posted
Do you search the exact positions of real stars mentioned in Star Trek? With the help of Bernd and Masao, I've created a complete list of about 20 stars, their parallaxes, distances, galactic coordinates and the resulting map distance and angle. Most of these data are based on figures from the HIPPARCOS catalogue and therefore as exact as possible. Of course, explanations and sample maps how to use this data is included.
Important Notice: Please include a link to the Star Trek Dimension if you use these figures. Please do not use the maps.
--------------------------- There are a lot of of other new things in the Star Trek Dimension - new LCARS files and new maps & infos in the Cartography. Check it out!
posted
Nice list! Altair is only 16,6 lightyears away from Earth, I didn't know that. Thanks btw: In case you are wondering: Yes this is where I got this alias. I love stars, and I love eagles
I belief that Fomalhaut is mentioned at least ones too.
An odd one I found is the star Hadar (Beta Centauri) which apperantly has nothing to do with the Jem'Hadar. This star is only about 300 lightyears away from Earth...
------------------ Presenting the NX-59650. It can slice! It can dice! It can seperate into THREE parts!! Now available with THREE FULL warpcores! But wait! Buy now, and get a free number upgrade to NX-74913!
To order, call: 0800-PROMETHEUS
[This message has been edited by Altair (edited October 29, 1999).]
posted
Christian: I was looking at your list. It's a great contribution to stellar cartography.
I have a few suggestions: Except for the last two maps the names of the stars nearest to Earth overlap and are unreadable. You either have to separate the names and use lines to connect them to the stars or omit some of the closer stars.
I was looking at Bjo Trimble's "Star Trek Concordance" and found some stars or names from TOS you might add.
posted
Christian: One more point. I was wondering about your "position in the galaxy" coordinates. Is this something you devised or is it a standard system? Since the size of the Galaxy is not known with great certainty, the 0,0 point cannot be certain either. It might be better to base the 0,0 point at the center of the galaxy, whose position would remain fixed and is better known. An added advantage would be that a star's quadrant would be obvious from whether x and y were positive or negative: Alpha quadrant = negative, negative; Beta quadrant = positive, negative.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
posted
Exactly. One such example can be seen in the recent National Geographic galactic map, as the Outer Arm extends just a bit outside the 50,000 light-year radius at some places. I find placing the origin at the galactic center to be very convienent when fiddling with my parametric equations.
------------------ "Captain! I must protest! I am NOT my neighbour's dog!"
posted
Ok, guys. I'm at your service. I have updated, improved and extended the list of the real stars mentioned in Star Trek; the new version is already avaiable here.
Masao, thank you for the new stars, three of them (the canon ones, I think: Merak, Alpha Eridani and Vega) I have already added.
Thanks also for the advices for absolute coordinate systems. Your suggestion, Masao, is now avaiable as well as polar coordinates for all stars. This special system might be interesting for you, Krenim.
Also, I have replaced the names of the stars by numbers in the first 4 maps because they were really illegible, however, this was the case because the maps were created automatically by a program, based on the unusual "Position in the Galaxy" (yes, I devised this system, it not an official one).
Hope you enjoy using the data.
------------ Please visit the Star Trek Dimension and its unique Star Trek cartography projects, with facts, maps, javascripts and data lists on this fascinating topic.
posted
I think this pretty much sums up all real world references of Star Trek Geography. So what is left to do? We could assign positions to all the fictitious stars, starting with Kronos and Romulus. I wonder if we should try to plot the courses of the E-nil and E-D, taking into account, real stars, the given stardates in the episodes and maximum warp speeds.
------------------ "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." A somewhat different Janeway in VOY: "Living Witness" Ex Astris Scientia
And Bernd -do you have a few years to spare? That kind of detailed analysis would take ages. Gauging where DS9 has moved in the past 7 years would be slightly more feasible, IMHO .
------------------ "Fire, Fire!" said Mrs O'Dwyer. "Where, where?" said Mrs O'Hare. "Down in the town." said Mrs Brown. "Lord bless us and save us" said old Mrs Davis. "I never knew a herring was a fish."
posted
Gaseous Anomaly: DS9 has moved a lot, if we take into account that the distances in the Bajor sector as well as the distance from Bajor to Earth or whatever fixed point is chosen is subject to continuous changes.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Chris
Ex-Member
posted
Bernd, this is exactly what I thought. A map also including the courses of our favorite vessels would be something completely new and unique. We would really go where no Star Trek cartographer has gone before ... :-) A first step was my attempt to include the Borg contacts of the last 20 years in my Map of Explored Space, however, this has already shown that it is pretty difficult.
So I agree with Gaseous Anomaly that this last quite some time. However, being androids, this shouldn't be a problem for us. :->
Perhaps it would be easier to start with the journeys of the original Enterprise, yes, the real NCC-1701, no bloody A, B, C or D! I think at least a third of the locations could be located within the galaxy, because there are so many real stars used in this series.
---------- Please visit the Star Trek Dimension, with everything about Star Trek Cartography - explanations, facts, tables, maps, javascripts and more!
posted
Well, there's a problem with that, too. Although one can certainly validate the visit to the galactic barrier by saying that they went "down" or "up" instead of "out," there's that little matter of Star Trek V (a cartographer's nightmare).
------------------ "Captain! I must protest! I am NOT my neighbour's dog!"
posted
Well, I reckon sometimes that Star Trek V - was a journey of 'The Mind' - all events after Sybok arrived on the Enterprise... his greatly enhanced Vulcan powers influenced everyone near him...
------------------ "Remove your hand or I will remove your arm!" - 7 of 9
posted
A problem with plotting the course of TOS Enterprise is that you would have to consider the continuity of the shows over the course of a season, which is something that the show's producers never thought about. Except for the artificial two-parter "The Menagerie," the episodes in a season could probably be aired in any order.
If you accepted the shows' airing order, you might assume that fictitious locations in shows aired close together were also physcically close together. But real stars in consectutive episodes might be on opposite sides of the galaxy. A real ship would be more likely to stay in one corner of the galaxy.
Anyway the first step would be to list the actual stars visited and fictitious locations whose locations can be inferred (i.e., the neutral zone) in the correct airing order and plot them on a galactic map. To be logical, locations for which there is no information given should be close to those in surrounding episodes.
This sounds like a fun project. Since we now know the locations of many real stars, it shouldn't be too hard. I think Bernd should do it!!
By the way, does anyone own a copy of the "official" Star Trek Maps that were published around the time of the first movie? I've never examined them in detail.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Printer-friendly view of this topic
