From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv>
Subject: SF-RPG: Plan for 200ly cube (local area)
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 20:27:36 -0800 (PST)

The Gliese (CNS3) data claims to confine itself to stars within
25 parsecs (81.5 light years) of the Sun, however, in looking
through the file, I discovered some 180 stars (of the 3802
present) which reside beyond 100 light years distance.   
Eliminating these altogether, that left me with 3622 stars.

Normally, that would been the end of it, however, there are two
sorts of "holes" in the Gliese data. The first, and most obvious,
is that not all stars in the file are designated as being of a
particular type/class category. Because the current theories
circulating tend to indicate a vast preponderance of MV stars, I
put all stars which were not categorized by color into the "M"
(Red) type and all stars which were not categorized by size into
the "V" (Dwarf/Main Sequence) class. This yielded the following
type/class distribution:

          I  II  III    IV      V  VI    Tot
     O    0   0    0     0      0   0      0
     B    0   0    0     0      3   0      3
     A    0   0    7    10     53   0     70
     F    0   0   15    55    176   2    248
     G    0   0   13    52    389   3    457
     K    0   1   35    17    769   2    824
     M    0   0    2     0   1856   0   1858
     Tot  0   1   72   134   3246   7   3460
                         White Dwarfs:   162 
                         Total:         3622 

The other sort of "hole" in the Gliese data is less obvious but
far more serious. Bertil Jonell first pointed it out to me a few
months ago, and Ben Lin admitted to it in the documentation to
his own star data. The basic gist of the problem was that the
farther out you go, the less stars the astronomers have actually
seen and identified. Bright stars they can see for quite some
distance, but many of the smaller ones, like our own Sun, tend to
be virtually invisible, for all intents and purposes.

     Stars     # in    #           % of
     Within    Gliese  Expected    Completeness
     10 ly     11      12          100%
     20 ly     98      98          100%
     30 ly     268     331         81% 
     40 ly     568     784         72% 
     50 ly     1065    1531        69% 
     60 ly     1695    2646        64% 
     70 ly     2488    4202        59% 
     80 ly     3255    6272        52% 
     90 ly     3548    8930        40% 
     100 ly    3622    12250       30% 

In the previous table, we assume that the astronomers have seen
all the stars within 20 light years. We further assume that the
distribution throughout a 100 light year radius is approximately
equal to the distribution within 20 light years, so if there's
approximately one star for every 342 cubic light years within the
nearest 20 light years of space, then we'd expect the same to
hold for the next 80 light years beyond this. Well, sure enough,
that doesn't happen, and so we come to the realization that while
3622 stars may seem like a lot, it's actually about 8628 stars
too few.

So what I'm going to do here is simply add on a random basis some
8628 stars between the 20 light year radius and the 100 light
year radius. The question arises: What should the type/class
distribution of these stars be? If they were large or bright,
they probably would have been noticed, so most likely, they're
small and dim. To help this notion along, back in January, Bertil
wrote me with a tiny tidbit of information he'd dug up at a local
library:

>           O    0.00002%
>           B    0.09%
>           A    0.6%
>           F    2.9%
>           G    7.3%
>           K    15%
>           M    73%
>
>   That's for main sequence. Non-main sequence is 0.8% of
>   the total population. (This is from an 'intelligent life
>   in the universe?' book (c) 1994 that is used in
>   physics/astronomy courses here on Chalmers)

So assuming this is, indeed, the case, we can construct the
following line of reasoning:

   Expected total # of stars within 100 ly radius: 12250
   0.8% are non-main sequence: 98
   99.2% are main sequence: 12152

   # of non-main sequence
   in Gliese: 214 (if you don't count White Dwarfs)
              376 (if you do)
   Conclusion: We don't need to generate any of these

   # of main sequence in Gliese: 3246
   Conclusion: We need about 12000 total, so we're 8750 short

                    rough #    # in     # we need
                   expected   Gliese     to add
   O    0.00002%        0        0         0
   B    0.09%          10        3         7
   A    0.6%           72       53        19
   F    2.9%          348      176       172
   G    7.3%          876      389       487
   K    15%          1800      769      1031
   M    73%          8760     1856      6904

So I'll add 7 BVs, 19 AVs, 172 FVs, 487 GVs, 1031 KVs, and 6904
MVs on a random basis between the 20 ly and 100 ly radius.

At this point, we would normally be done, however, there's
another problem. My starmapping program operates on cubic sectors
of space, not a spherical volume, so for the sake of
completeness, it would be best to fill in the space between the
100 ly radius and the eight corners of the 200 ly cube which
defines its center as our Sun.

The following line of reasoning should suffice:

   # of Cubic Light years in 200 ly cube:          8000000
   # of Cubic Light Years in 100 ly radius sphere: 4188790
   The cube is 190% as big as the sphere

   Revised Est. # of stars in Sphere: 12242
   Est. # of stars in cube (12242 * 1.9): 23260

Which means we need to generate an additional 11018 stars at this
stage and place them between the 100 ly radius but still within
the confines of the 200 ly cube. Now, remember that at the start
of this whole exercise, we had to toss 180 stars because they
fell outside the 100 ly radius. Well, we can now take 85 of those
stars back because although they fall outside the 100 ly radius,
they are still within our 200 ly cube. This brings the number of
Gliese stars which we are using upward from 3622 to 3707 so that
we are now using every single Gliese star that we possibly can
(that being 97.5% of them, the remaining 2.5% fall outside the
cube). So, after we take back these 85 Gliese stars, we have
10933 which we essentially have to create out of thin air.
Incidentally, it is worth keeping in mind that once we're done
with this stage, we're really done with our star generation,
however, we're still talking around 1.5 megs of data just
considering the map files alone. Doing actual write-ups on this
many star systems would be virtually impossible, but at least it
gives us growing room :-)

I'll use the following algorithm to determine the type/class
category for this last batch of stars:

   10933 stars to be generated between the
   100 ly radius and the cube corners

   Roll d1000:
      1-3: Class III
         Roll d100:
            1-10:     A
            11-30:    F
            31-49:    G
            50-97:    K
            98-100:   M
      4-9: Class IV
         Roll d100:
            1-7:      A
            8-48:     F
            49-87:    G
            88-100:   K
      10-9953: Class V
         Roll d1000:
            1:        B
            2-7:      A
            8-36:     F
            37-109:   G
            110-260:  K
            261-1000: M
      9954-9955: Class IV
         Roll d4:
            1:        F
            2:        G
            3:        K
            4:        M
      9956-10000: White Dwarf

I'll move on to the details of star system generation a little
bit later, but I just wanted to get this plan out in the open
before I begin doing it. If you see anything that you think is a
mistake or is just bad judgment, let me know. I'm letting you all
know in advance what's going on here, because once I'm done with
it, I really don't want to have to go back and fix anything.


Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 22:53:22 -0800
From: Eric Edgeworth <checkers@microsys.net>
Subject: Astrogation

Again, I don't know if you guys have discussed this before, but what methods
of astrogation have you come up with?  If you're talking FTL speeds in
realspace, you're talking serious difficulties when it comes to the
so-called "dark matter" in the Universe.  

My proposal for astrogation is loosely based on present research into
"gravity waves."  My understanding of the topic is that not only does matter
warp space, thus causing gravity, but it can also vibrate space-time if it
moves or explodes or what have you.  Last I heard, present research had not
yet totally confirmed the hypothesis, but science fiction seems ever ready
to adopt even unsuggested hypotheses, so...

I guess the detector would work more or less like a gyroscopic compass, with
a heavy mass for the stable point that a moveable gauge could measure
against.  The fluctuations of space-time would be minor, and overcoming the
influence of acceleration of the vehicle and any anti-inertial devices would
need to be considered, but I think such a device is plausible at the very
least.  

This would also allow for detection of FTL craft (which might be the method
by which humans ultimately discover alien space travel), since such
disturbances of space-time as the suggested mode of travel would cause could
easily be detected.  Much like wakes of boats on water.


Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 22:56:55 -0800
From: Eric Edgeworth <checkers@microsys.net>
Subject: Cyberware

Another possible limitation I forgot to mention previously: Any direct
neural interface technology (decking, vehicle control, etc.) would require
the character to acquire skills specifically for such an activity.  I.e., a
ship's pilot might have a skill slotted for piloting by hand, then acquires
cyberware for direct mental control of a spacecraft.  However, piloting by
hand and piloting with the mind are completely different, so he would need
to learn how to use his interface.

Similarly, characters who depend solely on their interface skills are
screwed if somebody superglues a cork into their neural interface.


Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 10:11:50 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: Astrogation

On Wed, 20 Mar 1996, Eric Edgeworth wrote:
> Again, I don't know if you guys have discussed this before, but what methods
> of astrogation have you come up with?  If you're talking FTL speeds in
> realspace, you're talking serious difficulties when it comes to the
> so-called "dark matter" in the Universe.  

At least if it is MACHOs (MAssive Compact Halo Objects) and not WIMPs 
(Weakly Interacting Massive Particles), like brown dwarfs, small black 
holes or other navigational hazards. However, I would assume most of 
interstellar space is emptier than a solar system, so the risks are not 
that great and you can usually fly in a straight line. 

> My proposal for astrogation is loosely based on present research into
> "gravity waves."  My understanding of the topic is that not only does matter
> warp space, thus causing gravity, but it can also vibrate space-time if it
> moves or explodes or what have you.  Last I heard, present research had not
> yet totally confirmed the hypothesis, but science fiction seems ever ready
> to adopt even unsuggested hypotheses, so...

And most physicists think they exist too (otherwise general relativity 
would be in deep and interesting trouble). It is worth noting that 
antigravity devices would be able to create them too. 
 
> I guess the detector would work more or less like a gyroscopic compass, with
> a heavy mass for the stable point that a moveable gauge could measure
> against.  The fluctuations of space-time would be minor, and overcoming the
> influence of acceleration of the vehicle and any anti-inertial devices would
> need to be considered, but I think such a device is plausible at the very
> least.  

There is a mass detector invented by Robert Forward (physicist and sf 
author) which actually works. It essentially looks like a rotating cross 
with weights at its ends; a sensor measures its oscilliations and 
calculates the local gravity field (it is a very ingenious device, and 
rather sensitive). The problem is that a FTL ship is surrounded by a 
complex local antigravity field, so it is a bit hard to detect outside 
fields well. I think detectors could notice changes in the local fields 
though, since they would distort in the vicinity of mass (probably 
triggering an emergency shut-down).

