Advertisement
It's where the Twelve Colonies of Kobol is located -- at least according to one fan:
sixu.deviantart.com/art/Heli...138122619
sixu.deviantart.com/art/Heli...138122619
posted by:
|
Michigan
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: The Helios system
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 7:50 AMIt follows from what I consider to be another foolish anti-scientific notion that there would be twelve planets in a single solar system habitable to human life but the star system is called "Cyrannus" in the series:
en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Th...es_(RDM)
As in the original series:
en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Th...es_(TOS) -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 4:13 PMIt would make sense that the planets of the Twelve Colonies be located in different solar systems. If they were all in the same solar system, FTL drives wouldn't be necessary (unless you're in a hurry). -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 5:21 PM"It would make sense that the planets of the Twelve Colonies be located in different solar systems. If they were all in the same solar system, FTL drives wouldn't be necessary (unless you're in a hurry)."
Well...
Keep in mind that the vast majority of ships that survived the initial Cylon attack DIDN'T have FTL drives. Like that ship with the little girl. She got splattered. They all got splattered.
Also remember that the use of FTL (at the beginning) was pretty radical -- there was lots of prep, people complained that the Galactica hadn't needed to FTL in forty-seven trillion years, and so forth. Everyone seemed to treat FTL as some sort of exotic science.
I'm inferring from this that FTL isn't strictly needed that much, so isn't strictly used that much.
We only THINK it's common because all the REMAINING ships have FTL.
The solar system could still be plenty small and have twelve planets more-or-less inhabitable. That's a common staple in sci-fi.
I mean, OUR solar system doesn't have that, but we also have 2/3 of a planet that believe in an Imaginary Friend, so maybe we're just some sort of mutant anomaly.
Of course, it could ALSO all be taking place in a Punyverse, which would ALSO explain it. -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 7:09 PMI just assumed during the initial miniseries, since nothing was stated otherwise that the 12 colonies were spread out over many solar systems but that each solar system also had multiple settlements, many of which would be dependent on the main colony in the system-- hence both FTL and STL transport of both people and goods. -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 9:52 PMPart of the storyline of the revised series was that colonial society was recovering from the shock how technology had failed them with the first Cylon War.
They had FTL and other space fairing technology, but perhaps it is only about about as little as 50 to say perhaps75 years old?
Another reason why the went primative (no matter how insane that is) at the end of the series?
-
Re: The Helios system
Sat, September 26, 2009 - 10:40 PMI don't recall anything constructing that.
I guess it's not unreasonable, except they ONLY referred to PLANETS hen they spoke of the colonies. They didn't refer to, say "one of the planets in the Pychon system," which would have suggested that. -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 3:02 AMWell, they also never named all twelve colonies either. I think some things were just left unsaid until they needed to be. -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 11:45 AM"Well, they also never named all twelve colonies either."
They named a lot of them throughout various episodes, but all twelve were named by their "old" names in the map room at the Tomb of Athena, if I recall correctly.
I think I'll run with this: "Does it make sense that there would be a star system with 12 inhabitable planets? Not really, but that was in the original and at some point I decided to run with that as another nod to the old show." (Ron Moore's blog, January 30, 2005)
This is also helpful:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twel...e_colonies -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 12:07 PMNo, cancer, leo and aquarius were never spoken, cancer was shown on a sign, and the battlestar wiki geeks believer leo was mentioned, though I still question the references. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: The Helios system
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 2:25 PMWell, I wasn't exactly taking notes, so I could have missed it. I'm pretty sure I didn't hear them say "Aquarius," as I tend to listen for that one.
Regardless, if Moore's thinking was that these were all planets in the same system*, it explains a lot.
Well, it explains a lot of minor bits in an otherwise confusing tangle of Lynchian monkeyshines.
