Howdy!
Doing some stellar generation, and had some thoughts that led into some issues leading to some questions.
Generated a stellar set, and got A3 Ia K9 VI {M8 V M0 VI} [G4 VI K6 VI] for the result. I'm using Dalthor notation to pair the stars.
The A3 Ia is the primary, and the K9 VI is the companion to the primary. OK, simple enough, so I started to figure out where the MW should go. I started looking at the available orbits, and locating the habitable zone.
According to T5.09 page 400, the surface of the A3 Ia star is at orbit 4. Page 402 states a star can have a companion which is extremely close, within orbit zero. This means that in the above example, the K9 VI star is WITHIN the A3 Ia star itself.
Is this result actually even possible in the real universe? To me, the companion should not exist at all in this case, but it is allowed by the rules as written (RAW).
I don't comprehend much of celestial mechanics, but from a (relatively) realistic standpoint, I'd expect those two stars actually rotate around each other, on a central point defined by the overall mass of the two stars. The larger star would appear to "wobble" on that point, and the smaller stellar mass would essentially orbit that central point.
Any additional stars in that stellar system should also orbit that central point.
Now, in the RAW, this would negate the inside orbit 0 part, but actually be possible within the universe as we know it.
This is just a generalization, but is it somewhat correct?
My plan is to roll four possible pairs of stars. A pair in this case refers to a star and a possible companion to that star. The mainworld would orbit that first pair rolled, what T5.09 currently calls the primary and companion.
I'd sort each pair to show the larger as the base star, and the smaller as the companion. For example, the pair M8 V M0 VI would be swapped, and appear as M0 VI M8 V.
I'd then find the largest pair by stellar mass, and make that the primary by swapping it with the first pair. The upshot is that the MW could conceivably orbit any pair, though the majority of the time the first pair generated is the largest mass. This is due to the DMs applied to additional stars.
For example, the original set
G6 VI (G2 VI F2 V) {A9 III}
would become
A9 III (F2 V G2 VI) {G6 VI}*
after the sort. I'd swap the G2/F2 pair, and the A9 III would be the primary due to its mass, so I'd swap it with the G6 VI. The asterisk is the MTU indicator for the star the MW would orbit - the original first star generated.
Yah, it takes up some additional code during generation, but seems like a good thing to me, especially for any referee that wants at least a little realism in their stellar systems.
I'm not looking for perfection -- I mean it is a game -- but this seems to me to be a decent approach. It is somewhat plausible as I understand the universe.
I've actually contemplated adjusting usable orbits and habitable zones out one orbit for paired stars to account for the wobble and additional stellar heat/luminosity and all that jazz -- after all, it is MTU and this seems right to me. OK, so feel free to laugh at me at this point.
Oh, by the way, my assumption when I import OTU data into MTU is that the first star listed is the star the MW orbits, and the largest star is the primary. Most times they are one and the same, but not always.
In any case, does any of this make sense to my fellow Travellers?
<Edit: This whole thing started as I was doing some stellar reconfiguration for my Varan campaign>
Doing some stellar generation, and had some thoughts that led into some issues leading to some questions.
Generated a stellar set, and got A3 Ia K9 VI {M8 V M0 VI} [G4 VI K6 VI] for the result. I'm using Dalthor notation to pair the stars.
The A3 Ia is the primary, and the K9 VI is the companion to the primary. OK, simple enough, so I started to figure out where the MW should go. I started looking at the available orbits, and locating the habitable zone.
According to T5.09 page 400, the surface of the A3 Ia star is at orbit 4. Page 402 states a star can have a companion which is extremely close, within orbit zero. This means that in the above example, the K9 VI star is WITHIN the A3 Ia star itself.
Is this result actually even possible in the real universe? To me, the companion should not exist at all in this case, but it is allowed by the rules as written (RAW).
I don't comprehend much of celestial mechanics, but from a (relatively) realistic standpoint, I'd expect those two stars actually rotate around each other, on a central point defined by the overall mass of the two stars. The larger star would appear to "wobble" on that point, and the smaller stellar mass would essentially orbit that central point.
Any additional stars in that stellar system should also orbit that central point.
Now, in the RAW, this would negate the inside orbit 0 part, but actually be possible within the universe as we know it.
This is just a generalization, but is it somewhat correct?
My plan is to roll four possible pairs of stars. A pair in this case refers to a star and a possible companion to that star. The mainworld would orbit that first pair rolled, what T5.09 currently calls the primary and companion.
I'd sort each pair to show the larger as the base star, and the smaller as the companion. For example, the pair M8 V M0 VI would be swapped, and appear as M0 VI M8 V.
I'd then find the largest pair by stellar mass, and make that the primary by swapping it with the first pair. The upshot is that the MW could conceivably orbit any pair, though the majority of the time the first pair generated is the largest mass. This is due to the DMs applied to additional stars.
For example, the original set
G6 VI (G2 VI F2 V) {A9 III}
would become
A9 III (F2 V G2 VI) {G6 VI}*
after the sort. I'd swap the G2/F2 pair, and the A9 III would be the primary due to its mass, so I'd swap it with the G6 VI. The asterisk is the MTU indicator for the star the MW would orbit - the original first star generated.
Yah, it takes up some additional code during generation, but seems like a good thing to me, especially for any referee that wants at least a little realism in their stellar systems.
I'm not looking for perfection -- I mean it is a game -- but this seems to me to be a decent approach. It is somewhat plausible as I understand the universe.
I've actually contemplated adjusting usable orbits and habitable zones out one orbit for paired stars to account for the wobble and additional stellar heat/luminosity and all that jazz -- after all, it is MTU and this seems right to me. OK, so feel free to laugh at me at this point.
Oh, by the way, my assumption when I import OTU data into MTU is that the first star listed is the star the MW orbits, and the largest star is the primary. Most times they are one and the same, but not always.
In any case, does any of this make sense to my fellow Travellers?
<Edit: This whole thing started as I was doing some stellar reconfiguration for my Varan campaign>
Last edited:
