posted
Mmkay, here are some "revised and extended" remarks regarding Archer's comment in "Home"[ENT4], split from the "In Techy Matrimony" thread.
He looks toward north and points out that the star "just to the left of Polaris" is where they found their first Class M world, one which had psychotropic compounds in the air. This, of course, is the planet from "Strange New World"[ENT1]. And, we get a shot of the stars he's looking toward in the evening sky.
Before continuing, I'd like to point out that "Home" was cool. There are many nice touches in the episode, and this shot was one of them. Archer is properly lit given the direction he's supposedly looking toward, and the stars are mostly correct (the only real 'problems' are relative brightness and the fact that at least one star that should've been visible is strangely absent).
Go Manny Coto.
But I digress:
The above is an overlay of the stars visible on the screen and stars above a certain visibility threshold. The match is not perfect with all the stars due to various factors, hence the occasional double-star or streak look. However, you can see that it's very close, and certainly close enough for what I'm doing.
What am I doing? Well, I want to know which star Archer was talking about. I want to be able to place the "Strange New World" planet in context, and do some cartography.
First, some basic ideas.
I. The star should be just to the left of Polaris. II. The star should not be too far from Earth. a. I'm ignoring the speed and time from "Broken Bow" which puts the Klingon homeworld at less than a light-year from Earth. b. I'm accepting the speeds from "Cease Fire"[ENT2] as a top-end which allows for the most distance with which we can work . . . the velocity indicated was 1460c. c. The approximate date for "SNW" was May 12, 2151, which puts Enterprise at four weeks and five days from home. (Why? See second message . . . it all works pretty well.) d. Given the passage of 33 days and the "Cease Fire"-style speeds, the maximum distance for the star in question should be 132 light-years, and probably less. III. Preferably the star should match what we'd expect to allow it to have a planet with life in regards to age, metallicity, variability, and so on.
Now, there are five stars circled above . . . only four of which are visible in the sky in the episode. For some reason, HR 8702 was not visible at all, though being as bright as HR 8748 it ought to have been quite visible. This is not a bad thing, though, since HR 8702 is helluva-far, and thus we wouldn't want that to be the SNW star anyway.
As for which one is just to the left, I'd say either HR 285 or 8546 ought to be the star in question. While Alrai is due left, "just to the left" may not imply such precision.
As for distance, Alrai is the clear winner. At just 45-50 light-years (the star having been well-studied), the star is in a perfect spot to satisfy the requirements of distance. HR 285 is over three hundred light-years away according to the parallax. HR 8748 is around 1000 parsecs away, and 8546 is about 540 light-years distant, by their parallax.
(Using Celestia, their distances are given as 390 and 255 light-years . . . I'm not sure why there is a discrepancy, given that the parallax data I have is from Hipparcos and if you've got parallax you've got distance without wacky calculations. The parallax I have for HR 285 concurs with Celestia's distance. But, in any case they're both too far.)
Alrai also works well insofar as the type of system it is. The star is large, bright, and hot, and is sufficiently old to have burned out all of its hydrogen. It has a known stellar companion, a smaller, dimmer red dwarf with an eccentric orbit taking it no closer than 10-12AU. Further, a planet twice the size of Jupiter has already been found in the system. The star's habitable zone would be at about 2.9 - 3.4AU.
The only problem with Alrai is that the known gas giant might cause problems. It has an eccentric orbit centered around the 1-2AU range. Thus, it seems likely that the giant could interfere with an orbit (or formation) of a rocky, earth-like world at 3AU unless the planet was very lucky. However, our data about the gas giant could be off a smidgen . . . the gas giant was claimed in 1992, then retracted, and then claimed again ten years later, with the confusion resulting from the B star's presence.
An alternative could be that the planet could be in a close orbit of the B star (perhaps having been captured after being flung out of A orbit).
It's worth noting that the good Mr. Joshua Bell reminded me of Celestia. I loaded up Celestia and looked north, and a few other stars were visible in the direction indicated. Some ought not have been visible in the sky when Archer looked, given the evening glow of the atmosphere . . . it's possible to calculate what could've been visible (http://www.go.ednet.ns.ca/~larry/astro/vislimit.html), but given that HR 8546 at magnitude 5.27 is readily visible in the shot at its height, that's a good indicator of what could possibly be seen at all. (That webpage, incidentally, seems to indicate that mag 6.1 is as good as it gets for the naked eye looking at a 45 degree angle.) Just for caution, I ramped up Celestia's visibility to magnitude 7 (which means I was seeing some helluva-dim stars), and checked the distances to all of the stars within a 60 degree wedge to the left of Polaris, plus a few more at random.
