Welcome to BookBoardz.com!
FAQFAQ   SearchSearch      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log in/Register/PasswordLog in/Register/Password

'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets?

 
   Book Forums (Home) -> Larry Niven RSS
Next:  Larry Niven: "Handmeals" = tortillas, in the real world.  
Author Message
Star

External


Since: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 8



(Msg. 1) Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 6:34 pm
Post subject: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets?
Archived from groups: alt>books>larry-niven (more info?)

Something's recently occurred to me. Here's a quote from 'Ringworld' -
'The Pioneer ran a twenty-four-year cycle that covered four suns and
their systems: five oxygen-atmosphere worlds and the Ringworld.'

The Pioneer is Prill's ramship. At sublight speeds, these planets must
be very close both to each other and the Ring; but unless I'm
mistaken, there's no mention of them at all beyond the brief
references in the first book.

Another in the list of interesting but undeveloped/ignored Niven
ideas, maybe?

 >> Stay informed about: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? 
Back to top
Login to vote
max

External


Since: Jul 09, 2003
Posts: 169



(Msg. 2) Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 11:46 pm
Post subject: Re: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Star wrote:

> Something's recently occurred to me. Here's a quote from 'Ringworld' -
> 'The Pioneer ran a twenty-four-year cycle that covered four suns and
> their systems: five oxygen-atmosphere worlds and the Ringworld.'
>
> The Pioneer is Prill's ramship. At sublight speeds, these planets must
> be very close both to each other and the Ring; but unless I'm
> mistaken, there's no mention of them at all beyond the brief
> references in the first book.
>
> Another in the list of interesting but undeveloped/ignored Niven
> ideas, maybe?

Yeah, but isn't this Niven's 1-gee acceleration, arbitrary top speed
Bussard ramjets? With one gee acceleration, you reach strongly
relativistic speeds in only a year. Pushing more than that, you
approach ultrarelativistic speeds. Twenty years or so straight line
acceleration takes you to the core of the Galaxy.

Granted, starting and stopping four times would reduce your total range
quite a bit. 24 years divided between four systems gives a maximum of 6
years per leg, so 3 years' acceleration from rest to top speed. Though
for more bang for your buck, you'd probably choose legs where you go to
a cluster of stars that's relatively far away, so it could be relatively
far.

Backing up, though, the stars nearby the Ringworld are totally
unexplored. All the trips there have gone straight from Known Space to
the Ringworld and back. None of the nearby stars have ever been probed
at all. I doubt it's so much an untapped resource for ideas; it's just
some background for the vicinity of the Ringworld: namely, that there
are interesting stars around there too -- just like in Known Space.

--
Erik Max Francis && max.DeleteThis@alcyone.com && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && AIM erikmaxfrancis
It is dark in my favorite dream.
-- Aaliyah

 >> Stay informed about: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Severian

External


Since: Apr 11, 2006
Posts: 4



(Msg. 3) Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:18 pm
Post subject: Re: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 23:46:40 -0700, Erik Max Francis <max.DeleteThis@alcyone.com>
wrote:

>
>Yeah, but isn't this Niven's 1-gee acceleration, arbitrary top speed
>Bussard ramjets? With one gee acceleration, you reach strongly
>relativistic speeds in only a year. Pushing more than that, you
>approach ultrarelativistic speeds. Twenty years or so straight line
>acceleration takes you to the core of the Galaxy.
>
I see your point, and it looks like we're making different
assumptions. I was thinking that the twenty-four year period referred
to an outside (objective) timeframe; I think you've assumed that it's
subjective (ie onboard) time.

Either way, though, as you say, it's interesting rather than ripe for
development.
 >> Stay informed about: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? 
Back to top
Login to vote
max

External


Since: Jul 09, 2003
Posts: 169



(Msg. 4) Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:18 pm
Post subject: Re: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Severian wrote:

> I see your point, and it looks like we're making different
> assumptions. I was thinking that the twenty-four year period referred
> to an outside (objective) timeframe; I think you've assumed that it's
> subjective (ie onboard) time.

I don't have the quote in front of me, but if it was given by Prill,
then it's more likely that the figure she gave was subjective time.
After all, what would she know about the details except how long the
trip was.

--
Erik Max Francis && max.DeleteThis@alcyone.com && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && AIM erikmaxfrancis
Maybe this world is another planet's Hell.
-- Aldous Huxley
 >> Stay informed about: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Dr John Stockton

External


Since: Oct 04, 2005
Posts: 15



(Msg. 5) Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 1:01 pm
Post subject: Re: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

JRS: In article <HsudnTpiAM-5eCLZnZ2dnUVZ_oSdnZ2d.DeleteThis@speakeasy.net>, dated
Thu, 20 Jul 2006 13:18:44 remote, seen in news:alt.books.larry-niven,
Erik Max Francis <max.DeleteThis@alcyone.com> posted :
>Severian wrote:
>
>> I see your point, and it looks like we're making different
>> assumptions. I was thinking that the twenty-four year period referred
>> to an outside (objective) timeframe; I think you've assumed that it's
>> subjective (ie onboard) time.
>
>I don't have the quote in front of me, but if it was given by Prill,
>then it's more likely that the figure she gave was subjective time.
>After all, what would she know about the details except how long the
>trip was.

