation for anything in a sci-fi setting is still armwavy technobabble.

Also, instead of just telling everyone how wrong they are, how about posting some links to back up your assertions and statements?
e.g. http://www.fnal.gov/pub/science/inquiring/questions/graviton.html
 
So.....

Is there a consensus, with everything we're thrown out so far as well as the chaff, as to whether jump shadow/mask is important in Traveller 1st ed. according to the very limited references? So far it seems stellar bodies don't effect travel between stars. Mostly the effect would be stars and gas giants with large shadows reaching potential destinations worlds once ships arrive in system. Problem is there are no sizes given in Mongoose Traveller for larger bodies to judge intra-system travel due to huge shadows. Does this mean it's pretty much a plot device for the referee to color a scenario?

To the original question, I never bother simply because there is so little information to use it. Even traversing the 100D of a destination world is a quick glance at the Interplanetary Transit Times Table. The rest is a bee line to a nearby world or gas giant. You'd need a bigger book (about 759 pages worth) to pack all that information to really make use of shadows.
 
fusor said:
Tenacious-Techhunter said:
Gravitons are the predominant theory for transmission of gravitation from one body to another.

Stop infecting myself and others with your ignorance! Read a damn book!

It doesn't matter who believes in them, they're still unproven - expecting and hoping that they exist is not the same as knowing they do. They may be the best idea anyone's come up with so far, but until there's any actual evidence for them specifically they're still as hypothetical as a tachyon (particularly since we have so much trouble understanding the nature of gravity in the first place compared to all the other forces). And using them as an explanation for anything in a sci-fi setting is still armwavy technobabble.

Also, instead of just telling everyone how wrong they are, how about posting some links to back up your assertions and statements?
e.g. http://www.fnal.gov/pub/science/inquiring/questions/graviton.html

Wow... dismissing Neil DeGrasse Tyson as an authority on Astrophysics... you really are ignorant.

More to the point, you didn’t even read your own source!

questions struck right at the center of one of the hottest and most challenging research topics in physics
The electromagnetic force, for example, is transmitted by photons, and light is nothing but a large number of photons. Photons/light show wave and particle properties. Scientists expect that gravity functions in a similar way.

My statement...
Tenacious-Techhunter said:
Gravitons are the predominant theory for transmission of gravitation from one body to another.
is still factually correct. In short, there’s no reasonable theory about how Gravity affects Jump Fields without assuming the existence of Gravitons. Peddle your ignorance elsewhere!
 
Tenacious-Techhunter said:
Wow... dismissing Neil DeGrasse Tyson as an authority on Astrophysics... you really are ignorant.

Tyson is an astrophysicist (and one that I happen to respect a lot), but that doesn't mean he knows everything about particle physics. I have a lot of respect for the guy and what he does, but it's patently obvious looking around the literature that gravitons are just one shot in the dark theory for how gravity works among many.


The electromagnetic force, for example, is transmitted by photons, and light is nothing but a large number of photons. Photons/light show wave and particle properties. Scientists expect that gravity functions in a similar way.

Scientists can "expect" all they like, that doesn't make that expectation the way it is though. Doesn't matter if many believe it's true, there's still not a jot of damned evidence for the things - and scientists are into facts, not belief. Heck, they tie it in with superstring theory which has a lot of issues and many scientists are skeptical about.

Anyway, I'm sick and tired of arguing irrelevancies with you. You're very condescending and arrogant, and I suspect you've found your way onto many peoples' ignore lists (including, as of now, my own). You need to learn to discuss things more reasonably with people if you want them to listen to you.
 
Reynard said:
So.....

Is there a consensus, with everything we're thrown out so far as well as the chaff, as to whether jump shadow/mask is important in Traveller 1st ed. according to the very limited references? So far it seems stellar bodies don't effect travel between stars. Mostly the effect would be stars and gas giants with large shadows reaching potential destinations worlds once ships arrive in system. Problem is there are no sizes given in Mongoose Traveller for larger bodies to judge intra-system travel due to huge shadows. Does this mean it's pretty much a plot device for the referee to color a scenario?

