
Has anything been developed about Celandra's astronomy? How many moons, other planets, significant constellations, etc.? Jefferson http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
RulingNations@aol.com wrote: >Has anything been developed about Celandra's astronomy? How many moons, >other planets, significant constellations, etc.? > > No, as far as I know. juuso ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
In a message dated 1/16/04 2:14:34 PM Mountain Standard Time, juuso@iki.fi writes: > RulingNations@aol.com wrote: > > >Has anything been developed about Celandra's astronomy? How many moons, > >other planets, significant constellations, etc.? > > > No, as far as I know. OK. I guess we can assume a G-type star and a standard length day and year. How about giving the planet two moons though? A "greater moon" and a "lesser moon." Jefferson (Exquaestio) http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
Giving Celandra two moons is a tempting idea, and rather traditional in fantasy settings, to boot, but what would the consequences of two moons be? With two moons, Celandra's tides would be complex and more difficult to predict. The size of each moon and the distance from Celandra would affect tides, as well as the development of calendars. We have a hard time reconciling lunar and solar time here on Earth, with one moon; how hard would it be with two? And would the moons be tidally locked to Earth or not? On a different note, some scientists postulate that a single large moon is a neccessary requirement for a planet to develop complex life. This is, of course, untestable at the moment. Of course, before talking about Sun, moons, and planets, we should answer the question of whether Celandra's cosmology is Ptolemaic/geocentric or Copernican/heliocentric. It makes a considerable difference. Andrew --- RulingNations@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 1/16/04 2:14:34 PM Mountain Standard Time, > juuso@iki.fi > writes: > > RulingNations@aol.com wrote: > > > > >Has anything been developed about Celandra's astronomy? How many > moons, > > >other planets, significant constellations, etc.? > > > > > No, as far as I know. > > OK. I guess we can assume a G-type star and a standard length day > and year. > > How about giving the planet two moons though? A "greater moon" and a > "lesser > moon." > > Jefferson (Exquaestio) > http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
RulingNations@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 1/16/04 2:14:34 PM Mountain Standard Time, juuso@iki.fi >writes: > > >> RulingNations@aol.com wrote: >> >> >Has anything been developed about Celandra's astronomy? How many moons, >> >other planets, significant constellations, etc.? >> > >> No, as far as I know. >> >> > >OK. I guess we can assume a G-type star and a standard length day and year. > >How about giving the planet two moons though? A "greater moon" and a "lesser >moon." > > Suits me. My suggestion is that the greater moon is much like ours (in terms of size and length of ... month). The lesser is much smaller, although still clearly visible, and takes a longer time to go around the planet. juuso ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
--- Juuso Vesantowrote: > RulingNations@aol.com wrote: > > >In a message dated 1/16/04 2:14:34 PM Mountain Standard Time, > juuso@iki.fi > >writes: > > > > > >> RulingNations@aol.com wrote: > >> > >> >Has anything been developed about Celandra's astronomy? How many > moons, > >> >other planets, significant constellations, etc.? > >> > > >> No, as far as I know. > >> > >> > > > >OK. I guess we can assume a G-type star and a standard length day > and year. > > > >How about giving the planet two moons though? A "greater moon" and > a "lesser > >moon." > > > > > Suits me. My suggestion is that the greater moon is much like ours > (in > terms of > size and length of ... month). The lesser is much smaller, although > still clearly visible, > and takes a longer time to go around the planet. Actually, if the 'lesser' moon takes a longer time to orbit the planet, that automatically makes it farther away than the 'greater' moon. It could be that the 'lesser' moon is larger than the 'greater' moon, but appears smaller due to distance. Andrew > juuso > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
Andrew Janssen wrote: > Actually, if the 'lesser' moon takes a longer time to orbit the planet, > that automatically makes it farther away than the 'greater' moon. It > could be that the 'lesser' moon is larger than the 'greater' moon, but > appears smaller due to distance. True. Still I think - unless someone has some specific objections to it - that the lesser moon should be both smaller, and further away, making its visible size much smaller than that of the greater moon. juuso PS. I try to start year 1442 later today; sorry about the delay. ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
In a message dated 2/21/04 10:58:34 PM Mountain Standard Time, andrewdj54701@yahoo.com writes: > Giving Celandra two moons is a tempting idea, and rather traditional in > fantasy settings, to boot, but what would the consequences of two moons > be? > > With two moons, Celandra's tides would be complex and more difficult to > predict. "More difficult," yes, but not significantly so. The difficulty in calculating tides is based more on the eccentricity of the lunar orbits (and don't forget the third dimension), not on the number of moons. So, unless both lunar orbits are wildly eccentric, any experienced seaman would be able to estimate fairly accurately. However, I can see the growth of a mathematically inclined caste to predict the tides which are more severe than exist on our world. > The size of each moon and the distance from Celandra would > affect tides, as well as the development of calendars. We have a hard > time reconciling lunar and solar time here on Earth, with one moon; how > hard would it be with two? And would the moons be tidally locked to > Earth or not? That all depends on what the creator wanted from the world when he made it. > On a different note, some scientists postulate that a single large moon > is a neccessary requirement for a planet to develop complex life. This > is, of course, untestable at the moment. And probably inapplicable to a world with existent magic. > Of course, before talking about Sun, moons, and planets, we should > answer the question of whether Celandra's cosmology is > Ptolemaic/geocentric or Copernican/heliocentric. It makes a > considerable difference. Well, yes, although not for the things I was thinking about. I was assuming a Newtonian system (via Copernicus, among others) since there's so much real-world data and its what's people are used to. I wasn't assuming an Einsteinean system since so few people actually understand relativity. Jefferson (Exquaestio) http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
Just a note: I'm no physicist. However, I was told that the tidal effect (i.e. how big a change there is in the mean sea level) is inversely proportional to the third power of the distance. So if the second moon is both smaller and further than the first, it would have a relatively tiny effect on tides.
