Like the titles says just how big is the Galaxy that Golarion...well I guess the Pact Worlds since Golarion went bye bye. By way of comparison our Galaxy, the Milky Way, is about 100 light-years (ly) across.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’ve always lived by the maxim that fictional universes operate the same as the real-world unless we are told otherwise. This makes it much easier to maintain verisimilitude and makes sure everyone is playing by the same assumptions. If I don’t explicitly tell my players that my campaign world is a flat disc resting on the backs of four elephants standing on a giant turtle being circled by a glowing giant riding a fiery chariot, they will probably assume it’s a oblate spheroid orbiting a yellow star.
Ergo, unless Paizo tells me different, I’m assuming the Starfinder galaxy is approximately the same size and shape as the Milky Way.
Which, for the record, puts it at 100 Billion Stars and 100 thousand light years in diameter and about 1000 light years thick. Plenty big enough to fit basically anything you want in it.
It's so big, that from the perspective of the pact worlds, I highly doubt that even .1% of it has even been seen by PW explorers yet. Even with FTL it would still take billions of years to see them all by drift.
Which, for the record, puts it at 100 Billion Stars and 100 thousand light years in diameter and about 1000 light years thick. Plenty big enough to fit basically anything you want in it.
It's so big, that from the perspective of the pact worlds, I highly doubt that even .1% of it has even been seen by PW explorers yet. Even with FTL it would still take billions of years to see them all by drift.
I'd like to think that Golarion's Galaxy is the Sunbero(sp?) Galaxy. If not, there are many. many, many Galaxies out there.
|
All of the worlds listed here have already been discovered or contacted by explorers from the Pact Worlds, but this list is only a sampling; the galaxy contains more than a hundred billion stars, and many of these nurture planets.
So canonically, both batgirl and pitchica are correct, the primary galaxy of the Starfinder universe is somewhere in the neighborhood of a hundred billion stars. Or, practically speaking, big enough that you can make whatever you want and not butt up against Paizo invalidating what you built (or them invalidating something another Paizo writer did.)
It's also important to remember that Drift travel isn't linear, its completely based on whether some place has a lot of drift beacons, if it doesn't it takes 5d6 days to travel through to the drift to get there regardless of how far away in real space that is (as long as its in the Pact Worlds galaxy.)
|
|
I think you mean the Sombrero Galaxy (also known as Messier Object 104). Any particular reason this galaxy appeals to you?
It's about half the size of the Milky Way and contains a greater number of globular clusters, both of which would (I guess) make for a better setting where travel over pan-galactic distances is commonplace... and its got that cool dust lane surrounding it and is theorized to have super-massive black hole at its core, which sound like nice places to set your Space Opera's Big Bad Evil Guy's Doomsday Weapon.
I just think its far easier to just not worry about the specific size and shape of the galaxy when the heroes probably won't ever leave their own star system.
I think you mean the Sombrero Galaxy (also known as Messier Object 104). Any particular reason this galaxy appeals to you?
It's about half the size of the Milky Way and contains a greater number of globular clusters, both of which would (I guess) make for a better setting where travel over pan-galactic distances is commonplace... and its got that cool dust lane surrounding it and is theorized to have super-massive black hole at its core, which sound like nice places to set your Space Opera's Big Bad Evil Guy's Doomsday Weapon.
I just think its far easier to just not worry about the specific size and shape of the galaxy when the heroes probably won't ever leave their own star system.
Yep there is a reason why it appeals. And there is a plasmoid at the center of the Sombrero Galaxy (not a black hole). And it's called the Sombrero Galaxy because it looks like a Mexican hat.
|
|
Spectroscopic observation has shown that the speed of the stars at the center of M104 couldn’t be sustained unless there was a black hole of staggering mass there.
It's also important to remember that Drift travel isn't linear, its completely based on whether some place has a lot of drift beacons, if it doesn't it takes 5d6 days to travel through to the drift to get there regardless of how far away in real space that is (as long as its in the Pact Worlds galaxy.)
