The Orion's Arm Universe Project Forums





Proof-reading EG
(07-24-2016, 06:38 AM)selden Wrote: On the page http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/4e297b0884b1a
the entry "Aleph Absolute" (no link) should link to http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/45e78575a15a5

FixedSmile
Reply
(07-24-2016, 06:49 AM)selden Wrote: On the page http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/4e297b0884b1a
the entries for Argelander (no links) should link to http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/45f9757b533b6

This and the same issue for Frei are both fixed.
Reply
(07-24-2016, 07:12 AM)selden Wrote: On the page http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/4e297b0884b1a
the entry for the unnamed wormhole from Anomie to Mu Cassiopiae
says "From Chi Draconis it connects to Xil"

I think that entry should say "From Mu Cassiopiae it connects to Xil"

Hmm. This entry and the other entry for Anomie right after it are both problematic.

Wormholes can only link two points, and we don't normally indicate that a given destination of a wormhole has other wormholes going other places in the way this does in the table and in the EG entry for Anomie.

I'm going to propose two things here.

a) We name the wormholes from Anomie - this should be easy enough to do and just looks better. We might do the same for all the other unnamed wormholes here for much the same reasons (although this would be a bit of work since they would need to be moved into alphabetical order in keeping with the other stargate names we have here. There is also the issue of our eventual adjustment to the structure of the wormhole nexus to a fractal structure, which might impact this whole table.

b) We adjust the Anomie article and the table to remove the mention/indication of a further wormhole extending from the destinations of the Anomie wormholes.

Thoughts from the group?

Todd
Reply
(07-24-2016, 11:30 AM)Drashner1 Wrote:
(07-24-2016, 05:29 AM)selden Wrote: On the page for NewRoot at
http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/49022a2c0c9be
the catalog name of its star (nu2 lup) is missing.

(I found it by a grep of the EG Celestia addons.)

Punctuation inconsistency: some entries for New Root have an infixed space and some don't.

I've fixed the issue of the missing catalog name, but I'm not sure what you mean by an 'infixed space'. Do you mean that some entries list it as 'New Root' and others as 'NewRoot'?

Thanks!

Todd

Sorry, yes, that's exactly what I meant: sometimes it's spelled "New Root" and sometimes it's spelled "NewRoot".
Selden
Reply
(07-24-2016, 12:23 PM)Drashner1 Wrote:
(07-24-2016, 07:12 AM)selden Wrote: On the page http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/4e297b0884b1a
the entry for the unnamed wormhole from Anomie to Mu Cassiopiae
says "From Chi Draconis it connects to Xil"

I think that entry should say "From Mu Cassiopiae it connects to Xil"

Hmm. This entry and the other entry for Anomie right after it are both problematic.

Wormholes can only link two points, and we don't normally indicate that a given destination of a wormhole has other wormholes going other places in the way this does in the table and in the EG entry for Anomie.

I'm going to propose two things here.

a) We name the wormholes from Anomie - this should be easy enough to do and just looks better. We might do the same for all the other unnamed wormholes here for much the same reasons (although this would be a bit of work since they would need to be moved into alphabetical order in keeping with the other stargate names we have here. There is also the issue of our eventual adjustment to the structure of the wormhole nexus to a fractal structure, which might impact this whole table.
I'm not sure what you mean by "a fractal structure" in this situation. I'm certainly not familiar with many the relevant writings, but I'd expect there to be (at least) two competing sets of social and practical pressures in the construction of wormholes and thus affecting the over-all layout of an interconnected system. One is that a given wormhole construction ship (fleet?) is only going to be able to provide wormholes which connect directly to endpoints that were previously emplaced, resulting in a relatively linear layout along its (jagged?) flightpath. The other is that individual polities are going to want to develop wormholes which interconnect locations that might be of interest only to specific local groups. These local links might or might not be within a convenient distance of other wormholes. Of course, there might be (are?) other, more long-range plans for interconnecting the major polities or other interesting locations. Given their value, I'd expect that sometimes interconnections would be separately initiated by each of the polities involved, resulting in redundant, parallel interconnections. Some of those adjacent wormholes would be under the control of one polity while others would be under control of the other polity. That way an embargo initiated by one of them would not necessarily result in a complete breakdown of travel or communication between them.
Quote:b) We adjust the Anomie article and the table to remove the mention/indication of a further wormhole extending from the destinations of the Anomie wormholes.
Personally, I have no objection to individual articles mentioning such extensions, so long as their endpoints all wind up in the primary list. It seems to me that having that information available locally in individual articles written about a particular polity (or other social grouping) would make it easier to think of stories involving them. That way one does not have to expend the effort to search through the list to try to discover their interconnections and decide what social (or anti-social) interactions there might be among competing (or cooperating) groups at which endpoints.
Quote:Thoughts from the group?

