New Traveller Universe: Pioneer

[Sigtrygg]

Centrifugal force is a perfectly acceptable pseudo-force - it all depend on you frame of reference.

Centrifugal force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If you are inside the rotating body then you experience a centrifugal pseudo-force. So very Newtonian.

the Coriolis force is also a pseudo force

Coriolis force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You'll be saying gravity isn't a force next...

 

[AndrewW]

Is there a feedback forum for play testing Pioneer, yet?

Down in Off Topic. "Pioneer Playtest"

 

[TrippyHippy]

Centrifugal force is a perfectly acceptable pseudo-force - it all depend on you frame of reference.

Saying it is an acceptable ‘pseudo force’ is contradiction in terms. It doesn’t exist.

And technically, post-Einsteinian physics suggest that Gravity isn’t a force, merely an effect of warping space-time, but that is another debate.

 

[Geir]

You know... I did actual go back and forth on "centrifugal", and it was just simpler to say centrifugal force and leave it at that. And at the time, it was good enough for Wikipedia (if you look... ten minutes ago at the Artificial Gravity entry , it is no longer good enough - but wait five minutes and flip a coin). It is good enough for Winchell Chung's Atomic Rockets though. At least it is today at

Artificial Gravity - Atomic Rockets

projectrho.com

(but a force in quotes).

Of course it is only pseudo gravity and has nothing to do with the fundamental force of gravity, but we're getting way too technical. Matt already made me put the equations in the back of the bus book and the page count is already getting bigger, so spending a paragraph on it, might not be the best use of space - best case, an added glossary entry.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Maybe have a sidebar, explaining why it is a pseudo force?

 

[Sigtrygg]

Saying it is an acceptable ‘pseudo force’ is contradiction in terms. It doesn’t exist.

And technically, post-Einsteinian physics suggest that Gravity isn’t a force, merely an effect of warping space-time, but that is another debate.

Pseudo-forces are perfectly acceptable physics.
It does "exist" within the frame of reference.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Pseudo-forces are perfectly acceptable physics.
It does "exist" within the frame of reference.

Just repeating yourself isn't useful. If you think anything 'pseudo-' is acceptable, then you are now being part of the problem. It doesn't exist and if it isn't even explained in any way then it should be - otherwise it is bad physics. This is meant to be a physics-accurate game, as a selling point - let's make it so.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Pseudoforces are real physics. Virtual particles are not real. Imaginary numbers crop up all the time in quantum mechanics, they are by definition not real.

Gravity is a pseudoforce are you willing to say gravity doesn't exist?

Virtual particles don't exist and yet they are incredibly useful for solving quantum equations.

Fictitious force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[TrippyHippy]

Pseudoforces are real physics.

Just stop. They are not - by definition - that is what ‘pseudo’ means. Please can we move this conversation further on than just defending stuff with terminal intensity?

Yes we can discuss Gravity too if you like, but what I am asking for is good explanations of these ideas in the text. That is, have these types of explanations incorporated into the text so that the science of the game actually shines out. The market of a game like this craves scientific rigour in the explanations of how things work.

In the case of gravity, just a single sentence explaining the notion of ‘falling into space’ becomes value added without making it less accessible at all. It is a point of interest for hard science fiction fans, in the same way using vectors for space travel is. What becomes less valuable is trying to make a hand wave that suggests the author(s) don’t realise ‘centrifuge' doesn’t actually exist when they refer to it. It devalues the hard science appeal of the game.

 

[ottarrus]

Is there a feedback forum for play testing Pioneer, yet?

I’ve just picked up a quick thing:

“Centrifugal force” (discussed in the Artificial Gravity section). Technically, there is no such thing as centrifugal forces. What you have is centripetal forces and their interaction with Newton’s 1st law.

‘Centripetal force' means the force pulled to the centre of a circle when the motion of an object is in a circular motion.

So, for example, a bucket of water being swung around an axis by a rope has a centripetal force acting to accelerate the bucket to the centre, and prevent it from flying off. However, the water in the bucket is trying to maintain Newton’s 1st Law of motion (to keep moving in a straight direction at a constant velocity). Hence, as the bucket turns in a circle, the water continues to push straight until it collides with the bottom/side of the bucket. It therefore it appears to be forced to the outside of the bucket which is termed ‘centrifugal’ (or 'avoiding the centre'). However, it doesn’t really exist - centrifugal forces are pseudo forces.

If we are going to do a hard Sci-fi game, then let's get the Newtonian Physics correct from the start.