This is the real answer to the original question, IMO. The actual size of the galaxy in realspace is irrelevant because you won't do any significant travel through realspace. Likewise, the relative location of star systems to each other is almost completely meaningless.
(Not to rain on anyone's parade. Hypothesizing about the realspace qualities of the Pact Worlds' home galaxy is still fun.)
Spectroscopic observation has shown that the speed of the stars at the center of M104 couldn’t be sustained unless there was a black hole of staggering mass there.
I spoke to a man that solved the equations for a black hole. He actually did them, and he concluded that black holes don't exist. He has given numerous lectures on how black holes don't exist.
So, black holes don't exist, so something must be at the center of the galaxy. A plasmoid is the best candidate.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stephen Crothers? Really? That guy was expelled from the University of New South Wales for academic misconduct. He refuses to publish his work in peer reviewed journals, claims a doctorate from the notorious Maxwell Einstein University degree mill, and constantly makes wholly unfalsifiable claims. Honestly, the luminiferous æther guys are more credible.
I mean, c’mon, the whole electric universe model can be falsified using a prism, a sheet of white paper, and a sunny day. Crothers likes to spin wild tales about how “big academia” is oppressing him, suppressing the truth, and how general relativity is a big lie... But his pet pseudo-science cannot accurately model observed reality like basic optics.
In the standard model, the nuclear reactions in the Sun’s core produce light and heat that cause the star to shine. If this were true, then we should observe thermal radiation bring emitted by the sun. We should observe a spectrum of colors that is almost continuous (and we should observe some Fraunhofer lines where cooler gasses in its upper atmosphere absorb some of the light.)
If the Sun were lit by electrically excited plasma, as the electric universe model claims, then the spectrum would be a discontinuous melange of bright lines. Plasma discharges do not emit a continuous spectrum of light.
So, what do we actually see?
[img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Fraunhofer_lines. svg/800px-Fraunhofer_lines.svg.png[/img]
Quod erat demonstrandum.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a way, the aether guys were right even for being wrong, because even any given volume of "the empty void of outer space" is filled with molecules (just at far lower concentration than atmosphere), magnetic fields, radiation and so on. It just doesn't work the way they thought, and isn't necessary for the propagation of light or other energetic waveforms.
That said, yeah, the electric universe is total BS and doesn't match actual observable reality in any way. I don't see why people keep trying to sell theories that outright contradict direct observation. Even if this were a "consensual reality" universe like White Wolf's Mage, you'd still want your theory to line up with observable reality, just provide a different explanation for how to get there. ;)
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm always open to the possibility that the standard model of physics is wrong. But, well, you've got to come up with a helluva lot of very good evidence if you want to upset the apple cart.
Prior to the Michelson–Morley experiment, just about every scientist knew that the luminiferous æther was a real thing. After Michelson and Morley demonstrated that the æther wasn't, scientists spent decades either trying to prove Michelson and Morley wrong or trying to come up with some other explanation for how light propagated. Enter Einstein.
Classic Newtonian physics and the luminiferous æther works well to explain nearly everything about our observable reality. Except, well, we couldn't observe æther. But the rest of the physics still "worked." So when Einstein developed the theory of relativity he had to work damn hard to provide the evidence to back up his hypothesis. So he did the work. He could have just hunkered down in his basement somewhere and written angry screeds about how The Conspiracy® was suppressing The Truth™... But, no, he wanted people to actually take him seriously.
Plenty of legitimate scientists have worked for years, if not there entire lives, in the pursuit of a hypothesis or model that turned out to be wrong. Lots of very serious physicists at the time Einstein first began to publish his work on relativity didn't think he had it right and worked to disprove his theories which is a perfectly legitimate avenue for science to take. But they did it "by the book," the experimented, they tested, they published... and when, eventually, they realized they were wrong they owned it.
Stephen Crothers is an embittered conspiracy theorist and a quack.
I'm always open to the possibility that the standard model of physics is wrong. But, well, you've got to come up with a helluva lot of very good evidence if you want to upset the apple cart.
Prior to the Michelson–Morley experiment, just about every scientist knew that the luminiferous æther was a real thing. After Michelson and Morley demonstrated that the æther wasn't, scientists spent decades either trying to prove Michelson and Morley wrong or trying to come up with some other explanation for how light propagated. Enter Einstein.
Classic Newtonian physics and the luminiferous æther works well to explain nearly everything about our observable reality. Except, well, we couldn't observe æther. But the rest of the physics still "worked." So when Einstein developed the theory of relativity he had to work damn hard to provide the evidence to back up his hypothesis. So he did the work. He could have just hunkered down in his basement somewhere and written angry screeds about how The Conspiracy® was suppressing The Truth™... But, no, he wanted people to actually take him seriously.
Plenty of legitimate scientists have worked for years, if not there entire lives, in the pursuit of a hypothesis or model that turned out to be wrong. Lots of very serious physicists at the time Einstein first began to publish his work on relativity didn't think he had it right and worked to disprove his theories which is a perfectly legitimate avenue for science to take. But they did it "by the book," the experimented, they tested, they published... and when, eventually, they realized they were wrong they owned it.
Stephen Crothers is an embittered conspiracy theorist and a quack.
The Aether is a real thing, the medium which light propagates. After all, advanced human beings use the luminiferous aether in their technology. Vacuum, zero point energy is the luminiferous aether. But if you really want to go after the Electric Universe, then try to falsify their data on the electrical comet model.
Or are you too chicken?
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Aether is a real thing, the medium which light propagates. After all, advanced human beings use the luminiferous aether in their technology.
“Advanced human beings”? Let me guess, they’re from Atlantis aren’t they... and the reason no one has been able to reproduce their technology is because of a Global Conspiracy (probably involving the Jews) to keep everyone unaware of it.
Look, I’m a maritime and admiralty law investigator. I don’t have any academic or professional credentials in the sciences, I’m merely an enthusiastic amateur astronomer and physics nerd. But the whole point of science is openness, falsifiability, and reproduction of tests. You don’t need a Ph.D. or even a B.Sc. to read a scientific journal and try to replicate any experiment within... You can conduct your own Michelson-Morley experiment yourself. I did it as an undergrad. It’s fun.
As to “Zero Point Energy”... Sigh.
Look, the worldwide ocean-going shipping industry has something north of 90,000 vessels active today. They handle about 90% of all global trade (yes, ninety, that’s not a typo). These ships burn 2.5 million to 4 million barrels a day of fuel oil... that’s about $300,000,000 USD annually. An international treaty regulating sulfur emissions goes into effect in 2020 and the entire industry is bracing for massive financial losses as a result of it.
If “Zero Point Energy” technology is real, please, walk into your nearest Møller-Maersk, COSCO, CMA, Mediterranean Shipping Company, or Hapag-Lloyd office with a copy of the blueprint, a demo model, and an empty semi-truck to haul away the cash they will give you. Those are the five largest container shipping companies on the planet. Møller-Maersk alone moves about 15% of all the manufacturered goods on Earth. Møller-Maersk Has an operating revenue of, like, $35 billion... But, they had negative profits last year and in fact they’ve been operating at a loss the last few years. Almost entirely due to fuel costs.
A “Zero Point Energy” motor would be worth TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS to this industry. Yes, with a “T.”
(To say nothing of the Nobel Prize, international fame, permanent place in the recorded history humanity, and whole “rewrite every physics textbook” thing.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I figured the galaxy was also kinda skewed as a result of the whatever that happened during/caused the Gap. So things like stars and stuff getting a slight bump in location or age, and things like carbon dating being odd, like some pieces of the same object of same composition registering as older/newer than the rest of it. So even if you had older markers/info from pre-Gap, you still can't figure out how long its been, since this star-info says one thing, this one has moved well more than it should have, and these rocks over here and giving different readings.
otherwise, size is the same as ours.