Of course, assuming antigravity devices we could also assume a simple 
detector that sees gravity waves; it could even be useful for 
communication among some races.


Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 10:15:33 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: Cyberware

On Wed, 20 Mar 1996, Eric Edgeworth wrote:
> Another possible limitation I forgot to mention previously: Any direct
> neural interface technology (decking, vehicle control, etc.) would require
> the character to acquire skills specifically for such an activity.  I.e., a
> ship's pilot might have a skill slotted for piloting by hand, then acquires
> cyberware for direct mental control of a spacecraft.  However, piloting by
> hand and piloting with the mind are completely different, so he would need
> to learn how to use his interface.

Good point. Not to mention that most users personalize their user 
interfaces quite a bit, and a neural interface would be downright 
private. It would be exceedingly hard to use the neural user-interface of 
one person for another (although there are probably standard interfaces 
that work equally bad for everyone). My guess is that piloting skills in 
themselves are unchanged, but once you chip in you can learn your own 
personalized version (a bit like having a specialization in Shadowrun; it 
gives an extra edge that could be developed further). 

> Similarly, characters who depend solely on their interface skills are
> screwed if somebody superglues a cork into their neural interface.

Exactly. And don't even *think* of using your interface in an alien 
computer...


Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 12:26:39 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: SF-RPG: Plan for 200ly cube (local area)

On Wed, 20 Mar 1996, Jim Vassilakos wrote:
> So what I'm going to do here is simply add on a random basis some
> 8628 stars between the 20 light year radius and the 100 light
> year radius.

Sounds OK, especially if you implement the ability to use either the 
"real" data or the filled out data you mentioned earlier.

> So, after we take back these 85 Gliese stars, we have
> 10933 which we essentially have to create out of thin air.
> Incidentally, it is worth keeping in mind that once we're done
> with this stage, we're really done with our star generation,
> however, we're still talking around 1.5 megs of data just
> considering the map files alone.

How do you store the stars? Can't the map files be stored in some 
compressed format?

> Doing actual write-ups on this
> many star systems would be virtually impossible, but at least it
> gives us growing room :-)

Yes, now we can delineate rough spheres of influence, and write up some 
highligts. How do we want to place the map in the coalition? My 
suggestion is to assume the coalition is roughly spherical, and the map 
covers (say) an octant of it. 


Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 12:41:45 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: SF-RPG: How much energy does fusion yield?

On Wed, 20 Mar 1996, Jim Vassilakos wrote:
> I've run into a minor snag, however. Although we've pretty much
> decided on fusion and antimatter for our power generation, I still
> need to know how many MW-hours you can get out of a liter of pure
> deuterium by converting said substance into helium. Any takers?
> BTW, are there more economical substance we should use instead?

According to Energy Sources & Conversion at
http://FusEdWeb.pppl.gov/CPEP/Chart_Pages/1.EnergyConversion.html a
typical fusion reaction would produce around 3.4 x 10^14 J/Kg input. 

See also the fusion FAQ for more information:
http://FusEdWeb.pppl.gov/FAQ/fusion-faq.html

Some tidbits: It mentions that turbines have efficiencies around 50%, but
magnetohydrodynamic conversion can get up to 95% efficiencies. A 1000 MW
fusion reactor would contain at least 1000 tons of vanadium, although the
smallest competitive reactor would be around 3000 MW of fusion power,
which after conversion to electricity would be around 1000-1500 MW,
although reactors can probably be built smaller. 


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv>
Subject: Re: SF-RPG: Plan for 200ly cube (local area)
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 13:55:15 -0800 (PST)

Anders sez:
> How do you store the stars? Can't the map files be stored in some 
> compressed format?

I always use straight text for my data files so that they can be
easily edited with various applications. However, I just had a
bad thought about these data files. Each file my program reads
only covers a 10ly cube, so there would have to be 8000 of these
data files to cover a 200ly cube (20^3). Assuming 512 byte blocks,
that means that we're talking more like 4 megs. Still, given that
most PC harddrives nowadays are on the order of 500-2000 megs, this
isn't really that big a deal. Ya figure I should generate mainworld
data (ala traveller) as well? Given the block structure of file
systems, it probably wouldn't make that big an impact on the overall
space consumed. I mean, we're only talking an average of four stars
per data file, and many of these are bound to be holed up in binary
and trinary star systems. The other option, of course, is to increase
the volume of space each data file covers, but I kinda like playing
it conservative with memory, considering that I have to load 27 (3^3)
of these files at once and have to reload every time the user crosses
the border from one sector to another. I guess I'll just have to play
around with it and see what works best.

> How do we want to place the map in the coalition? My 
> suggestion is to assume the coalition is roughly spherical, and the map 
> covers (say) an octant of it. 

Let's see how many habitable worlds we end up with. I have a sneaking
suspicion that the garden spots (like Earth) are going to be few and
far between, but I won't know for sure until I run the data, and we
still have to review the starsystem creation process (that ugly thing
we were discussing back in September) one more time before that can
happen.


Date: Sat, 23 Mar 1996 22:54:19 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Planets

I just found another web page which might be relevant for the 
planet-creation part of the game:

http://www.compulink.co.uk/~vicarage/planets/

It contains lots of references and explanations, and what looks like a
system generator. Of course, I think we already have the expertise on this
list, but it is always fun with more background. 


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv>
Subject: SF-RPG: Frequency of Multiple Star Systems
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 00:40:39 -0800 (PST)

Been playing with the Gliese (CNS3) data a little more.
From the looks of things, Gliese shows (within the 100ly
radius):

   2750 Solos
   401  Binaries
   22   Trinaries
   1    Quaternary  (Delta Velorum)

This is slightly odd, because from what I've heard, about
one-third of star systems are supposed to be multiple star
systems. Gliese shows only about half that (around 15%).
My guess is it boils down to the same old problem... the
difficulties of observing distant stars. In any case, if
anyone has any percentages to suggest for the star systems
I'm going to be randomly generating, speak now. I'm currently
planning on running with:

   70% Solo
   25% Binary
   4% Trinary
   1% Quaternary

This isn't based on anything other than intuition, however,
so if anyone has any data on this... please... shoot it though
the list. I need all the help I can get on this stuff.


Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 13:30:21 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: SF-RPG: Frequency of Multiple Star Systems

On Sun, 24 Mar 1996, Jim Vassilakos wrote:
>    2750 Solos
>    401  Binaries
>    22   Trinaries
>    1    Quaternary  (Delta Velorum)

Hmm, there must be some error here. I know Iota Ursae Majoris is also a 
quaternary (one bright A7 star, and three M stars), and in the 2300 data 
Xi Ursae Majoris is also quaternary.

>    70% Solo
>    25% Binary
>    4% Trinary
>    1% Quaternary

I think this will work nicely, although there is a chance that with this 
system we get too many quaternary systems.


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv@e2.empirenet.com>
Subject: Re: SF-RPG: Frequency of Multiple Star Systems
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 10:16:23 -0800 (PST)

> Hmm, there must be some error here. I know Iota Ursae Majoris is also a 
> quaternary (one bright A7 star, and three M stars), and in the 2300 data 
> Xi Ursae Majoris is also quaternary.

How distant is Iota Ursae Majoris? It doesn't appear in the Gliese (CNS3)
data. If you can send me the right ascension, decination, and distance, I'll
see if it falls within the 200ly cube.

As for Xi Ursae Majoris, Gliese seems to show it as a binary system.
Two GV stars. I would tend to trust Gliese over GDW  :-)

> >    70% Solo
> >    25% Binary
> >    4% Trinary
> >    1% Quaternary
>
> I think this will work nicely, although there is a chance that with this 
> system we get too many quaternary systems.
 
True. What would you suggest as far an an amendment?


Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:52:35 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: SF-RPG: Frequency of Multiple Star Systems

On Mon, 25 Mar 1996, Jim Vassilakos wrote:
> How distant is Iota Ursae Majoris? It doesn't appear in the Gliese (CNS3)
> data. If you can send me the right ascension, decination, and distance, I'll
> see if it falls within the 200ly cube.

It is in the 2300AD data, I think around 45 ly out. It's coordinates are
{-22.9, 23.6, 36.8}; I don't remember the conversion formulae right now. 

> As for Xi Ursae Majoris, Gliese seems to show it as a binary system.
> Two GV stars. I would tend to trust Gliese over GDW  :-)

As you should. I think many of the multiple systems in GDW are listed as 
close-lying systems in Gliese. 


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv@e2.empirenet.com>
Subject: sfrpg: frequency of multiple star systems
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 17:13:56 -0800 (PST)

Anders wrote:
>>    2750 Solos
>>    401  Binaries
>>    22   Trinaries
>>    1    Quaternary  (Delta Velorum)
>
>Hmm, there must be some error here. I know Iota Ursae Majoris is
>also a quaternary (one bright A7 star, and three M stars), and
>in the 2300 data Xi Ursae Majoris is also quaternary.

Originally I said that Gliese didn't seem to have Iota Ursae
Majoris present. Well, I found it. Because of the way the CNS3
data file is set up (with the segment of the name designation I'm
looking for falling in various locations of the name field), my
program originally missed it. Basically, I screwed up. Rest
assured, I'll try to make the bugger a little bit smarter.

As for the whole issue regarding how many stars reside in these
systems, I made another mistake. I was taking each CNS3 entry as
a separate star, but some of them are spectroscopic binaries, and
my program wasn't accounting for that. Back to the ol' drawing
board. Kudos to Anders for catching the error.

One question: Can the two stars of a spectroscopic binary be of
two separate color/size (type/class) categories? If not, then my
task is easy; I just assign the value in Gliese to both stars.
Otherwise, I need some way to decide how to categorize these two
separate stars based on the single color/size category given in
the CNS3 data.

Anders writes:
> >    70% Solo
> >    25% Binary
> >    4% Trinary
> >    1% Quaternary
>
> I think this will work nicely, although there is a chance that
> with this system we get too many quaternary systems.

What do you think would be a good percentage for the number of
quaternaries versus the other sorts of star systems? 0.25%? 0.1%?


From: "Tony L. Hayes" <tlh@epsilon.com>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: frequency of multiple star systems
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 21:39:03 -0500 (EST)

> One question: Can the two stars of a spectroscopic binary be of
> two separate color/size (type/class) categories? If not, then my

Yes they can.  Spectroscopic refers to the fact that you can
see the binary via dopeler shifts in the spectral lines as opposed
to visually (as two stars).


Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 13:58:23 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Some small ideas

Here are a few ideas I recently got (I plan to write them up more 
properly later, but this is a start):

When generating planets, we have to take civilization into account. In 
the background we have roughly agreed upon, intelligent life has been 
active in the volume for at least 10,000 years, probably much more 
(although the Old Ones might have been rather low key). This means that 
planets may no longer belong to their original type; some garden worlds 
may have been rendered uninhabitable in the Great War, and quite a few 
planets may have been terraformed or are in the process of being 
terraformed. How to handle this? One simple solution would be to generate 
the planets normally, and then add "cultural postprocessing": a small 
probability that a garden has turned into a nuclear desert, another 
chance a pre-garden is being terraformed etc. 

Way stations: As I see it, most merchant ships use antimatter and need 
refuelling in each system they enter (although rare ships may have larger 
antimatter stores). This opens up the possibility of waystations along 
trading routes, especially in systems that are otherwise devoid of 
resources or interest. 

A waystation would have at least one antimatter manufacturing plant, which
probably would be a set of huge solar collector arrays in orbit around the
star (once in place they require very little maintenance and not much
other infrastructure, unlike fusion reactors which need deuterium). This
plant produces antimatter and packages it, and then sends it to the
waystation proper. The waystation would be something between a space gas
station and a small trading post; in some systems it is not much more than
a orbital structure where ships dock and refuel, in others it is a large
complex with trading facilities, repair functions, large numbers of
permanent inhabitants and Coalition presence. All in all, waystations may
be rather exciting places. 

A scheme to get money for the poor earthlings: sell Mars! Mars is prime 
terraforming material, but has been unused so far. Now it is legal to 
terraform it, but it belongs to mankind who so far has no terraforming 
experience. It is quite possible that some terraforming consortium in the 
game is courting human authorities to buy Mars...


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: frequency of multiple star systems
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:42:44 -0800 (PST)

Tony sez:
> > One question: Can the two stars of a spectroscopic binary be of
> > two separate color/size (type/class) categories?
> 
> Yes they can.  Spectroscopic refers to the fact that you can
> see the binary via dopeler shifts in the spectral lines as opposed
> to visually (as two stars).

But obviously, a spectroscopic binary (SB) which is noted as a GV isn't
going to consist of a GV and an FIV. The larger and brighter of the
two would be the dominant star. But would either of the two stars
necessarily have to be a GV? Would it be possible to put two KVs
so close to one another that they would be categorized as an SB-GV or
an SB-KIV? Or, should I always assume that in an SB, the type/class
designation is for the most dominant star of the pair and the second
star can be anything equal to or lesser (on either the size or color
scales)? In short, can you suggest an algorithm I should use?


From: "Tony L. Hayes" <tlh@epsilon.com>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: frequency of multiple star systems
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 14:46:08 -0500 (EST)

Jim Vassilakos writes ->
> > > One question: Can the two stars of a spectroscopic binary be of
> > > two separate color/size (type/class) categories?
> > 
> > Yes they can.  Spectroscopic refers to the fact that you can
> > see the binary via dopeler shifts in the spectral lines as opposed
> > to visually (as two stars).
> 
> But obviously, a spectroscopic binary (SB) which is noted as a GV isn't
> going to consist of a GV and an FIV. The larger and brighter of the
> two would be the dominant star. But would either of the two stars
> necessarily have to be a GV? Would it be possible to put two KVs
> so close to one another that they would be categorized as an SB-GV or
> and SB-KIV? Or, should I always assume that in an SB, the type/class

No because you can sepearate the spectra of the two stars and the
spectra are distinct for each star type.  In short, two stars won't
add in that way (net magnitude but not spectra).

> designation is for the most dominant star of the pair and the second
> star can be anything equal to or lesser (on either the size or color
> scales)? In short, can you suggest an algorithm I should use?
 
I would use the information you have as the primary and make the
other star any dimmer class you want - including "dead" stars
like white dwarfs, neutron stars, etc.

It is a common occurance in binaries that they do mass transfer
which mean the large star will 'age' rapidly while losing mass
to the smaller star.  As the smaller, slower aging star gains
mass it changes spectral class and its aging rate increases.
Further, many novas are the result of mass transfer so binaries
may be without usable planets since they occasionally and repeatedly
explode (close binaries that is...obviously).


Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 10:14:16 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: frequency of multiple star systems

On Wed, 27 Mar 1996, Tony L. Hayes wrote:
> I would use the information you have as the primary and make the
> other star any dimmer class you want - including "dead" stars
> like white dwarfs, neutron stars, etc.

Hmm, that reminds me: how common are neutron stars? As far as I know, no 
neutron stars have been observed in the vicinity, but singlet neutron 
stars might drift around in interstellar space. Should we add a few, or 
are they so rare they can be ignored? 


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv>
Subject: sfrpg: neutron stars / cosmic cataclysm
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 10:49:23 -0800 (PST)

Anders writes:
> Hmm, that reminds me: how common are neutron stars? As far as I know, no 
> neutron stars have been observed in the vicinity, but singlet neutron 
> stars might drift around in interstellar space. Should we add a few, or 
> are they so rare they can be ignored? 
 
This is a good question, imho, because neutron stars (afaik) are an
end-state. Once you got one, they don't go away, unless they somehow
compress down to a black hole via the accretion of matter. The
problem, of course, is that you need a supernova to make one, which
are pretty rare, but not so rare (considering galactic time scales)
that there couldn't have been plenty of them relatively close-by in
the distant past.

In fact, this reminds me of a conversation we had back in June of
last year before the mailing list was established. We were talking
local astrography, and you mentioned that we reside in an area of
the galaxy which we call "Gould's Plane" or "The Local System", and
what sets this area apart from the rest of the galaxy is that it
seems to be a bit misaligned, as though something major happened
here in the distant past. The astronomers, though various mumbo
jumbo, estimated the date the this "cataclysm" to be about 67
million years ago (how they did this I have no idea). Well, you
speculated that what happened might have been a bunch of supernovae
going off in a relatively short space of time. And I interjected
something along the lines of: "Hey, wasn't 67 million years ago
around when the dinosaurs disappeared?"

This comment must have struck a nerve, because you instantly
went for your copy of Cosmos :-)

You wrote:
> Hmm... good thought. The timing seems right. I happen to have a copy
> of Cosmos on hand. Sagan writes a little tidbit on this notion...
>
> "No one knows what wiped out the dinosaurs. One evocative idea is that
> it was a cosmic catastrophe, the explosion of a nearby star -- a supernova
> like one that produced the Crab Nebula. If there were by chance a
> supernova within ten or twenty lightyears of the solar system some
> sixty-five million years ago, it would have sprayed an intense flux of
> cosmic rays into space, and some of these, entering the Earth's
> envelope of air, would have burned the atmospheric nitrogen. The oxides
> of nitrogen thus generated would have removed the protective layer of
> ozone from the atmosphere, increasing the flux of solar ultraviolet
> radiation at the surface and frying or mutating the many organisms
> imprefectly protected against intense ultraviolet light. Some of these
> organisms may have been staples of the dinosaur diet."
>
> Just an alternative to the meteor-theory.

So if we go with this notion, linking the cosmic castastrope of
"Gould's Plane" to the extinction of the dinosaurs via supernovae,
then we've got some local neutron stars to account for (unless
somebody like the Galactics decided to nab them for profit...
him... can anyone say "neutron star production factory"? :-)
Another wicked (though obvious) thought is that maybe it was the
result of some ancient war before even the Old Ones arrived on
the scene and began toying with genetic uplifting. Y'know, we
can't let a recent cosmic catastrophe go by without attaching
some sort of history to it.

Here's a question for you, though: Are there any nearby nebula to
place these neutron stars within or would the gasses have disappated
and formed new stars during the last 65+ million years?


Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 16:22:37 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: neutron stars / cosmic cataclysm

On Thu, 28 Mar 1996, Jim Vassilakos wrote:
> This is a good question, imho, because neutron stars (afaik) are an
> end-state. Once you got one, they don't go away, unless they somehow
> compress down to a black hole via the accretion of matter. The
> problem, of course, is that you need a supernova to make one, which
> are pretty rare, but not so rare (considering galactic time scales)
> that there couldn't have been plenty of them relatively close-by in
> the distant past.

Hmm, aren't there roughly around one supernova a year in our galaxy (but
we only see a few of them)? In that case there ought to have appeared
roughly 10^9 neutron stars, which seems to make them rather common (still
rare, but common enough for a few to exist within our map). 

> So if we go with this notion, linking the cosmic castastrope of
> "Gould's Plane" to the extinction of the dinosaurs via supernovae,
> then we've got some local neutron stars to account for (unless
> somebody like the Galactics decided to nab them for profit...
> him... can anyone say "neutron star production factory"? :-)

...which was shut down due to its environmental impact. :-)

Another possible reason for "Gould's plane" would be some *huge* 
gravitational warping of the galactic disk. Some Galactic project that 
went horribly wrong? 

> Another wicked (though obvious) thought is that maybe it was the
> result of some ancient war before even the Old Ones arrived on
> the scene and began toying with genetic uplifting. Y'know, we
> can't let a recent cosmic catastrophe go by without attaching
> some sort of history to it.

Exactly! Earlier, we discussed the idea that the Galactics had passed down
some "laws" to other civilizations. One of them was that interference in
the natural lifecycle of stars is prohibited. Maybe this huge war or event
was the cause of this law. 

A plot idea: one of the races of the Coalition claims that the law is
irrelevant, and certainly does not appear to conservative stellar
engineering. They want to inject antimatter pellets into the mantle of a
star to mix it a bit, thus prolonging its main-sequence lifetime
significantly and making it brighter (this would simplify terraforming
immensely). Everyone else in the Coalition opposes it, but due to the
structure of the Coalition each race is soverign within its territory, and
there is no actual rule against this. A move is underway to forbid such 
behaviour, but it is stuck in the bureaucracy. And some groups are 
prepared to prevent this project by any means - like hiring some 
"renegade humans" to sabotage it...

> Here's a question for you, though: Are there any nearby nebula to
> place these neutron stars within or would the gasses have disappated
> and formed new stars during the last 65+ million years?

I think there is a good chance they have dissipated, but then, I'm not an 
astrophysicist.