Distance-wise, we get a few other possibilities:
HD 22701, 133ly, dim (mag 5.84, or dimmer than 8546), but it's almost straight up from Polaris, and only a little bit leftward, and out of frame in the shot. It's also only barely within possible range.
HD 223731, 128ly, very dim (mag 6.56), just upward from Alrai, and not visible in the shot, barely within possible range.
HD 223778, 35ly, very dim (mag 6.36), up and to the left from Alrai, not visible in the shot. However, at a distance of just 35 light-years, I wish it were. However, it's even further from "just to the left" than Alrai, and too dim.
HD 3440, 105ly, very dim (mag 6.38), not visible in the shot . . . to find it, one would start at Polaris and go on past HR 285.
HD 2589, 128ly, very dim (mag 6.18), not visible in the shot . . . it's past HR 285 and up from Alrai.
So, Alrai still seems the only logical possibility, even accounting for stars which Archer could not possibly have seen.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
posted
I mentioned above that I would provide the derivation for the May 12 2151 date I give for SNW, as well as the launch date for Enterprise. Well, here it is:
**** Regarding "Broken Bow":
At fifteen light-years distant, and even at near "Cease Fire" speeds, the ship would've needed no less than four days to reach Rigel (or Ryjull or whatever the place actually was, sincethe real star is too far). It probably would've taken at least five days, given that the engines weren't pushed to "Cease Fire" levels until later in the series. The episode seems to indicate that Klaang was taken on the second day of the four-day trip to the Klingon homeworld (given the 80 hour scene, followed by the dinner scene, followed by the scene of everyone on the bridge, which was presumably the next day).
It then took them ten hours to reach the gas giant which the Suliban ship warped to, with an additional six hours of Archer's unconsciousness (after which he gives the date as April 16).
Even if their original course to Rigel took them past the Klingon homeworld, with the ten-hour hop taking them back toward Q'onos, then they would've needed at least another day to reach the Klingon capital.
We're thus left with two days after leaving Earth, a five-day trip to Rigel, ten hours plus some time for the action at the gas giant, and another day to get to the Klingons. That's 2 + 5 + 1 + 1, or nine days.
But, before you accuse me of nitpickery, consider that Klaang was on his way back to the Klingon homeworld when he crashed on Earth. His last stop prior to Earth was Rigel Ten. This, by necessity, implies that Rigel was not past the Klingon homeworld when Enterprise was headed there from Earth. Or, in other words, Rigel must've been in a completely different direction than the Klingon homeworld, and Earth is likely between Rigel and the Klingons.
So, that's 2 + 5 + 1 + X, where X must equal some number of days. Even assuming that Rigel, Earth, and Q'onos form a right angle (in which case Klaang was trying to take a left at Albuquerque), then X would have to equal at least four days. At maximum, X would equal about six days, perhaps a week. Assuming five days for X, then we have an episode spanning 13 days.
Incidentally, this implies a launch date of Friday, April 9, 2151.
This works out pretty nicely. Recall that when Archer was brought to view Klaang, the Vulcan ambassador's assistant said that Earth could face a squadron of Klingon "warbirds" by the end of the week, at which point Archer swore to launch in three days. And, in "Shockwave", Archer was returned to a point four days prior to the launch of Enterprise . . . Klaang was seen the day after the late-night call from Trip. That would've been Monday, April 5, 2151, and the inspection pods were getting their weekly overhaul that night.
Of course, that could've happened on Sunday, giving a launch date of April 8, but could not have happened prior to Friday, April 2 . . . had it been Friday, then the "end of the week" comment would've been made on Saturday, which makes little sense.
In any case, all of this seems to point to the Enterprise being at Q'onos circa Wednesday, April 21, at the earliest.
**** Regarding "Fight or Flight":
The ship's been in space for two weeks without a first contact and without seeing anything of interest, implying it's been two weeks since the Klingon homeworld. This suggests a date of May 5. However, we know it wasn't a full two weeks, because May 6 is the date given at the end of the episode at Sluggo's World.
By that point, working backward:
1. The ship had travelled to an unspecified star system to drop off Sluggo. (We're told when they find the derelict ship that the closest system was three light-years away, which could be reached in about 18 hours at "Cease Fire" velocities, or a full day at 75% of that speed.) 2. The ship had spent some time with the Axanar, presumably those aboard the ship which rescued them. 3. It had been two days since the ship first encountered the Axanar ship whose crew was killed by the tri-vamps. However, the two day figure comes from Hoshi's translation of the Axanar captain, and does not necessarily represent two actual Earth days. At least 10 hours passed between the fight and the flight, however, given that after the course reversal it would take five hours to get back to the dead Axanar ship. However, we don't know how long the Enterprise travelled away from the ship at its stated speed of warp three before turning around and, presumably, going faster to get back. As a result, the two-day figure seems useful.
