These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Fiction

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Stars Age
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Shiva Darksun
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2013-11-26 01:05:07 UTC
So I was waltzing around hisec and thought of investigating the EVE universe a little bit more.
Oursulaert star is 30.599.000.000 years old, pretty much impossible if this is our Universe, not an imagined one.

I thought it was an one-off, and then i found Halle star - 23.436.000.000 Years old.

So how is it? Are star ages wrong or are we talking about EVE Universe being a parallel Universe, where nothing that we know of our "real" universe matters?
Gorn Arming
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2 - 2013-11-26 02:07:40 UTC
New Eden is on the other side of a wormhole from Earth. A wormhole links (well, hypothetically anyway--none have been discovered) two locations in space and time, not just space.

In other words, we're in the distant future. Low-mass stars can continue burning for far longer than 30 billion years, so if Oursulaert is a red dwarf it is quite possible for it to be that old.
Dangirdas Bachir
The Exiled Titans
Two Vargurs one Hole
#3 - 2013-11-26 07:54:50 UTC
Gorn Arming wrote:
New Eden is on the other side of a wormhole from Earth. A wormhole links (well, hypothetically anyway--none have been discovered) two locations in space and time, not just space.

In other words, we're in the distant future. Low-mass stars can continue burning for far longer than 30 billion years, so if Oursulaert is a red dwarf it is quite possible for it to be that old.

10/10 explanation.

EVE EVE STARGALACTIC CITY B I T C H
Shiva Darksun
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2013-11-26 12:36:47 UTC
Fair enough, however I found "blue giants" (as nominated by their spectral class) which were 50 billion years old. Also within the same star info, there were mismatching entries, e.g. color didn't match age which didn't match spectral class which didn't match expected size.

All I want to know is whether there were any constraints put in place when these were generated, or it's all just "random data" thrown in there.

I am thinking of venturing out and exploring star systems with an emphasis on the astronomical side of New Eden. But if the universe data (including but not limited to stars) is randomized with no constraints (e.g. size, spectral class, color, age) then it makes little sense to go ahead and do that.
Esna Pitoojee
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#5 - 2013-11-26 18:12:50 UTC
More relevantly, celestial object stats are generated pseudorandomly and generally should not be taken as hard canon.
Che Biko
Alexylva Paradox
#6 - 2013-11-26 19:06:35 UTC
Actually, the luminosity-radius-mass-temperature relations of stars is one of the few things that don't seem to be quite right when I input them in a gravity simulator.

Most of the other parameters technicaly work with quite stable orbits (not taking into account multi-body calculations over periods for more than a year) if you input them in a gravity simulator and start the simulation (this is the case with the Tekaima system, anyway).
The density/mass/radius of planets seems to not make sense, but that is because one of those numbers, density IIRC, is for some reason multiplied by a few factors, i.e. 1652.65 g/cm3 = actually more like 1.65 g/cm3 or something like that.
Other than that, only temperatures might just be random.
Well, the other numbers could be random as well, but there is a solid interaction between stuff like orbit radius and orbital period, so in cases like that, maybe one number is generate randomly while the others are derived from the randomly generated number.

TL;DR: The numbers may be random, but they're not complete nonsense (apart from the stars and temperatures).

Coordination Channel for Consolidated Space Rescue Cooperation

Open Letter to the Aidonis Foundation Directorate
Shiva Darksun
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#7 - 2013-11-26 22:37:29 UTC
Che Biko wrote:

TL;DR: The numbers may be random, but they're not complete nonsense (apart from the stars and temperatures).


Thank you for looking at this in detail. I only looked at stars and the first thing that struck me was age. The smallest number I found was about 289 million years and the highest was over 50 billion.
Garandras
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2013-11-27 04:39:37 UTC
I think the other thing you need to think off is that our understanding of the universe in the real world is no where near complete/correct.. we are always find new things or updating our current understanding how things work
Shiva Darksun
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2013-11-27 12:50:17 UTC
Hmm, that's a bit of a stretch; I mean, from this point of view, we can use whatever numbers we want because, hey, they might be proven right sometime, somehow.

After all, we might all just be a dog's dream.
RAIN Arthie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2013-11-27 17:39:51 UTC
Shiva Darksun wrote:
So I was waltzing around hisec and thought of investigating the EVE universe a little bit more.
Oursulaert star is 30.599.000.000 years old, pretty much impossible if this is our Universe, not an imagined one.

I thought it was an one-off, and then i found Halle star - 23.436.000.000 Years old.

So how is it? Are star ages wrong or are we talking about EVE Universe being a parallel Universe, where nothing that we know of our "real" universe matters?



Do you understand how stars are formed?
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#11 - 2013-11-27 20:49:58 UTC
Esna Pitoojee wrote:
More relevantly, celestial object stats are generated pseudorandomly and generally should not be taken as hard canon.


Exactly. I had a hard tiem when I tried to find a home planet for my characters, and it urned that not a single temperate planet had stats that weren't extremely non-Earth-like.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Shiva Darksun
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2013-11-28 00:19:26 UTC
RAIN Arthie wrote:

Do you understand how stars are formed?