From: Joerg Rhiemeier <rhiemeir@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: neutron stars / cosmic cataclysm
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 96 17:16:37 MET

Anders Sandberg wrote:
> Hmm, aren't there roughly around one supernova a year in our galaxy (but
> we only see a few of them)? In that case there ought to have appeared
> roughly 10^9 neutron stars, which seems to make them rather common (still
> rare, but common enough for a few to exist within our map). 

GURPS Space says it's estimated that there's one supernova going off per
century.  After 10^10 years, this would be 10^8 (i.e., 100 million)
supernova remnants (most of them neutron stars).
 
> Another possible reason for "Gould's plane" would be some *huge* 
> gravitational warping of the galactic disk. Some Galactic project that 
> went horribly wrong? 

Perhaps that weird thing orbiting 51 Pegasi (which I named "Crazy Horse")
has something to do with this?  In some private e-mail communication with
Anders, I speculated about that object being some megaengineering doohickey
set up by some weird supercivilization, for unknown purposes.  That thing
might even be malfunctioning in some way.
 
> A plot idea: one of the races of the Coalition claims that the law is
> irrelevant, and certainly does not appear to conservative stellar
> engineering. They want to inject antimatter pellets into the mantle of a
> star to mix it a bit, thus prolonging its main-sequence lifetime
> significantly and making it brighter (this would simplify terraforming
> immensely).

Such an experiment might backfire nastily.  The Ganymedans in James P. Hogan's
_The Gentle Giants of Ganymede_ tried this.  (They used a different method
to stir up the star, but nevertheless.)  They failed.  The star just
blew up.  Fortunately, they had decided to try it out first at a neighbouring
star before attempting to boost Sol.

> Everyone else in the Coalition opposes it, but due to the
> structure of the Coalition each race is soverign within its territory, and
> there is no actual rule against this. A move is underway to forbid such 
> behaviour, but it is stuck in the bureaucracy. And some groups are 
> prepared to prevent this project by any means - like hiring some 
> "renegade humans" to sabotage it...

Or perhaps the humans are the first to notice... because the star
those buggers use for their experiments is *Sol*...

> > Here's a question for you, though: Are there any nearby nebula to
> > place these neutron stars within or would the gasses have disappated
> > and formed new stars during the last 65+ million years?
> 
> I think there is a good chance they have dissipated,

I also think so.  65 million years are a pretty long time.  Nothing will
be left of that husk.


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv@e2.empirenet.com>
Subject: sfrpg: supernovae, neutron stars, etc.
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 11:19:03 -0800 (PST)

Anders:
> Hmm, aren't there roughly around one supernova a year in our galaxy (but
> we only see a few of them)? In that case there ought to have appeared
> roughly 10^9 neutron stars, which seems to make them rather common (still
> rare, but common enough for a few to exist within our map). 

Joerg:
> GURPS Space says it's estimated that there's one supernova going off per
> century.  After 10^10 years, this would be 10^8 (i.e., 100 million)
> supernova remnants (most of them neutron stars).

Assuming that it's been the same rate for the last 10^10 years. I
imagine that as the galaxy ages, the rate tends to change. In any case,
what are the chances that we'd have detected a nearby (<100ly) neutron
star via radio emissions and whatnot? If it's low, then we can feel
free to play around. If it's high, and there aren't any reported as
being that close, then we have to assume that somebody nabbed 'em and
make up a history to go along with that hypothesis.

Anders:
> Another possible reason for "Gould's plane" would be some *huge* 
> gravitational warping of the galactic disk. Some Galactic project that 
> went horribly wrong? 

Could you dig up some more info on this? I'd like to know more about
how big "Gould's Plane" is, in what way it seems to be misaligned, and
what the current consensus or competing theories are regarding how it
got that way.

Joerg:
> Perhaps that weird thing orbiting 51 Pegasi (which I named "Crazy Horse")
> has something to do with this?

I'm at a complete loss on this one. What's weird about 51 Peg? Did they
detect a brown dwarf or something?

Anders:
> Earlier, we discussed the idea that the Galactics had passed down
> some "laws" to other civilizations. One of them was that interference in
> the natural lifecycle of stars is prohibited. Maybe this huge war or event
> was the cause of this law. 

I was under the impression that the main reason behind the law was that
the Galactics didn't want the low-tech civs (lowteks) from breaking
through the lower tech-ceiling, and that the only way to do this would be
to undertake such a project. In short, it's sort of a like the non-nuclear
proliferation treaty, except the lowteks have no choice but to knuckle-
under for fear that the vastly superior Galactics might step in and
squash them if they violate the "agreement".

Of course, there are other good reason for having such a law, such as
environmental concerns (supernovae do tend to scatter lots of radiation
to neighboring systems). Using them as weapons, however, doesn't seem
all that terribly efficient when you've got things like antimatter
bombs and such. Then again, any ship in the system that goes nova is
likely to be so much space dust after its over, so it seems an
effective way to dispose of large fleets, particularly if they're
in the inner system. Somebody correct me if I'm out of whack on this.


Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 00:19:23 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: supernovae, neutron stars, etc.

On Fri, 29 Mar 1996, Jim Vassilakos wrote:
> Anders:
> > Another possible reason for "Gould's plane" would be some *huge* 
> > gravitational warping of the galactic disk. Some Galactic project that 
> > went horribly wrong? 
> 
> Could you dig up some more info on this? I'd like to know more about
> how big "Gould's Plane" is, in what way it seems to be misaligned, and
> what the current consensus or competing theories are regarding how it
> got that way.

I have mainly read about it in the _Cambridge Atlas of Astronomy_. BTW, 
It is called Gould's Belt. 

On the net I found some references, but I think you have to look in real 
astronomical litterature for the big picture. Some hints and things:

at http://www.aas.org/meetings/aas183/abs/S11602.html I found this:

J. A. Esposito, B. L. Dingus, P. Sreekumar (NASA/GSFC, USRA), D. L.
Bertsch, C. E. Fichtel, R. C. Hartman, S. D. Hunter, D. J. Thompson
(NASA/GSFC), J. R. Mattox (NASA/GSFC, CSC), G. Kanbach, H. A.
Mayer-Hasselwander, C. von Montigny (MPE), Y. C. Lin, P. F. Michelson, P.
L. Nolan (Stanford Univ.), and E. Schneid (Grumman)

The Phase 1 all-sky survey of high energy gamma radiation has been
completed using the Energetic Gamma Ray Experiment Telescope (EGRET)
instrument on the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory (CGRO). This survey is
used for spectral and spatial analysis of the gamma ray emission from the
collection of molecular clouds in the local interstellar medium known as
Gould's Belt. The results of this analysis will be presented. 

This seems to imply an extragalactic origin:

Comersn, F., Torra, J. 
The origin of the Gould Belt by the impact of a high velocity
cloud on the galactic disk, A&A, 281, 35 (1994) 

Comersn,F., Torra, J., Gsmez, A.E. 
The characteristics and origin of the Gould's Belt, Astrophysics
and Space Science, 187, 187 (1991) 

> Joerg:
> > Perhaps that weird thing orbiting 51 Pegasi (which I named "Crazy Horse")
> > has something to do with this?
> 
> I'm at a complete loss on this one. What's weird about 51 Peg? Did they
> detect a brown dwarf or something?

51 Pegasi is orbited by something of 0.41 jovian masses, *very* closely
(orbital period: 4.22 days). If it is a planet, it will be a huge molten
ball. It is too small to be a black hole or neutron star. There is also 
another companion with superjovian mass and a period of around a year, 
which may be a normal star. 

51 Pegasi is just 45 ly away, so it will be within the Coalition. And it
will be within reach for adventurers - let's make it a treat!

> Anders:
> > Earlier, we discussed the idea that the Galactics had passed down
> > some "laws" to other civilizations. One of them was that interference in
> > the natural lifecycle of stars is prohibited. Maybe this huge war or event
> > was the cause of this law. 
> 
> I was under the impression that the main reason behind the law was that
> the Galactics didn't want the low-tech civs (lowteks) from breaking
> through the lower tech-ceiling, and that the only way to do this would be
> to undertake such a project. In short, it's sort of a like the non-nuclear
> proliferation treaty, except the lowteks have no choice but to knuckle-
> under for fear that the vastly superior Galactics might step in and
> squash them if they violate the "agreement".

That could be the main reason. I have another idea too: Joerg and I have
played with the idea that the Main Sequence is really artificial. An alien
race, which we call the Harvesters, control practically all stars and live
*inside* them, in submerged "dyson spheres" around the stellar core (where
they can get maximum energy and minimal communication delays).  Obviously
they are *extremely* advanced and powerful, but have no interest at all in
the interstellar environment except for building new stars. Life based on 
chemistry is just a curious byproduct of their powerhouses, and too 
primitive to deal with. At least as long as they do not mess with the 
stars...

So maybe the Galactics are *everywhere*, but nobody knows this. This 
could be the real reason for the laws.

> Of course, there are other good reason for having such a law, such as
> environmental concerns (supernovae do tend to scatter lots of radiation
> to neighboring systems). Using them as weapons, however, doesn't seem
> all that terribly efficient when you've got things like antimatter
> bombs and such. Then again, any ship in the system that goes nova is
> likely to be so much space dust after its over, so it seems an
> effective way to dispose of large fleets, particularly if they're
> in the inner system. Somebody correct me if I'm out of whack on this.

You are probably right. I think it would be hard to set off a real nova
explosion even using antimatter (you have to cause the collapse of the
core, and that isn't very easy), although a nasty planet-killer flare
could be possible. And it would be too slow to destroy a fleet unless you
could set up things before. 


Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 00:28:04 +0100 (MET)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: neutron stars / cosmic cataclysm

On Fri, 29 Mar 1996, Joerg Rhiemeier wrote:
> GURPS Space says it's estimated that there's one supernova going off per
> century.  After 10^10 years, this would be 10^8 (i.e., 100 million)
> supernova remnants (most of them neutron stars).

Hmm, I think there are around 10^11 stars in our galaxy, so that would 
give us 0.1% neutron stars. There could be plenty of them on the map!

> > A plot idea: one of the races of the Coalition claims that the law is
> > irrelevant, and certainly does not appear to conservative stellar
> > engineering. They want to inject antimatter pellets into the mantle of a
> > star to mix it a bit, thus prolonging its main-sequence lifetime
> > significantly and making it brighter (this would simplify terraforming
> > immensely).
> 
> Such an experiment might backfire nastily.  The Ganymedans in James P. Hogan's
> _The Gentle Giants of Ganymede_ tried this.  (They used a different method
> to stir up the star, but nevertheless.)  They failed.  The star just
> blew up.  Fortunately, they had decided to try it out first at a neighbouring
> star before attempting to boost Sol.

