Better situational awareness
robocon@xxxxxx
(17 Jul 2015 01:22 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Joseph Paul
(17 Jul 2015 03:08 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situationalawareness
Robert
(18 Jul 2015 00:22 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situationalawareness
rupert.boleyn@xxxxxx
(18 Jul 2015 04:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situationalawareness
Craig Berry
(18 Jul 2015 04:59 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situationalawareness
rupert.boleyn@xxxxxx
(18 Jul 2015 06:02 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situationalawareness
Rob O'Connor
(19 Jul 2015 00:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situationalawareness
Craig Berry
(19 Jul 2015 03:58 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness rupert.boleyn@xxxxxx (19 Jul 2015 09:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situationalawareness
Rob O'Connor
(20 Jul 2015 09:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
rupert.boleyn@xxxxxx
(19 Jul 2015 09:02 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Grimmund
(17 Jul 2015 12:49 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Richard Aiken
(17 Jul 2015 18:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Greg Nokes
(17 Jul 2015 18:55 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Craig Berry
(17 Jul 2015 19:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Grimmund
(17 Jul 2015 19:47 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Bruce Johnson
(17 Jul 2015 21:05 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] Better situational awareness
Anthony Jackson
(17 Jul 2015 21:44 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Jim Vassilakos
(17 Jul 2015 22:54 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Grimmund
(17 Jul 2015 23:14 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Craig Berry
(17 Jul 2015 23:31 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Richard Aiken
(18 Jul 2015 06:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Phil Pugliese
(18 Jul 2015 15:32 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Better situational awareness
Greg Chalik
(22 Jul 2015 06:43 UTC)
|
On 19 Jul 2015 at 10:41, Rob O'Connor wrote: > Rupert Boleyn wrote: > Craig Berry wrote: > > 5% of c relative to what? :) > > Rupert's idea of the cosmic microwave background serving as a > reference is a good one. > > Local star as the preferred frame makes sense for in-system travel but > has consequences for relativity, as you point out. In most cases it's not going to make any difference a player is going to notice, being merely a matter for the astrogation computer to deal with. However, in the grand scheme of things, I felt that this provides a fairly universal (at least within Trvaller's known space) frame of reference. As Traveller's FTL doesn't seem to break causality in the Trav universe, I suspect there's a privaleged frame of reference out there somewhere, and for now background radiation is the stand-in IMTU.