To the original question, I never bother simply because there is so little information to use it. Even traversing the 100D of a destination world is a quick glance at the Interplanetary Transit Times Table. The rest is a bee line to a nearby world or gas giant. You'd need a bigger book (about 759 pages worth) to pack all that information to really make use of shadows.

It can potentially be important, but I think only in very limited cases (if the target system is very close to or within the ecliptic plane of the departure system, and if there happen to be any large planets or stars in the departure system whose 100D happens to be in the way - both of which are very unlikely). I guess it depends on whether you want to really roll with the consequences of how jump works, or just want to ignore all of that.
 
fusor said:
Anyway, I'm sick and tired of arguing irrelevancies with you. You're very condescending and arrogant, and I suspect you've found your way onto many peoples' ignore lists (including, as of now, my own). You need to learn to discuss things more reasonably with people if you want them to listen to you.
Welcome to the club. :twisted:
 
rust2 said:
fusor said:
Anyway, I'm sick and tired of arguing irrelevancies with you. You're very condescending and arrogant, and I suspect you've found your way onto many peoples' ignore lists (including, as of now, my own). You need to learn to discuss things more reasonably with people if you want them to listen to you.
Welcome to the club. :twisted:

I'm sorry you think my constructive contributions to this thread are worth ignoring. I've tried to keep this on topic and provide useful information for that and stay polite with it (I'm pretty much the only person who bothered to show calculations and evidence for my statements, which probably got lost in all the noise here), but if you don't want to know that then it's your loss I guess.
 
fusor said:
I'm sorry you think my constructive contributions to this thread are worth ignoring. I've tried to keep this on topic and provide useful information for that and stay polite with it, but if you don't want to know that then it's your loss I guess.
Oops ... sorry, you misunderstood me completely. I did mean the club whose members put a certain other person on their ignore list, not you. :oops:
 
Reynard said:
So.....

Is there a consensus, with everything we're thrown out so far as well as the chaff, as to whether jump shadow/mask is important in Traveller 1st ed. according to the very limited references? So far it seems stellar bodies don't effect travel between stars. Mostly the effect would be stars and gas giants with large shadows reaching potential destinations worlds once ships arrive in system. Problem is there are no sizes given in Mongoose Traveller for larger bodies to judge intra-system travel due to huge shadows. Does this mean it's pretty much a plot device for the referee to color a scenario?

To the original question, I never bother simply because there is so little information to use it. Even traversing the 100D of a destination world is a quick glance at the Interplanetary Transit Times Table. The rest is a bee line to a nearby world or gas giant. You'd need a bigger book (about 759 pages worth) to pack all that information to really make use of shadows.

Jump Shadowing and Jump Masking are logical consequences of the described Jump Mechanics. While they may be ignored for the sake of gameplay, reason dictates that they exist, since the masses of all objects are treated the same by physics, and so the mass of a planet can’t somehow be more relevant than the mass of a star. Stars with diameters that are relatively large compared to their habitable orbits will bring ships out of jump at a distance of 100D of the star, even though the Intended Destination is more than 100D away. A big gas giant’s 100D range physically eclipsing the 100D range of a target object in the same system along all possible Jump Trajectories into the system will bring ships out of jump 100D away from the gas giant, and not 100D away from the target object. Summed up, a ship must Jump and Precipitate at greater than 100D away from all objects, or suffer corresponding penalties.

Do Mongoose, or other editions of Traveller, provide you with enough information to correctly model these things? No, no they don’t.

For starters, you need to know at what angle to the Destination System’s orbital plane your ship’s available Jump Trajectories must approach at; it’s a perfectly Euclidean straight line from one Jump Point to another, so the available options for drawing that line from the Initial 100D Sphere to the Destination 100D Sphere are dictated by this angle. Also important is knowing where in the target system those objects will be, so you can determine whether one thing or another is Shadowed, Masked, or whatever, by something else. This is where all the rambling about Orbital Navigation comes in... a properly plotted jump is going to consider the navigational advantages and disadvantages of where in the target system you intend to pop out at. As such, you have to know all the positions of the planets in advance; not just to calculate the jump at all, but to calculate where exactly in the target system you want to enter, for minimum travel time. So, Traveller is currently missing...