When I sit back and think about it, I'm kind of amazed at all the stuff I've learned because of gaming... And I remember what was probably the first thing, too! Fifteen-year-old-me had to look up the word 'fecund' because of the Monster Manual

 

[Geir]

When I sit back and think about it, I'm kind of amazed at all the stuff I've learned because of gaming... And I remember what was probably the first thing, too! Fifteen-year-old-me had to look up the word 'fecund' because of the Monster Manual

'Albeit'. I think it was in the Dungeon Master's Guide, but I was about the same age.
But eventually, Traveller led me to learn astrophysics and then rocket science, and I can now with honesty tell my parents that it actually paid off...

 

[Sigtrygg]

Just stop. They are not - by definition - that is what ‘pseudo’ means. Please can we move this conversation further on than just defending stuff with terminal intensity?

No, I will not stop because you are wrong in your assumptions. A fictitious force or pseudo force or body force is real physics.

Body force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In the case of gravity, just a single sentence explaining the notion of ‘falling into space’ becomes value added without making it less accessible at all. It is a point of interest for hard science fiction fans, in the same way using vectors for space travel is. What becomes less valuable is trying to make a hand wave that suggests the author(s) don’t realise ‘centrifuge' doesn’t actually exist when they refer to it. It devalues the hard science appeal of the game.

Except that centrifugal force does exist from the perspective of the person in the spin gravity and it is perfectly acceptable to say so. Then there is the perceived "weight" of the person is the reactive centrifugal force to the centripetal force pushing towards the centre. Note that this reactive centrifugal force is not the same as the fictitious centrifugal force (which is real physics).

Reactive centrifugal force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[TrippyHippy]

No, I will not stop because you are wrong in your assumptions. A fictitious force or pseudo force or body force is real physics.

Body force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Except that centrifugal force does exist from the perspective of the person in the spin gravity and it is perfectly acceptable to say so. Then there is the perceived "weight" of the person is the reactive centrifugal force to the centripetal force pushing towards the centre. Note that this reactive centrifugal force is not the same as the fictitious centrifugal force (which is real physics).

Reactive centrifugal force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I can tell you as a Physics teacher that this question is a pretty stock question in an exam paper. No, centrifugal force is not acceptable as an explanation because it is a pseudo force. It doesn't exist. If you had used that term in a physics paper, you’d fail to get marked for it.

What you are now arguing is worthy of an ignore button. Carry on if you want, but I won’t engage with you any further and don’t take your comments seriously.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Also as a physics teacher/lecturer I can tell you that there is a lot more to physics than you teach to high school level.

Basically you are stating that your limited understanding is correct despite the evidence presented.

I have never used an ignore button on anyone, I prefer discussion and free speech rather than censorship.

 

[Geir]

And... this is what we call a rat hole, death spiral, tangential issue.
Solution: say nothing but "rotation forces simulate gravity" in the main text, which only has a table. Add the 'c' terms detail in the equation section in the back.

Moving on. So, other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play? (in other words, what other problems need to be looked at?)

 

[Sigtrygg]

Good idea

 

[TrippyHippy]

And... this is what we call a rat hole, death spiral, tangential issue.
Solution: say nothing but "rotation forces simulate gravity" in the main text, which only has a table. Add the 'c' terms detail in the equation section in the back.

Moving on. So, other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play? (in other words, what other problems need to be looked at?)

Well, that could be a solution although the opportunity to discuss science ideas in text is still a selling point to me. In terms of game play experience, it is coming….

I don’t know why some members feel the need to exercise their egos by linking a bunch of YouTube clips that explain what I’ve already explained though. Sigtrygg is not an authority on what is acceptable physics or not - and the point that the writer, himself, actually responded to and addressed the issue directly should have been the end of this discussion. What Sigtrygg thinks is of lesser importance to me. I hope this type of antagonistic response doesn’t become a feature of this playtest, though.

 

[Loconius]

I just watched Scavenger’s Reign on Max, and it could totally be a Pioneer campaign (or a Traveller one honestly). Has anyone else checked this out?

Will Pioneer be able to support discovery of a planet teaming with alien (REALLY ALIEN) life? The focus is still on the human crew of the freighter that crashed on Vesta, but the wild life is truly alien and beautiful and brutal at the same time!

 

[MongooseMatt]

I am afraid I have not seen that one. Pioneer could handle something like The Europa Report though (but we will officially be focussing more on environment than whacky aliens ).

 

[CordwainerFish]

If Pioneer is strictly limited to the Solar System, there's nowhere for a shirtsleeve envionment like in Scavengers Reign to be set. (It is a helluva good show and will be in my Hugo nominations next year.)