Todd
Selden
Reply
In the article http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/4911ce8f43ea3
Alpha Scorpius should be Alpha Scorpii

(Genitive form, not nominative: i.e. Alpha of the Scorpion)
Selden
Reply
Some more incorrect star designations:

Alpha Areitis -> Alpha Arietis in http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/49fc193234b06

Eta Sagittarius -> Eta Sagittarii in http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/464ceaad61e78
and many more Sad

Alpha Aquarius -> Alpha Aquarii in
http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/4911ce8f43ea3
http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-topic/45cd3240ea58a
http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-topic/45bcbeb588b26
Selden
Reply
Quite often a wormhole link between a major system and another major system will have an intermediate stop at a minor system in between; this is what I intended with the Anomie wormhole, and since this connection now includes two wormholes, both should be named and treated separately in the gazetteer.
So here goes;

Gamma Cephei (Anomie) to Mu Cassiopeia (Pandya); The Better Way to Travel
Mu Cassiopeia (Pandya) to Xi Bootis (Xil); Vimana
Gamma Cephei (Anomie) to Chi Draconis (Lam Wai-Chun); Well of Infinity
Chi Draconis (Lam Wai-Chun) to Penglais (Sigma Draconis); Ménkǒu
Reply
NOTE - I messed up the quoting here for Selden's text somehow and it wasn't displaying properly so just using bold text to substitute.

I'm not sure what you mean by "a fractal structure" in this situation.

See this thread HERE.

Based on what we came up with in this thread, I'm going to eventually (hopefully later this year) revise the relevant wormhole articles to reflect that the majority of the Wormhole Nexus uses a tree-like repeating configuration (so roughly a fractal) that allows a much more efficient use of wormholes and much faster transit times than our current set up. To account for the existing (mostly Inner Sphere) named/destination specified wormholes already in the EG, we are looking at saying these date from earlier in the timeline when individual archailects were creating them and before the 'international waters' approach to the Nexus was established in which an overarching authority (at the archailect level) decides both the structure of the Nexus and which systems are connected to it.


I'm certainly not familiar with many the relevant writings, but I'd expect there to be (at least) two competing sets of social and practical pressures in the construction of wormholes and thus affecting the over-all layout of an interconnected system. One is that a given wormhole construction ship (fleet?) is only going to be able to provide wormholes which connect directly to endpoints that were previously emplaced, resulting in a relatively linear layout along its (jagged?) flightpath.

This is true to some degree, but see the thread above. Also consider that a more efficient approach is for a linelayer to travel to a 'central' system possessed of lots of energy and resources and then manufacture large numbers of wormholes there which are sent out to nearby systems, thereby 'hooking up' that region of space. A single WH jump to that system then allows access to a large number of other systems as well as minimal jump travel between all of those systems via the central 'hub'. For the cost of a single WH a given system can access many many other solar systems in only two jumps, rather than jumping from gate to gate to gate.


The other is that individual polities are going to want to develop wormholes which interconnect locations that might be of interest only to specific local groups. These local links might or might not be within a convenient distance of other wormholes. Of course, there might be (are?) other, more long-range plans for interconnecting the major polities or other interesting locations. Given their value, I'd expect that sometimes interconnections would be separately initiated by each of the polities involved, resulting in redundant, parallel interconnections. Some of those adjacent wormholes would be under the control of one polity while others would be under control of the other polity. That way an embargo initiated by one of them would not necessarily result in a complete breakdown of travel or communication between them.

This isn't actually the case, due to both OA canon and the physics of OA wormholes.

Re individual polities - the Nexus is actually set up as a sort of 'international waters' construct in the sense that travel through it is largely considered neutral, regardless of what the polities using it might be doing with each other.

More importantly, this state of affairs, and the overall growth and structure of the Nexus is controlled by the highest archai, which means the social issues of lesser minds (basically all modos and transapients below S6) aren't really a factor. The Nexus goes where the S6 want it to go, or grows under the guidelines they provide and lesser minds just have to make the best of it. It may be possible to request or petition the establishment of a WH to some specific place, but that's something we've never specified and which would still require approval from the archai/whatever agency is carrying out their overall wishes.

Beyond that, the physics of WHs prevents you from having multiple links between two points. Doings this sets up a Close Timeline Curve, (see the Failure Modes section) which means a time machine tries to form and wormholes start imploding. As such, the structure of the Nexus is something like a tree with branches extending out from a central 'trunk'. You can travel up and down the links to get to/from the center, but you can't set up more than one link to connect any two spots.


Personally, I have no objection to individual articles mentioning such extensions, so long as their endpoints all wind up in the primary list. It seems to me that having that information available locally in individual articles written about a particular polity (or other social grouping) would make it easier to think of stories involving them. That way one does not have to expend the effort to search through the list to try to discover their interconnections and decide what social (or anti-social) interactions there might be among competing (or cooperating) groups at which endpoints.


I understand the reasoning here, but I don't think this is the best approach. In some cases a given location could link to an intermediate system with dozens of wormholes or more. Should we mention all the possible links from that intermediate point on the page for the 'starting' system?

While I can see the utility of a having some kind of 'map' or 'routing guide' for the Nexus for systems (and we do have a very limited one at present), I think we need to figure out another way of presenting it rather than at the level of each individual star system we are writing about. That way lies a very messy situation, both to set up and to maintain, IMO.

Todd
Reply
There are around a billion stars in the Terragen Sphere, including red dwarfs and so on; there must be at least a million wormholes, probably many times that. We'll never be able to make a map of the Nexus by hand. Maybe some clever soul could make a program up to generate a wormhole map from certain predetermined parameters; but this might be best left until the Gaia information is available.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 6 Guest(s)