That said, having two obvious, moving, celestial figures would (IMO) have a strong effect on the importance of mathematics and astronomy. As well as the perceived structure of any 'heavenly' pantheon. And thus elemental magics...
Bob
>
> From:
> Date: 24/02/2004 0:31:08
> To: celandra@phoenyx.net
> Subject: Re: [Cel] [World] Astronomy
>
>
This message was sent through MyMail http://www.mymail.com.au
Unknown MIME type: null
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
rafry@ozemail.com.au wrote: >Just a note: I'm no physicist. However, I was told that the tidal effect (i.e. how big a change there is in the mean sea level) is inversely proportional to the third power of the distance. So if the second moon is both smaller and further than the first, it would have a relatively tiny effect on tides. > > IMHO, that's exactly as it should be. >That said, having two obvious, moving, celestial figures would (IMO) have a strong effect on the importance of mathematics and astronomy. As well as the perceived structure of any 'heavenly' pantheon. And thus elemental magics... > > I kind of disagree. Celandra has "real" gods, so they don't need to invent many new ones. And early astronomy was based on detecting movements of planets - not the moon. I put the stuff below on the Website as "official" truth - if somebody really wants to have far developed astronomy (or astrology), I can live with that, too. Astronomy is not a very well developed subject on Celandra. Astrology does not exist. Astronomical / cosmological questions are not, in general, considered important. Celandra has a Sol-like G-type star and an Earth-like length of day and year. Unlike Earth, Celandra has 2 moons: the Greater Moon, with size and other properties much like Earth's moon, and the Lesser Moon, which is smaller, and further away. The Lesser Moon has visible size approximately one tenth of the size of the Greater Moon. There are other planets on the solar system, but their existence is not common knowledge. The night sky is lighted by stars. By common understanding, these are holes in the dome that envelops Celandra. Other popular suggestions are that they are faraway worlds in the Dreaming, or ancient gods. The most common cosmological understanding is that Celandra is flat, and the moons and the sun circulate it (geocentric). Some sea-going people, and some highly-learned individuals, know that Celandra is actually a sphere, and some sea-going people know how to navigate by stars. A few mathematically oriented wizard-scientists have suggested that Celandra actually circulates the sun, but generally this is considered an overly complicated setup. A geocentric view is much more sensible. juuso ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
In a message dated 2/24/04 2:23:32 PM Mountain Standard Time, juuso@iki.fi writes: >Celandra has a Sol-like G-type star and an Earth-like length of day and >year. >Unlike Earth, Celandra has 2 moons: the Greater Moon, with size and >other properties much like Earth's moon, and the Lesser Moon, which >is smaller, and further away. The Lesser Moon has >visible size approximately one tenth of the size of the Greater Moon. How about giving the lesser moon a highly eccentric orbit so that last sentence would read: The Lesser Moon is highly eccentric and varies in visible size from about 20% to 3% of the diameter of the Greater Moon. If I get some time I'll start plugging some numbers and report on what I come up with. Jefferson (Exquaestio) http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.
RulingNations@aol.com wrote: >How about giving the lesser moon a highly eccentric orbit so that last >sentence would read: > >The Lesser Moon is highly eccentric and varies in visible size from about 20% >to 3% of the diameter of the Greater Moon. > > Sure, why not. juuso ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send mail to celandra-off@phoenyx.net.