-=-=-=-=-
* And he also admits this seems improbable -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 5:02 PMWell, the colonial setting strikes me as an solar system made habitable possibly via terraforming? -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 6:28 PMWell, one COULD terraform planets, but you'd still have to find a system with twelve planets sufficiently in the golden zone for liquid water. Tricky to do.
You could MAKE a solar system, but that would imply some serious tech we aren't seeing in the show.
But, sure, if there were twelve planets in the zone and you could terraform them very, very quickly, you could kick out twelve sexy colonies of wonderment. -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 9:04 PMTrue enough, I just taking into account that this was a sci-fi show, not a scientifically accurate one.
I do recall that some of the worlds were in orbit around a Jovian world in the Lagrange Points? -
-
Re: The Helios system
Mon, September 28, 2009 - 1:17 AM" just taking into account that this was a sci-fi show, not a scientifically accurate one."
Fair enough.
I've always been amused in Star Trek that most of the tech makes sense except for the transporter technology which is MUCH more advanced than anything we ever see on that show. It would be like finding an agrarian society that uses antigravity to keep its tractors out of the mud. -
-
Re: The Helios system
Mon, September 28, 2009 - 2:37 AMTransporters were a gift from the Vulcans, and a plot necessity once they realized the ship couldn't land in the "upright" configuration (it was originally built to be upside down).
The La-Grange point is the gravitational equilibrium point between two bodies. If they have similar average densities, it's also the point at which both bodies appear to be the same size. Planets placed in La-Grange points around a jovian body makes no sense as they would either become moons around one of the two bodies, or the non jovian bodies would become their moons, thus eliminating the La-Grange points. Think of our moon and the sun. They appear to be the same size. During a new moon, Earth is at the La-Grange point between them. However, it's not "placed" in the LG point between them, the moon revolves around us, not the sun. -
-
Re: The Helios system
Mon, September 28, 2009 - 10:29 AMWell, needless to say, I think this image is not to scale???
-
Re: The Helios system
Mon, September 28, 2009 - 12:51 PM"Transporters were a gift from the Vulcans, and a plot necessity once they realized the ship couldn't land in the "upright" configuration (it was originally built to be upside down)"
They are SIGNIFICANTLY more advanced than the basic ST tech to such a degree that they stand out -- including tech from the Vulcans.
Yes, I'm aware they allowed the show to cheat landings.
"The La-Grange point is the gravitational equilibrium point between two bodies."
Well...
It's actually a bit more complicated than that.
There are five LaGrange points between any two bodies, but most folks only have a grasp of L1. L1 is the point between two bodies such that the gravitational attractions of the two bodies cancel each other out. The other four points, L2, L3, L4, and L5 are more complicated.
Here's a good quickie breakdown of them:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point
The thing with the size is only pure coincidence with the moon and the sun visible from Earth. We just happen to be in a time in history when the sizes are relatively close.
From what I understand, there's no reason Jupiter wouldn't have its own five LaGrange points.
But I think five's the limit on LaGrange points, and I'm not too sure you can put anything of any real significant mass at a LaGrange point (such as a planet of sufficient mass such that it produces approximately 1G) without really cocking the whole thing up.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: The Helios system
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 6:26 AM> That's a common staple in sci-fi.
Pre-1950. Interesting how so much television and film science-fiction deals primarily in tropes that literary writers essentially abandoned generations ago. -
-
Re: The Helios system
Sun, September 27, 2009 - 11:49 AM"Pre-1950. Interesting how so much television and film science-fiction deals primarily in tropes that literary writers essentially abandoned generations ago."
I was writing in the context of TV shows.
As far as literary stuff, it is a lot more sprightly, because practically any idiot can write a book (thus there's lots of churn and really good interesting stuff tends to rise to the top), but not any idiot can pony up $100,000 to make a movie.
There ARE interesting sci-fi movies out there that are exploring strange new worlds and seeking out new plots and complications, but they are harder to make because one needs either a lot of cash, or a convincing argument that this will make money. But they're out there.
-
-
-
-