Just goes to show that you should know what you are doing when you 
experiment with something nuclear - just look at Chernobyl and the 
giant's star! :-)

I think that in my scenario the involved race would try it on some older 
star with one or two terraformable planets - if they could freshen it up 
just a bit they would get lots of prime estate. And if they fail, well, 
nobody lived there anyway...

> >	Everyone else in the Coalition opposes it, but due to the
> > structure of the Coalition each race is soverign within its territory, and
> > there is no actual rule against this. A move is underway to forbid such 
> > behaviour, but it is stuck in the bureaucracy. And some groups are 
> > prepared to prevent this project by any means - like hiring some 
> > "renegade humans" to sabotage it...
> 
> Or perhaps the humans are the first to notice... because the star
> those buggers use for their experiments is *Sol*...

Doesn't sound likely, Sol is a rather well-functioning star and not that 
aged. Besides, it might be hard to hide the project.


From: Joerg Rhiemeier <rhiemeir@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: neutron stars / cosmic cataclysm
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 96 13:18:09 MET DST

Tony L. Hayes wrote:
[...]
> If the region of space in which the SN occurs has a high density of gases
> already, then the SN may trigger new star formation along its shock
> front (ala Vela).  As for nearby objects, I immediately think of the
> Crab Nebula.  I don't remember its exact distance but I know its
> fairly close (it was visible after all to the naked eye when it exploded).

Sorry, but the SN which produced the crab nebula is historically accounted
for.  Its light reached Earth in 1154 or something like that.

After all, the SN theory regarding extinction of dinos is considered
obsolete by now.  It is now assumed that it was a comet impact.
The remnants of the crater have already been found (Chixculub, Yucatan).
So much on the SN 65 million years ago.


From: "Tony L. Hayes" <tlh@epsilon.com>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: neutron stars / cosmic cataclysm
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 08:25:04 -0500 (EST)

Joerg Rhiemeier writes ->
> Tony L. Hayes wrote:
> [...]
> > If the region of space in which the SN occurs has a high density of gases
> > already, then the SN may trigger new star formation along its shock
> > front (ala Vela).  As for nearby objects, I immediately think of the
> > Crab Nebula.  I don't remember its exact distance but I know its
> > fairly close (it was visible after all to the naked eye when it exploded).
> 
> Sorry, but the SN which produced the crab nebula is historically accounted
> for.  Its light reached Earth in 1154 or something like that.

It reached Earth in 1024 I believe.  My point is, it was visible to earth
so, perhaps, it is fairly close.  My astro books are mostly still packed
away so I don't have access to a book with the exact distance.

> After all, the SN theory regarding extinction of dinos is considered
> obsolete by now.  It is now assumed that it was a comet impact.
> The remnants of the crater have already been found (Chixculub, Yucatan).
> So much on the SN 65 million years ago.
 
I wasn't searching or a source for Dinosaur extinction, I was looking
for a nearby SN (relatively nearby), so now I'm confused.  What
do the two have to do with each other?  Did I misread the original
post?


Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 21:45:09 -0800
From: llvogel@teleport.com (Laura L. and Allan Hayes Vogel)
Subject: Re: sfrpg: neutron stars / cosmic cataclysm

First Joerg, then Tony, said:
>> After all, the SN theory regarding extinction of dinos is considered
>> obsolete by now.  It is now assumed that it was a comet impact.
>> The remnants of the crater have already been found (Chixculub, Yucatan).
>> So much on the SN 65 million years ago.
>I wasn't searching or a source for Dinosaur extinction, I was looking
>for a nearby SN (relatively nearby), so now I'm confused.  What
>do the two have to do with each other?  Did I misread the original
>post?

I liked the supernova theory myself, but there's far too much evidence for
the asteroid strike in the Yucatan including fossil tsunami signs in Haiti
and east Texas (limestone blocks the size of a lecture hall being ripped up
and tossed around like children's toy blocks; VW bug size in east Texas -
farther away). The geologists have also found two, much smaller, extinction
events linked to Ir layers - one at the end of the Eocene, I forget the
timing of the other one.

The original post on this topic suggested a supernova as an alternative
explanation to the K/T extinction event. I just got back from vacation and
was reading my e-mail when I saw it. Joerg updated the science info on that
event first, but I would have also. However, in the April 1996 Scientific
American, p. 20 in the US edition, there's a new proposed stellar
extinction mechanism that's worth including in the game IMHO - neutrino
flood from a "silent stellar collapse". It's probably has a much lower
frequency of occurrence than the proposed one (like maybe once in 600
million years or longer - there's only one big mass extinction event in
Earth's history without a good  known mechanism), but still worth playing
with. (If you want the specific geological date of the event with an
unknown cause, I can look it up for you in a day or so.)


Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 11:29:02 +0200
From: Joerg Rhiemeier <rhiemeir@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Subject: sfrpg: Apparent lack of neutron stars - solved

We have been discussing the point that, with one supernova going off per
century, we'd have 10^8 neutron stars around in the galaxy, which is
far more than observed - there would have to be a few hundreds of them
within 100 lightyears.

This morning, I browsed through Science magazine and found an article on
page 1372 (March 3, 1996) which addressed exactly that issue.
To put it short: Neutron stars glow out and become inactive after about
3 million years.  Older neutron stars are just dark chunks of neutronium,
undetectable by 20th-century astronomy.

This leaves us with about 30000 visible neutron stars, which is more
consistent with the observed data.  The vast majority of neutron stars
remain unseen.


Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 11:43:26 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: sfrpg: Apparent lack of neutron stars - solved

On Tue, 2 Apr 1996, Joerg Rhiemeier wrote:
> This morning, I browsed through Science magazine and found an article on
> page 1372 (March 3, 1996) which addressed exactly that issue.
> To put it short: Neutron stars glow out and become inactive after about
> 3 million years.  Older neutron stars are just dark chunks of neutronium,
> undetectable by 20th-century astronomy.

Ah, interesting! That gives us a lot of leeway in placing a suitable 
number of neutron stars on the map. 

Neutron stars are obvious navigational hazards (imagine running into 
their small but intense gravity fields at FTL speeds - ouch!), but I 
assume the gravity technology of the Coalition has managed to map most of 
them (or else they have found them the hard way). The question is: what 
other uses are there for them? I assume there is very little energy 
resources near burnt-out neutron stars, although some may have planets 
with interesting isotopes. 


From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
Subject: Re: Near Star Data
To: jimv@cs.UCR.EDU (james vassilakos)
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 09:33:43 +0200 (MET DST)

  Book recommendation relevant to your old article 'SF Genres / Fermi /
World Building': 'Engines of god' by Jack McDevitt. 

  *Why* it is relevant is a central spoiler about the book:), but IMHO its
well on the level of Hogans early 'Giants' novels, and Clarke's 'Rama'.

[Note from jimv: I asked Bertil for the spoiler since I was too lazy to
ready the book. He wrote back: "Ok, parties unknown send out pattern-
searching (i.e. looks for planets with large patterns like cities etc)
civilization busters resonably masked as natural phenomena (small thick
clouds, or thin comets) in waves with 8000-year separation." Sounds alot
like the Berzerker idea he had back in Sept-94, only sneakier.]


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv@e2.empirenet.com>
Subject: sfrpg: muchos apologies yet again...
Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 16:59:17 -0700 (PDT)

Well, I hate to admit it, but I let myself get sidetracked again.
This time it was a sector generator/viewer for Traveller. It was
calling out to me: "Jim, write me... you know you want to." And
it was right, I did want to. In any case, I'm now free to pursue
over things (like the SFRPG we've all supposedly been working on).

In any case, on the off-chance that some of you are remotely
interested in a Traveller sector-generator, here's the run down:

   *  Allows you to randomly generate sectors via both the
      traditional method and a variant method which has its roots
      in a Traveller Mailing List discussion dating back to 1993
      (included with the online help). You can also display the
      maps, of course, and it translates into English the UWP
      code of whatever world your "cursor" is on so you don't
      have to sit there with the book open.

   *  Keeps campaign notes in text files which can be accessed
      directly from the subsector map. The maps all mesh
      seemlessly, and access to your campaign notes is a single
      keystroke away. You can even organize your notes under a
      system of menus if you want to keep them organized.

   *  Thirteen of the Classic Traveller sectors are included
      along with a variant universe sector which I've just
      started to create (the Classic sectors came from the
      Sunbane ftp archive). All the sectors come complete with
      jump routes, incidentally, and several world write-ups by
      Rob Dean are also included with the Spinward Marches
      sector.

   *  Lots of online help. You don't even have to know much about
      Traveller in order to use this program. Basically, it was
      designed both for long-time players as well as for people
      who are curious about the game and are thinking of "getting
      into it."

   *  Built for DOS but, of course, also runs under Windows. You
      must have at least VGA graphics capability and over two
      megs of free diskspace.

   WARNING:   You must use "-d" option when unzipping:

      >>>>>>>>    pkunzip -d gal20.zip    <<<<<<<<

   Available Now:  http://www.cs.ucr.edu/~jimv/
   (go to the programs section and look around)

Let me know if you have any trouble getting the program. I'll
arrange for alternate distribution methods in the next day or
two.

As for those of you who don't really give a damn, just think
of this little critter as a two-dimensional prelude to the
mapping program that I hope to get revised sometime soonish
for the SFRPG setting that we've been slowly but surely
hammering out. I just wanted to send this little note up the
pipe to let you know that I haven't given up on the project.
And I'll try not to let myself get sidetracked anymore,
though you know how that is...  :-(


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv>
Subject: SF-RPG: Comments on the Premise
Date: Sat, 11 May 1996 23:20:23 -0700 (PDT)

Hi folks. Just before releasing that Traveller Sector Viewer I
mentioned a few days ago, I was contacted by Jo Grant (formerly
Jo Jaquinta?) (Jo_Grant/DUB/Lotus.LOTUSINT@crd.lotus.com), who
has also been involved in various Traveller-related freeware
and who most recently programmed the CHVIEW 3d-starmap viewer
(the same one that Ben Lin was doing the star data files for).
Anyway, we got to talking, and I mentioned the SF-RPG project
that we've been sporadically discussing for the past several
months, and offered to send Jo the latest version of the
premise. Anyway, the version I eventually sent had some
modifications based on the comments I received from you folks.