So, assuming about a day was spent with the Axanarians and that Sluggo's new home was the closest system (meaning another day for travel time), then the episode begins on Sunday, May 2.
**** Regarding "Strange New World":
When Trip makes a comment about having a cabin in the woods of the SNW planet, Archer jokes that they've only been in "deep space" for three weeks and Trip's ready to leave the ship.
Given an April 9 launch this would imply a date of April 30, which of course is far too soon. Archer evidently referred to it being three weeks since their mission began (i.e. since departing Q'onos), which gives us a date of approximately May 12.
**** Regarding "Unexpected":
When talking to the Klingons near the end of the episode, T'Pol points out that it had been less than a month since Archer stood before the High Council. With Trip spending three days on the Xyrillian ship and with eight days being spent looking for it afterward, that means that it couldn't have been before May 23, if the May 12 date was right. However, that doesn't work.
So, assuming a date of May 20 for the conversation with the Klingons (less than a month, but barely), then the Xyrillian events would've started circa Sunday, May 9. Thus, Archer's "three weeks" would've referred to two weeks and four or five days.
**** Regarding "Terra Nova":
No dates are given in the episode, but with May 20 as a bookend from the last episode we can look to the next episode to get another. It comes out as June 15.
**** Regarding "The Andorian Incident"
During her incarceration by the Andorians, T'Pol notes to one of the other Vulcans that she's been aboard Enterprise for nine weeks and four days. Going by the April 9 launch date, her comment would've been made on Tuesday, June 15.
We have a date for two episodes later of July 31, so this works out.
Incidentally, this works quite nicely indeed. Terra Nova was within 20 light-years of Earth. Vulcan is 16 light-years distant. Since it would make sense that the 3,000 year old monastery of P'Jem would be reasonably close to Vulcan,
========
As a result of all of this, we see a few things:
1. The speeds given in "Broken Bow" simply don't work. Warp four cannot be a mere 100c, unless there's a mad-crazy jump of 1360c between warp four and warp five. At 100c, the 15ly trip to Rigel would've taken seven weeks, and of course numerous other episodes show them reaching another star system within days. Further, "Civilization" gives a date (July 31) and a range from Earth (78ly) that would, based on an April 9 launch date, require the ship to have an absolute minimum velocity of 237.25c. Of course, since the ship didn't just make a straight shot to the "Civilization" planet, the ship's true top speed must be higher.
2. Provided we ignore the too-slow speed given in "Broken Bow", everything works out pretty nicely.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
posted
I'm a bit unsure if this really works out. What you manage to prove is that some ENT speed references override others - hence invalidating your own assumption that it would be possible to seriously claim things like 15 ly = 5 days of travel.
In general, I agree with your reasoning, though. But you make a solid case for NX-01 and her contemporaries being relatively fast, which means that Klaang could also have made a major detour or backtracking in his Rigel-to-Qo'noS run, rather than a beeline, sacrificing a few days' worth of travel for the chance to shake off Suliban pursuit. So any bet as to where Rigel/Ryjeel and Qo'noS lie in relation to Earth is off. Similarly, the NX-01 could have been weaving a spiderweb all around Sol, rather than working only on the "Qo'noS side of the galaxy". It's all thus vewwy, vewwy vague...
...Which I guess is a good thing. If there ever is a second edition of the Star Charts, I'll promote Alrai as the Strange New World, and a possible rearranging of the Earth/"Beta Rigel"/Qo'noS setup. Certainly Qo'noS should be squeezed even closer to Earth than it currently is in the Charts, which will be a major challenge...
posted
I put little weight in the Star Charts, given that they're based on the same wrong-headed doctrinal stances as Ruhl's flawed work.
Your point about Klaang's course being designed to shake off pursuit is a good one, and gives a firmer reason for the left at Albuquerque than the no-reason I had for it previously. While I doubt it was a spider web, there are some angles that would need working out.
Your first paragraph has me befuddled (if you'll forgive the vewwy bad pun). I don't see offhand how a disproof of one thing is a disproof of all (including the original disproof), which is what you seem to be saying.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
posted
What I mean is, you declare at least three onscreen speed estimates false and then largely go by the "Cease Fire" example the rest of the way. That leaves an awful lot of grey area in between - cases where the observer cannot be sure whether to use your speed estimates or Archer's, but which you claim as supporting your estimates merely because you apply your estimates there and don't run into major contradictions. To me, that's assuming a bit too much. The 15 ly detour to Rigel may have lasted 5 days, but it looked more like it lasted less than a day, for example.