Having a vested interest in astronomy-related things, i probably do more than you. But that's outside of the scope of the conversation, since your question aims at simply pouring flames o something I don't want flames poured over.

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:

Exactly. I had a hard tiem when I tried to find a home planet for my characters, and it urned that not a single temperate planet had stats that weren't extremely non-Earth-like.


Ugh, I haven't even gotten that far :)
But bad news for me...
Esna Pitoojee
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#13 - 2013-11-29 04:38:20 UTC
The planets thing can be particularly wallbanger-inducing when you come to planets explicitely mentioned in PF; Amarr Prime, for instance, appears to orbit its star nearly 7 times faster than Earth but also somehow manages to have a higher surface gravity despite being significantly smaller and less dense than Earth.
Roga Dracor
Gladiators of Rage
Fraternity.
#14 - 2013-12-04 03:44:31 UTC
I've always thought the Jove harvesting materials from stars would make them older in appearance, but, then, some of the other stats are just as whacked... ~shrugs~ It's a game....

It's no use going back to yesterday, because I was a different person then, and it's a poor sort of memory that only works backward.
Shiva Darksun
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2013-12-05 01:35:35 UTC
Esna Pitoojee wrote:
The planets thing can be particularly wallbanger-inducing when you come to planets explicitely mentioned in PF; Amarr Prime, for instance, appears to orbit its star nearly 7 times faster than Earth but also somehow manages to have a higher surface gravity despite being significantly smaller and less dense than Earth.


The really interesting part is that it is entirely possible to generate proper astronomical data. I am working on some backend formulas (PL/SQL) which would allow me to generate stars (AND planets) with correct properties. I wonder why EVE doesn't respect those (at all). It's not even that difficult.
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#16 - 2013-12-05 16:14:39 UTC
Most likely a result of the 'finished products don't sell' attitude that seemed to be driving CCP for a time. Actually researching basic astronomy for the background story and universe wasn't a priority, hence the weird stats.

The EVE universe *is* far future, but by 10s or 100s of thousands of years. Not billions. (Remember, we're still considered to be recognizably human, and billions of years could very well change that)
Shiva Darksun
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2013-12-05 17:35:01 UTC
Joia Crenca wrote:
Most likely a result of the 'finished products don't sell' attitude that seemed to be driving CCP for a time. Actually researching basic astronomy for the background story and universe wasn't a priority, hence the weird stats.


Yeah, but it's so easy to change the data so that it matches reality more closely.
...Maybe we should put it up to CSM for review? In a couple weeks tops I would even be able to provide them with the formulas and data tables so that they're even more easily implemented. If I, alone, could generate a galaxy with 2 million stars and about 300K planetary systems with proper astronomical data, I'm sure CCP would do it even better.
Roland Calvary
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2014-02-18 15:36:51 UTC
Found Kizama Star Almost 60 bil years. That's really impressive age Shocked
Eija-Riitta Veitonen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#19 - 2014-02-23 04:01:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Eija-Riitta Veitonen
Roland Calvary wrote:
Found Kizama Star Almost 60 bil years. That's really impressive age Shocked

For an M6 V class main sequence star (T ~ 2950K, M ~ 0.267 M_sun, R ~ 0.27 R_sun, L ~ 0.0051 L_sun) lifetime (t_ms) in main sequence is staggering 2.7x10^11 years, yes, that's right, it's 271 billion years, so this star is actually relatively young Big smile

As for the stellar data -- i'm an amateur astronomer -- i stopped caring about it exactly three minutes after i figured out the discrepancies in the stellar and planetary data. It's a game, not encyclopaedia.

[update] Here's some more numbers on stars mentioned in this thread:

  • Oursulaert -- Class K7 V -- T ~ 4130 K, L ~ 0.11 L_sun, λ_max = 701.69 nm (deep red), M ~ 0.576 M_sun, R ~ 0.65 R_sun, t_ms ~ 3.97E+10 years (~40 bil);
  • Halle -- Class K4 V -- T ~ 4400 K, L ~ 0.15 L_sun, λ_max = 658.64 nm (orange-red), M ~ 0.622 M_sun, R ~ 0.67 R_sun, t_ms ~ 3.27E+10 (~33 bil);


Here T is temperature, L is luminosity, λ_max is peak wavelength of emitted light in nm, M is mass, R is radius and t_ms is expected main sequence lifetime in years.

Solar data spreadsheet -- knock yourselves out :)
Eran Mintor
Metropolis Commercial Consortium
#20 - 2014-02-23 04:13:06 UTC
Shiva Darksun wrote:
Joia Crenca wrote:
Most likely a result of the 'finished products don't sell' attitude that seemed to be driving CCP for a time. Actually researching basic astronomy for the background story and universe wasn't a priority, hence the weird stats.


Yeah, but it's so easy to change the data so that it matches reality more closely.
...Maybe we should put it up to CSM for review? In a couple weeks tops I would even be able to provide them with the formulas and data tables so that they're even more easily implemented. If I, alone, could generate a galaxy with 2 million stars and about 300K planetary systems with proper astronomical data, I'm sure CCP would do it even better.


Please do. I would love for this information to be relevant. Not sure why the information is included if it's all nonsensical bull.
12Next page