The first was that the date for human uplifting was set at about
30,000 years ago (not the -10000 years of the earlier version).
As I mentioned before, the reason for the -10,000 years date
was that -10000 was about the date of the development of
agriculture. However, if I recall correctly, Anders wanted to
take the date back all the way to -100,000 (tool use). I figured
that -30,000 (first cave-paintings) might be a good compromise.

The other difference was that in the old version of the premise,
Earth sustained heavier damage from the Ikkadju attack. I figured
that we wouldn't have much of a chance, and that having developed
from carnivore stock, they would be decent warriors. Tony, however,
argued against Earth being practically reduced to a charred cinder.

He wrote:
> I guess I'm not fond of the idea of Earth being essentially trashed
> and Humans as outcasts.  Where is the incentive to be Human?  You have
> no homeworld, you are a minor race, you don't really have any allies,
> you have no assured port to repair or refit your ships, you may not
> even have access to the same level of tech as the other races.

My initial feeling was, "Yeah, so what? It's supposed to be a grim
setting. It's supposed to be dark, dangerous, and forbidding." However,
the more I thought about it, the more I figured that maybe he was
right. Maybe the humans should get a fighting chance. Maybe it would
make the game more interesting. So I softed the premise just a tad,
and maybe I should soften it even further. Or maybe I should just
go the other way and say that the attack was a total victory on the
part of the Ikkadju and that there are no survivors on Earth (only
those who are already in space are left to continue the race). That
was my initial idea, and it still holds a certain romantic quality,
the players knowing that they are among a small handful of survivors
(no more than a few thousand, anyway, each on various patrol ships
or deep space stations).

So I asked Jo (who has been temporarily added to our list) about
this, just to get some more input. These are the comments I found
in my mailbox about three days later.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Yo Jim,
  My comments on your Premise.
  Firstly, there are a few rules to my philosophy. 1: "No one
is special." 2: "No one is altruistic." So my comments are
mainly slanted at fixing these "problems" in your premise.

  As for start-date, I would pick -100,000 to -300,000. That
is biologically significant. -30,000 is a wee bit late. There
are consistant records before and after that of progressive
development. Also, just because the cave paintings _we_ know
about now only go back that far doesn't mean that next year
they won't discover more...
  Biologically, other alien intelligences are bound to be
millions of years either ahead of behind us. I'd make the
Old Ones out as the ones who just happened to get there first
in the Galaxy.
  Why did God create man? Some say to be worshiped. Some say
to see what would happen. Some say for someone to talk to.
You can look at it like this:
  God sat there omnipotent and all that. But existance was
pretty dull. When you can calculate the spin on every electron
in the galaxy, that doesn't leave much for entertainment.
So God decides that having some other intelligences around
would liven things up a bit. So the angels are created. However
they just do what god wants. Like robots running on a program.
So, well, God tries again and creates humanity. The vital
difference is that they have "free will". That level of
uncertainty makes the difference between an orbital function
and a chaotic attractor (if you follow the mathematical
reference).
  So what does this metaphysical argument have to do with
all this? Well, these Old Ones are in the position of
being the sole inhabitants of the Galaxy. I wouldn't think
the notion of "making friends" would mean much. If you haven't
anyone to relate to, it is unlikely you would develop the
concept.
  Say, though, they had pets. Sometimes strange and exotic
pets from the worlds of the Galaxy. It might occur to them
to "educate" their pets so they might be more amusing.
Today we use different specialised breeds of animals to
perform different tasks. Alternatively the Old Ones may
have bred species on different worlds for collective tasks.
Anything from mining useful rocks to building starships.
(Seen Stargate?)
  How does your dog see you? Master? Pack leader? One to be
doted upon and every whim followed? An object that it very
much wishes to please? How does your cat see you? Horses?
Cattle? Any domesticated animal? These are probably the
variety of perceptions that the Child Races hold. [As DM
you might pick an Earth domestic animal to use as a "role
model" for trying to work out perceptions.]
  Say there were a number of "hunting dog" type races.
Perhaps Old Ones would fight them in arenas ranging from
football fields to worlds to solar systems. Perhaps they
hunt with them against other "fox" type races. Depending
on the nature of the "hunt" these could only use sharpened
sticks or have the power to destroy whole planets.
  A rebellion seems to me a bit unlikely. Creatures bred
for fighting very seldom get on together. Perhaps more
likely the Old Ones, sinking toward decadance in their
search for diversion, begin the "ultimate hunt", that
of hunting each other. Another possibility is that they
create their own destruction. They create a number of
races that are hell bent on destroying the Old Ones
themselves (like modern biological weapons). Maybe there
was a political dispute between factions of Old Ones.
[Maybe they were _quite_ like humans!]
  Take your pick. The ultimate result is that there is a
lack of Old Ones. What happens when humans desert a place
and leave their domesticated animals? Some die from lack
of attention (camels can't breed without human intervention).
Others go feral.
  The hunter-types might whittle each other down at the
begining. They would be unlikely to attack others, as
they aren't what they would consider a threat or enemies.
After a period of rapidly changing chaos there would be
a sort of calm uneasiness. This would be your modern era
of The Coalition.
  I would conjecture that the Old Ones "uplifted" races
pretty much at whim. Sort of "lets bump their IQ, leave them
for a bit, then see what they might be good for". So in
the Coalition era you will have the established "domesticated"
races and then the "emerging" races. The domesticated
still have behavioural patters originally fashioned by
The Old Ones whereas the emerging races are, for them,
strange and unpredictable. Some of the Coalition races will
have established ways of dealing with each other (as sheep
and sheep dogs do). Others will really find it quite difficult
to understand each other (plow horses and mice hunters).
  All are likely to regognise that the emerging races are
likely to be the greatest source of instability amongst
them. You might classify the ways of dealing with them
in three categories:
  1) Recognition and independance. The emerging race is
acknowledged as a independant member of The Coalition. They
can then interact and work with the galactic community.
  2) Adsorbtion. The emerging race is adsorbed into another
race or polity's domain. They are then subject to whatever
way that polity works.
  3) Destruction. This can be taken as a special case of (2).
Basically they are absorbed and destroyed. Assets are liquidated
and given to the agreed polity. This may also be an option
where no one can agree what should be done with them.

So, reworking your history...

  The Coalition is aware that the Old Ones uplifted a race
on Earth/Sol. It is closest to the borders of the Harafu
and Ikkadju. Thus, they are the main ones in consideration
for determing its fate.
  Lets consider the Harafu as a "ferret" role model. They
had an accelerated predeliction for mining and resource
recovery on marginal worlds. Terraformation, ecosystem
engineering and mining would be their specialties. They
are fairly secure in the Galactic ecology as they can fit
into niches that others do not necessarily want.
  Say the Ikkadju were developed for aereal sport ("hunting
hawk" role model). Either flying in the air of "garden
worlds" or flying ships through gas giants, they were used
for challange, sport, and depending on your chosen end
game, warfare. As one of the hunters they were most likely
caught up in post Old One conflicts. Currently they are
not in a terribly secure position and frequently have
skirmishes along their borders. Consequently they are
nervous of _any_ emerging culture nearby and may not
have decided if they see humanity as other hunters or
not.
  So, the Ikkadju threaten and posture a lot over the developing
course of the Solians whereas the Harafu are more interested
in collecting factual data that often disproves the more
wild claims of the Ikkadju.
  You have your accidental first contact. The Harafu's
objectives of this are to curry favour with the Solians
(which they probably fail to see as being as balkanised
as they are). The humans don't really care that much
about Intergalactic politics (as it is almost certainly
beyond each government's lifetime) and are more interested
in wheedling technology secrets out of the aliens.
  Thus you have the embarassing situation where the Harafu
pass on technological know-how in order to help the Solians
improve their eco-system and the Solians just keep using it
for selfpromotion and warfare.
  The "secret" spreads through successful intelligence efforts
by the superpowers. They, effectively, blackmail the Harafu
into giving them equal knowledge by threatening to broadcast
to the galaxy their intervention.
  The arms race escalates into a space race as the nations of
humanity struggle for pre-emenance in what they can see will
become a representation in a galactic arena. All at the expense
of Earth's neglected ecosystem. Eventually they break out of
their egg-shell and create fleets of FTL ships. Knowing no one
else they establish "official" releations with the Harafu.
  Of course it is each nation of earth separately doing so,
but the Harafu don't really understand this. Since they are
now "emerged" there is no restriction on what technology can
be traded. Free of the blackmail threat they attempt to hold
back on pure military science and instead try to give mainly
eco-technical information.
  The Ikkadju, of course, are having conuptions by now. Infuriated
and paranoid they scream of violations of codes of conduct but,
as usual have no proof. Eventually one of the nations of Earth
who was not originally contacted by the Hafaru gets FTL second
hand from another nation. They contact the _Ikkadju_ in hopes of
getting preferential treatment and playing the Galactic politics
in their favour. The Ikkadju are incredulous at this blatant
evidence of long-term Hafaru corruption and parade them before
Coalition committees and so forth. No one really wants to deal
with the situation so in the absence of action the Ikkadju take
things into their own hands and decide to deal with humanity
themselves.
  The assult does tremendous damage to Earth. The fleets built
by Earth are, actually, rather larger then they expected since
Earth was acting as several nations each of which wanted a piece
of the action, rather than a organised and unified whole. Earth
_is_ on the fringe of their space where line of supply is dangerous.
Once they started the other attack the skirmishing along the
Ikkadju's other borders flared up. Assuming that they had put
them in their place for the short term they have halted the assult
and are now vigourously defending their other borders.

  So, the current situation is that the Earth is in a pretty bad
shape. The Harafu are doubtless involved trying to help these
bloody-minded self-destructive creatures get back on their feet.
Now that everything is out in the open and the military industrial
complex of Earth is shattered the Harafu can much more effectively
enforce only passing in peaceful tech.
  The fleets of Earth have been more scattered than destroyed.
However the modest Harafu fleet blocades the Sol system and
enforces it as a non-military zone.
  So, the main arena for role-playing action is in the dispersed
fleets of Earth. They can't go home, they have to go on. There
are many opportunities in the galaxy at large. Their ships are
not the best, but they can still contribute to a conflict. Other
races probably have no qualms about hiring them as mercenaries.
One "campaign drive" would thus be finding jobs and improving
their ships.
  Most domesticated races would view them as curiousities. Or
parade them in political circles should they wish to make certain
points (like annoying the Ikkadju).
  Other emerging races may see them as brothers in spirit and
be more favourable toward them. This gives the prospect of
unlooked for friends.