And it *could* have lasted less than a day, if speeds in that episode were different from speeds in another; and you already acknowledge that much by (correctly) declaring Archer's two explicit speed figures from "Broken Bow" as not applying to other episodes.
quote:Originally posted by Timo: What I mean is, you declare at least three onscreen speed estimates false and then largely go by the "Cease Fire" example the rest of the way.
Regarding the SNW star, I only use "Cease Fire" as a fairly-large-but-not-largest-possible speed I could've used 1700c from "Horizon", which could quite easily fit in to "Cease Fire" with minor adjustments in the time and distance), with which we obtain the approximate maximum distance of the star in question. No problem there.
Now, if you're referring to the early-ep chronology, then we have a discussion.
1. The 1460c speed (i.e. 4ly/day) from CF is not actually used. I actually assume a speed some 75% of that for my calculations.
2. CF-level speeds are a known quantity from several examples, and of course can be derived on at least two occasions . . . CF and Horizon.
3. Such a speed is pretty much required to make the early episodes fit with one another, and also to maintain internal consistency. The Broken Bow speeds in the 100c (.25ly/day) range would require: a. Q'onos at one light-year b. the 15ly trip to Rigel taking two months, during which the Klingons (previously so bothered as to be sending warships by the end of the week) are patiently waiting for the Earth ship. b1. The trip from Rigel to the gas giant, which took no more than 16 hours, could only have covered about .18 light-years c. a total travel time to Terra Nova of up to 80 days d. a total travel time to the Akaali world from "Civilization" of 312 days from Earth, and at bare minimum of 232 days from Terra Nova, even though we know it couldn't have taken more than 2.5 months for the latter e. it makes the crew's bitching after a mere two weeks (i.e. 3.5 light-years, or the rough distance from Earth to Proxima Centauri) most unseemly f. The trip to Sluggo's World, assuming it was orbiting the closest stated star to the Axanar derelict, would've taken twelve days, meaning the fight against the vampire-ship would've had to have occurred on or about April 24. Before that they'd had an uneventful two weeks in space, which would mean that the events of "Broken Bow" were considered uneventful and without finding any life g. the 90ly from Earth distance given in "Carpenter Street" would've required a full year's travel, instead of the ~6-8 months which actually passed
. . . and so on.
Far from injecting some sort of global uncertainty into the equation, I have picked the solution which works best given the evidence available.
To be sure, the ship was not always travelling at three light-years per day, as I note in regards to examples such as the warp three flight from the Axanar derelict. However, I think it is clear that there are times when such speeds are required because the canon makes no sense otherwise.
quote:The 15 ly detour to Rigel may have lasted 5 days, but it looked more like it lasted less than a day, for example.
Occam's Razor. 5500c might very well have been the ship's velocity, but there's no evidence in favor from that or any other episode. To my knowledge, the absolute maximum velocities given for Enterprise are in the 1700c range.
So, we can either accept those maximums because they work and throw out the smaller, inconsistent claimed maximums . . . or we can throw out these high maximums in favor of smaller figures that riddle the canon with inconsistency.
Or we can do what you suggest, which is to throw out everything in some grand deconstructionist fallacy.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
quote:I put little weight in the Star Charts, given that they're based on the same wrong-headed doctrinal stances as Ruhl's flawed work.
Dear Guardian 2000, although I appreciate your thorough work on this topic, I can't leave this statement unchallenged. It's up to you to call Christian's work on stellar cartography flawed, no matter if you find real mistakes or if you simply have a different set of criteria. I won't contest that.
But why is it that you of all people blame Christian of having "wrong-headed doctrinal stances"? Sorry, but that's simply indecent, bearing in mind what kind of a website you're running. You know that I'm with you most of the time, and that I hold your own work in high regard where it is relevant to me. But this is not a "vs. debate" where you have a dedicated opponent. I think you owe Christian an apology.
-------------------- Bernd Schneider
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Besides, what the hell do 'doctrinal stances' have to do with the enjoyment of a television show? There are FAR more important things to worry about.
posted
I wish that somebody would tell me what the flaws in Ruhl's works are. (And what Ruhl's works are, in total.) And why are they wrong headed, doctrinaly speaking?
posted
Well, I heard he believes that Christ and God the Father have similar but distinct substances, instead of sharing in the same substance, and thus is guilty of the Arian heresy.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