1. The angle of the primary orbital plane of a given system relative to the Jump Map
2. The planetary orbit information of every object significant to Jump Navigation within that system, so you will know where planets in the target system will be when

This makes GMing such a game realistically highly problematic, unless you have some very nice tools to help you. Number 2 is conveniently covered by some online tool whose address I have misplaced... you feed it a date, and it tells you where everything is for that planet; very nice. But number 1 is a detail that should be canon that has never been covered.

The likelihood of intermediate hexes providing any meaningful masking between the and the Initial System and Destination System is astronomically slim... practically speaking, it should be ignored, except as an excuse for plot devices, or as a trick available to players post-discovery.

So how should this stuff play out in game? Well, it depends on how you want your games to go... If the fun in your game is not in how your players get there, just ignore it all. But if your players would prefer to sweat the details of Jump Navigation and Orbital Mechanics to shave a few hours (or even days) off of travel time in the Initial or Destination systems, go for it. A clever Navigator can plot a Jump Trajectory that, upon exit, will slingshot you around a planet onto the course of your destination faster than a raw burn alone. If that sounds fun to your players, use Jump Shadowing and Jump Masking in your games to give your players interesting Navigation puzzles to solve. But if they’re simply not into game mechanics derived from realism, just don’t.
 
I've always maintained that starports can have separated terminals at optimal transit locations, almost certainly private ones for transport megacorporations.
 
Unfortunately, “optimal transit locations” vary over time as the planets do... with the 100D limits averaging around 1AU, even after a few months, the advantage is gone. Traffic to such a starport would be very seasonal. There are cases for them, but they’re very system-specific.
 
Condottiere said:
Space stations have manoeuvring jets.

What you are describing is really more of a statite; something that tries to stay in the same position regardless of local gravity. The fuel expenses would be problematic. Not impossible to overcome, but definitely problematic. They would absolutely have to charge a higher fee without necessarily a higher margin, and the additional traffic would have to be enough to justify the effort. Massive solar panels would help, though.
 
Condottiere said:
Space stations have manoeuvring jets.

In many cases they'd need full-on thrusters (essentially becoming very big spaceships rather than space stations), not just manoeuvering jets used for attitude control. The location of the destination system in the sky from the departure system would pretty much be fixed, but the 100D limits may be moving around all over the place. e.g. Earth's is about 1.2 million km from the planet, and it's outside Sol's 100D limit. So as Earth moves around its orbit, its 100D limit is moving around with it, so where do you put your space station so that it's in an optimal location for departures/arrivals to/from say, Sirius? Or Alpha Centauri?
 
Reynard said:
So.....

Is there a consensus, with everything we're thrown out so far as well as the chaff, as to whether jump shadow/mask is important in Traveller 1st ed. according to the very limited references? So far it seems stellar bodies don't effect travel between stars. Mostly the effect would be stars and gas giants with large shadows reaching potential destinations worlds once ships arrive in system. Problem is there are no sizes given in Mongoose Traveller for larger bodies to judge intra-system travel due to huge shadows. Does this mean it's pretty much a plot device for the referee to color a scenario?

To the original question, I never bother simply because there is so little information to use it. Even traversing the 100D of a destination world is a quick glance at the Interplanetary Transit Times Table. The rest is a bee line to a nearby world or gas giant. You'd need a bigger book (about 759 pages worth) to pack all that information to really make use of shadows.

I've found the internet a great source for stellar types in Traveller. The Traveller wiki has most of them listed for the Spinward Marches, if not all. Now, most of them won't be CT or Mongoose official, but I know GURPS did a lot of work filling in the stellar type blanks in the area and I'm happy to use that information in my game. It's my go-to for when I want to know what stars I'm looking at, any companions, etc.

I also use the table and method published in GURPS Starships and GURPS Far Trader, modified for Traveller's 2D mechanic as opposed to the GURPs 3d6. I find it works very well given the circumstances, and knowing the stellar type/s of the planet the characters are going to really adds that little bit of extra colour to your descriptions (pun intended).
 
Back
Top