  I have other ideas of alternate approaches but I must get
to bed right now...

  Cheers for now,
      Jo
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

This was actually much more than I was expecting, and in the hope
of giving the ideas a fair hearing, I figured I'd better forward
them to you guys to see if we can't get some discussion going.
Like I said, Jo is on the list for the next few days, so any
replies sent to the list address will be automagically forwarded.

jimv@empirenet.com   (my address)
jimv2@empirenet.com  (sfrpg list address)


From: Jo Grant/DUB/Lotus <Jo_Grant/DUB/Lotus.LOTUSINT@crd.lotus.com>
Date: 12 May 96 23:12:34 EDT
Subject: SF-RPG Premise -- take 2

  I proposed two "golden rules" in my previous take on
this SF premise. For this lets just throw these out the
window and take a sillier approach.

  We are going to assume that humanity _is_ special.
They really are much more violent than anything else
the universe has experienced. I don't buy this "humanity
had never really occupied a specific ecologic niche".
However as a "wave your hands in the air" reason it
doesn't really matter.
  This does, however, require cleaning up certain
inconsistancies in the premise background. For example
these non-violent, peaceful enabled child races managed
to conduct a war "which, within several years, had
utterly wiped out the Old Ones", is not really tenable
if we accept that humanity as we know it is the pinnacle
of voracious rapaciousness.
  Violence, for these child races, is something fairly
alien. Conflict, is not. Two cars that want to cross
a one-way bridge at the same time is conflict. You can't
avoid conflict. How you solve it, though, is different.
Persumably then these Child races are much more likely
to resolve conflict without resorting to violence.
  Discussion, pursuasion, and group encounter sessions
are possibilities. And, if all of these don't resolve
things, they might, after spending a lot of time really
working themselves up to it, conduct an act of potential
harm to make their point. After which, of course, they
need to recover with many cups of tea or profound
apologies (should their couterpart survive).
  Consequently the obliteration of the Old Ones took a
long time to work up to and probably was really quite
traumatic for all concerned (especially the Old Ones).
  It is also implied that these peaceful types had
"modern warships". How do we explain this? Well, if you
look at the animal world, there is frequent conflict.
Over territory, over food, over dominance. However, very
seldom does this actually lead to _actual_ violence.
Usually the condenders square off, threaten like mad,
establish who is really weaker, and then crow triumphantly
while the other slinks off.
  When two nations of the Child Races have a "war" their
fleets probably parade about before one another. Displaying
what they have and what they are capable of. Shots fired
above bows, minor skirmishes to establish the effectiveness
of each of their designs and so forth. Assuming that it is
clear from all this who would win the day if a battle had
been fought, the losing side would sigh and negotiate terms.

  Naturally when these civilized warriors see humanity,
who even when faced with clearly superior odds, have the
attidute of "damn the torpedoes", they would be filled with
disquiet and alarm.
  The Hafaru probably had great pity for humanity. They
would be curious to find what it was about their, persumably,
harsh environment that would make them into such ravening,
uncooth, monsters.
  Humanity just frightens the willies out of the Ikkadju.
Perhaps they played a bigger part in the obliteration of
the Old Ones then they could psycologically handle. This
has left them slightly unbalanced and over reactive when
it comes to violence.

  So the Hafaru research ship gets shot down and they
decide to try to make the best of things. They are going
to try to _help_ these poor creatures. And damn the
Coalition! Well, not quite damn them, but they are sure
they would understand if they could explain it all, and,
well, if they have some positive results before they
have to explain it, so much the better for everyone.
  Reasoning that it is because of their primitive
technology and latent feelings of guild for what they
have done to the environment that they are so screwed
up. So they pass on to them this vital information for
their own good. Naturally they expect that humanity
will be greatful for being lead out of their self destructive
tendencies and embrace the galactic community through
the Hafaru.
  As humanity progress more and more rapidly toward space
the Ikkadju have absolute comniptions. They move their
battle fleets around in distress to emphasise their points.
This is double-plus ungood!
  Earth begins to get some inkling of galactic politics.
They also work out that these Hafaru are a bit of a push-over.
The Ikkadju sound like they have a bit more back-bone but
if you are a third world country and you don't want to be
exploited it is better to ally with the liberal pansies.
  So, once NATO build their fleet they leap into space and
declare their undying loyalty to the Hafaru. The Hafaru are,
naturally enough, quite pleased with themselves, and explain
that their benevolent guidence had cured humanity of their
violence.
  The Ikkadju throw a complete wobbly. They march their
fleets up and down and indicate that they are really not
pleased. Humanity uses this as an excuse to gain weapons
technology and arm their FTL fleet to the nines.
  The Coalition are really quite flummoxed by the whole
thing. Many races just want to have a quiet lie-down somewhere
and hope the whole things blows over. Others try to urge
peace and calm to the increasingly distressed Ikkadju. The
Hafaru are just rather smug and say that there is nothing
to worry about.
  Eventually the tension becomes too much for the Ikkadju.
They decide that humanity must be put in their place. They
march their battle fleet right up to the Earth system. They
maneuver up and down and blow large craters in the Moon just
to show them what they could do, if they really wanted to.
  Humanity quickly marshals their ships in defense. They can
see that they are quite outnumbered and outgunned. The only
thing they can do, from their point of view, is strike attack
as quickly as possible and sell each one of their lives as
dearly as possible to preserve as much of Earth as they can.
  When Humanity stars actually opening fire on the Ikkadju
they are really quite shocked. They have clearly demonstrated
their superiority but the silly little creatures have attacked
anyway. They blow some more holes in the Moon in case they
didn't get it the first time. When it becomes clear that they
did get it but didn't care they are forced to actually fire
on their vessels. Many Earth ships are destroyed. Many Ikkadju,
who can't quite bring themselves to fire, also are destroyed.
They are so upset that they bombard earth for a bit as well.
Eventually they are consumed by the horror of what they have
done and flee home to drink many cups of tea.

  As the original premise states "The player characters are
probably military personnel who were either involved in the
Battle of Earth or were out on scouting missions and border
defense when it happened." Earth is largely destroyed. The
remanants will revert to barbarism unless something can be
done.
  The Coalition members are really quite unsettled by the
matter. They can only see the Solians as ravening barbarians.
The Hafaru stock market crashes. The players will be in the
position of being rather heavily outgunned but also able,
through their violent psycology, to conduct the most amazing
bluffs.
  Weather they decide to conduct revenge as the Galactic
Bully Boys or to become Saviors Of The Earth through coercing
aid is up to the campaign development.
  [You might read Clones In Space, a Paranoia adventure that
features some aliens who want to "Ravage Earth Women! (If
they don't mind too much?)".]


Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 15:39:01 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: SF-RPG: Comments on the Premise

On Sat, 11 May 1996, Jim Vassilakos wrote:
> The other difference was that in the old version of the premise,
> Earth sustained heavier damage from the Ikkadju attack. I figured
> that we wouldn't have much of a chance, and that having developed
> from carnivore stock, they would be decent warriors. Tony, however,
> argued against Earth being practically reduced to a charred cinder.

Well, as I saw the premise, the Earth was in a bad shape, but not 
completely devastated. Maybe North America, Europe and East Asia are 
radioactive deserts, the climate is quite unstable, a few billion people 
died and so on. The ecosystem *can* be saved, if proper means are 
applied, but there is a certain risk that things could get fouled up. 

>   Biologically, other alien intelligences are bound to be
> millions of years either ahead of behind us. I'd make the
> Old Ones out as the ones who just happened to get there first
> in the Galaxy.

Personally I think it is better to just say they were the dominant group
in this region since a very long time back. I like the idea of having
rumors about even more powerful beings out there somewhere... 

>   Say, though, they had pets. Sometimes strange and exotic
> pets from the worlds of the Galaxy. It might occur to them
> to "educate" their pets so they might be more amusing.
> Today we use different specialised breeds of animals to
> perform different tasks. Alternatively the Old Ones may
> have bred species on different worlds for collective tasks.
> Anything from mining useful rocks to building starships.

I think this could be a partial explanation. I don't think we should try
too hard to define their intentions, since they were most probably rather
alien. In the Coalition History I wrote, I assumed the Old Ones uplifted
races to satisfy their philosophical curiosity (how would the new beings
view the universe?). This could be combined with the "pet" model - humans
have pets intended to be beautiful or cute, the Old Ones uplifted pet
races to do various tasks and be philosophically interesting. 

>   A rebellion seems to me a bit unlikely. Creatures bred
> for fighting very seldom get on together. Perhaps more
> likely the Old Ones, sinking toward decadance in their
> search for diversion, begin the "ultimate hunt", that
> of hunting each other. Another possibility is that they
> create their own destruction. They create a number of
> races that are hell bent on destroying the Old Ones
> themselves (like modern biological weapons). Maybe there
> was a political dispute between factions of Old Ones.

As I saw it, the Old Ones fell maily due to their own complacency - they 
knew they were the most advanced beings, kept their pet races under 
strict control and had the best technology. Unfortunately for them the 
other races didn't like it, some of their servant races helped the others 
communicate with each other, the "pets" began to do things on their own, 
they didn't obey the Old Ones, and then the situation began to slide...

I really don't like the idea of old races being decadent in any human 
sense (it stinks of space opera). Old races are probably very static - 
they have done everything, they have found a society that works well 
enough, their technology fits them. Killing others for a sport is just 
decadent from a human perspective, and might occur in young races too. 

The reason old races eventually die out is their inability to adapt.

>   Take your pick. The ultimate result is that there is a
> lack of Old Ones. What happens when humans desert a place
> and leave their domesticated animals? Some die from lack
> of attention (camels can't breed without human intervention).
> Others go feral.
>   The hunter-types might whittle each other down at the
> begining. They would be unlikely to attack others, as
> they aren't what they would consider a threat or enemies.
> After a period of rapidly changing chaos there would be
> a sort of calm uneasiness. This would be your modern era
> of The Coalition.

This fits what I have written quite well. Maybe I should repost the history?

>   I would conjecture that the Old Ones "uplifted" races
> pretty much at whim. Sort of "lets bump their IQ, leave them
> for a bit, then see what they might be good for". So in
> the Coalition era you will have the established "domesticated"
> races and then the "emerging" races. The domesticated
> still have behavioural patters originally fashioned by
> The Old Ones whereas the emerging races are, for them,
> strange and unpredictable.

Sounds like a good idea, I like this scenario.


Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 15:52:32 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: SF-RPG Premise -- take 2

On 12 May 1996, Jo Grant/DUB/Lotus wrote:
>   I proposed two "golden rules" in my previous take on
> this SF premise. For this lets just throw these out the
> window and take a sillier approach.
>
>   We are going to assume that humanity _is_ special.
> They really are much more violent than anything else
> the universe has experienced. I don't buy this "humanity
> had never really occupied a specific ecologic niche".
> However as a "wave your hands in the air" reason it
> doesn't really matter.

Well, I don't like to define humanity as the most violent beings in the
universe, but I think they really are much more violent than the other
Coalition races. It is a bit unlikely that evolution wouldn't make other
species violent, even with Old Ones interfering. On the other hand, the
races that were too violent got wiped out (either they nuked themselves
before getting spaceflight, or they got killed in the War). The rest have 
socialized themselves, and now prefer calm conflicts as you describe.

Humans are special because they survived against all expectations - the 
Hafaru interference and technological boost almost caused total 
destruction, but mostly out of sheer luck humanity survived - leaving it 
a very unique and unbalanced race. 

>   When two nations of the Child Races have a "war" their
> fleets probably parade about before one another. Displaying
> what they have and what they are capable of. Shots fired
> above bows, minor skirmishes to establish the effectiveness
> of each of their designs and so forth. Assuming that it is
> clear from all this who would win the day if a battle had
> been fought, the losing side would sigh and negotiate terms.

"We can't win against the Mothers, their quantum computers can outsmart 
any of our algorithms. But we have a good model of the Gool strategy, and 
if we can convince them to strike, we can mediate."

>   The Hafaru probably had great pity for humanity. They
> would be curious to find what it was about their, persumably,
> harsh environment that would make them into such ravening,
> uncooth, monsters.

I prefer my own cynical approach: ravening, uncooth monsters are very 
useful tools for certain applications. The Hafaru are preparing for what 
happens when the Coalition breaks down (which they believe will happen 
soon), and they want to have ravening monsters doing their dirty work in 
exchange for technology. And yes, it might be humanitarian (hafarian?) to 
save them too. Who said you couldn't do good while being machiavellian? 
Too bad the Hafaru aren't that good at it...

[Very funny scenario described and deleted for brevity]

I think this fits in with what we said earlier, although it is yet 
another angle on it. Something I feel we need is some kind of archive or 
website to place what we have written for easy reference, so that we do 
not reinvent the wheel too often. 


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv@e2.empirenet.com>
Subject: sfrpg: administrivia
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 10:59:48 -0700 (PDT)

Anders sez: 
> Something I feel we need is some kind of archive or 
> website to place what we have written for easy reference, so that we do 
> not reinvent the wheel too often. 

I've got entire discussion logged (it's only about a 1.5 megs or so).
Give me some time, and I'll make this available to everyone.


From: Jim Vassilakos <jimv>
Subject: Re: SF-RPG Premise -- take 2
Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 11:33:00 -0700 (PDT)

Jo Grant:
> I don't buy this "humanity
> had never really occupied a specific ecologic niche".

Well, we are omnivores, after all. That, in itself, makes our
eco-niche pretty wide. How would things have been different if
we were solely veggies or carnevores? Considering that many
of the Coalition races are likely to be on one extreme or
the other, it's probably with some consideration.

Anders:
> Well, I don't like to define humanity as the most violent beings in the
> universe, but I think they really are much more violent than the other
> Coalition races. It is a bit unlikely that evolution wouldn't make other
> species violent, even with Old Ones interfering. On the other hand, the
> races that were too violent got wiped out (either they nuked themselves
> before getting spaceflight, or they got killed in the War). The rest have 
> socialized themselves, and now prefer calm conflicts as you describe.

I recently got to talking with yet another netter about this topic.
Joseph Gill (snowgen@wf.net), who I've just added to our list, writes:

> The section "A Dangerous Savage Child-Race" almost gives the impression
> that warfare was a strictly human vice, which left me confused in "The
> Great War" to find the other child-races resorting to warfare...

A good observation and succinctly put. I think a good chunk of Jo Grant's
comments stem from this, which is why in the "silly" version of the
history, the Ikkadju aren't so much warlike as posturing. A funny as it
is, though, I can't see going that way, because it would completely
change the mood from gritty, high-stakes, future-of-humanity to a
comic tragedy where humanity is victimized due to a case of
miscommunication (and how long can a GM really hold this up?).
The "silly" history would make a good premise for Douglas Adams'
next novel, but as an RPG premise, I doubt it would wash.

Jo Grant:
> The Hafaru probably had great pity for humanity. They
> would be curious to find what it was about their, persumably,
> harsh environment that would make them into such ravening,
> uncooth, monsters.

Anders:
> I prefer my own cynical approach: ravening, uncooth monsters are very 
> useful tools for certain applications. The Hafaru are preparing for what 
> happens when the Coalition breaks down (which they believe will happen 
> soon),

Hmm... I don't remember if this was discussed earlier, but what reasons
do you have in mind?

> and they want to have ravening monsters doing their dirty work in 
> exchange for technology. And yes, it might be humanitarian (hafarian?) to 
> save them too. Who said you couldn't do good while being machiavellian? 
> Too bad the Hafaru aren't that good at it...

Yeah, I don't mind some beings being very generous toward humanity for
various psychological or historical reasons, but we shouldn't miss the
opportunity to have a "false-friend" type of race, and the Hafaru are
certainly in the right position to play this role.

> I think this fits in with what we said earlier, although it is yet 
> another angle on it. Something I feel we need is some kind of archive or 
> website to place what we have written for easy reference, so that we do 
> not reinvent the wheel too often. 
 
Incidentally, does anyone have a nice chunk of anonymous ftp space they'd
be willing to lend for this?


Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 21:00:00 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Anders Sandberg <nv91-asa@nada.kth.se>
Subject: Re: SF-RPG Premise -- take 2

On Tue, 14 May 1996, Jim Vassilakos wrote:
> Well, we are omnivores, after all. That, in itself, makes our
> eco-niche pretty wide. How would things have been different if
> we were solely veggies or carnevores? Considering that many
> of the Coalition races are likely to be on one extreme or
> the other, it's probably with some consideration.

Remember that most animals are not exclusively predators or herbivores; 
sheep really like to eat young birds if they can find their nests (they 
eat the eggs too, probably they want the calcium), while cats sometimes 
like to nibble on plants (perhaps more a psychological need). The 
Ikkaddju might be predators, but they still like the Sharri-fruits 
(tastes almost like Jii-larvae!). 

> I recently got to talking with yet another netter about this topic.
> Joseph Gill (snowgen@wf.net), who I've just added to our list, writes:
> 
> > The section "A Dangerous Savage Child-Race" almost gives the impression
> > that warfare was a strictly human vice, which left me confused in "The
> > Great War" to find the other child-races resorting to warfare...
> 
> A good observation and succinctly put. I think a good chunk of Jo Grant's
> comments stem from this, which is why in the "silly" version of the
> history, the Ikkadju aren't so much warlike as posturing. A funny as it
> is, though, I can't see going that way, because it would completely
> change the mood from gritty, high-stakes, future-of-humanity to a
> comic tragedy where humanity is victimized due to a case of
> miscommunication (and how long can a GM really hold this up?).
> The "silly" history would make a good premise for Douglas Adams'
> next novel, but as an RPG premise, I doubt it would wash.

Yes, I agree. But on the other hand, some elements of it are useful (just 
because the world is gritty doesn't mean there is no humor - but it is 
black irony rather than silliness). In my half-finished writeup of the 
Ikkadju I have assumed the war partially was due more to media politics 
and lifestyle rather than an actual will to destroy humanity - the 
Ikkadju had to get Lebensraum, they had huge expectations on getting 
Earth, a large fraction were very involved in getting their claws on the 
planet and the Hafaru help was both threatening and lured viewers (look 
out, direct democracy can be awfully populistic sometimes!). 

> Jo Grant:
> > The Hafaru probably had great pity for humanity. They
> > would be curious to find what it was about their, persumably,
> > harsh environment that would make them into such ravening,
> > uncooth, monsters.
> 
> Anders:
> > I prefer my own cynical approach: ravening, uncooth monsters are very 
> > useful tools for certain applications. The Hafaru are preparing for what 
> > happens when the Coalition breaks down (which they believe will happen 
> > soon),
> 
> Hmm... I don't remember if this was discussed earlier, but what reasons
> do you have in mind?

As I see it, the Coalition has never been an unified whole, just a loose 
coalition held together by the fear of another devastating war, the 
Ontology (the standard language/protocol), trade and its sheer 
unwieldiness - it takes years to come to decisions, and leaves most of 
the races in peace. In the beginning everyone were so busy rebuilding 
their shattered worlds that they had to cooperate, and then trade became 
important. 

But now the Coalition has been rather stagnant for a long time, conflicts
cannot be resolved properly (since nobody can come to an useful decision),
several important races have begun to become static while some younger
chafe under what they see as bureaucratic restraints (during the Great
Mapping when everyone got their domains, the races that were out among the
stars and had lots of colonies naturally got the most.  Young and
localized races got small domains, and some are becoming overcrowded). It 
is not that everybody wants to start anew, but (at least from the Hafaru 
perspective) the future looks... interesting. The terran mess could be 
the beginning of a breakup - two races have essentially broken most of 
the rules in the book, and a third, aggressive race has appeared and has 
no domain at all. 

> > and they want to have ravening monsters doing their dirty work in 
> > exchange for technology. And yes, it might be humanitarian (hafarian?) to
> > save them too. Who said you couldn't do good while being machiavellian?  
> > Too bad the Hafaru aren't that good at it... 
> Yeah, I don't mind some beings being very generous toward humanity for 
> various psychological or historical reasons, but we shouldn't miss the 
> opportunity to have a "false-friend" type of race, and the Hafaru are 
> certainly in the right position to play this role. 

Exactly. So the Gools, who regard humans as disgusting things, are trying 
to help them, while the friendly (if eerie) Hafaru try to manipulate 
things along ("advisors" and "allies" everywhere, gifts of safe and 
useful technology, small tips about alien politics...).