The year is subjective time and undefined length; it is unrelated to the
Ringworld, but it is hinted that it could be an Earth year.

The round trip took 24 subjective years, and was over 300 light years
long (known by Prill); there were five stops /en route/.

Ringworld, Chapter 21.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
 >> Stay informed about: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Aidan Karley

External


Since: May 14, 2005
Posts: 63



(Msg. 6) Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:11 pm
Post subject: Re: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

In article <QUH4pjG2IMwEFwpf.DeleteThis@merlyn.demon.co.uk>, Dr John Stockton wrote:
> >I don't have the quote in front of me, but if it was given by Prill,
> >then it's more likely that the figure she gave was subjective time.
> >After all, what would she know about the details except how long the
> >trip was.
>
> The year is subjective time and undefined length; it is unrelated to the
> Ringworld, but it is hinted that it could be an Earth year.
>
> The round trip took 24 subjective years, and was over 300 light years
> long (known by Prill); there were five stops /en route/.
>
Hmmm, doing the numbers non-relativistically, I get an average
acceleration of the order of 118m/s, so either their years had a lot more
standard seconds than ours, or the relativistic effects are much bigger
than I would have thought. Ah, but that would give a peak velocity on the
order of 20 times legal maximum. So my analysis has holes in it, and a
classical approximation is wildly out.
My working was :
5 stops. So 6 legs:
RW-Stop1 Leg 1 ; Stop1-Stop2 Leg 2 ;
Stop2-Stop3 Leg 3 ; Stop3-Stop4 Leg 4 ;
Stop4-Stop5 Leg 5 ; Stop5-RW Leg 6

Therefore, average of 50ly and 4 years per leg.
Turn-over on an average leg at 25ly and 2 years.
s=ut+0.5(a.t^2)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ clearly not appropriate for relativistic velocities

Initial velocity = final velocity = 0 (to all practical intents and
purposes). u=0.
Rearrange to get Acceleration = 2.s/t^2

s = 25 ly = 25*365*24*60*60*300000*1000 (ly * days/year * hour/day *
min/hour * sec/min * km/sec * m/km = m) = 2.37E+017 m
t = 2 years = 2 * 365 * 24 * 60 * 60 s = 63072000 s
Therefore, average acceleration is 118.91 m/s/s
Peak velocity = a.t = 7500000000 m/s = 7,500,000 km/s

Actually more like 25 times legal max.

I see a website that says "relativistic speeds begin at about 0.14c
(on the basis that the 1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) "gamma" factor goes above 1.01, I
think).
A purported Usenet Physics FAQ
(http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html) at gives
a relativistic equation for s, a, and t (in slightly different terms) as
s = (c2/a) [cosh(aT/c) - 1]

Hmmm, I don't have the maths to rearrange that to get a direct
solution, but approximating and iterating I still get, for a 2 year
journey (ship time), and a leg length of 25LY, an acceleration on the ship
of 23 m/s/s, which still is a touch more than you'd want to live in
without artificial gravity.
Can you check the maths.

--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Written at Sun, 30 Jul 2006 17:40 +0100, but posted later.
 >> Stay informed about: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Dr John Stockton

External


Since: Oct 04, 2005
Posts: 15



(Msg. 7) Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:48 pm
Post subject: Re: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

JRS: In article <VA.0000102b.078e3993.DeleteThis@validemailaddresstoa.news.group>,
dated Sun, 30 Jul 2006 21:11:10 remote, seen in news:alt.books.larry-
niven, Aidan Karley <doIlookDAFTenoughTOpost.DeleteThis@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.g
roup> posted :
>In article <QUH4pjG2IMwEFwpf.DeleteThis@merlyn.demon.co.uk>, Dr John Stockton wrote:
>> >I don't have the quote in front of me, but if it was given by Prill,
>> >then it's more likely that the figure she gave was subjective time.
>> >After all, what would she know about the details except how long the
>> >trip was.
>>
>> The year is subjective time and undefined length; it is unrelated to the
>> Ringworld, but it is hinted that it could be an Earth year.
>>
>> The round trip took 24 subjective years, and was over 300 light years
>> long (known by Prill); there were five stops /en route/.
>>
> Hmmm, doing the numbers non-relativistically, I get an average
>acceleration of the order of 118m/s, so either their years had a lot more
>standard seconds than ours, or the relativistic effects are much bigger
>than I would have thought.

Subjective Years << Light Years strongly implies peak speed near to that
of light.


> [ classical ] ...
>Therefore, average acceleration is 118.91 m/s/s

A Newtonian leg of 50 light-years, taking 4 years, with turnover,
requires acceleration of 118.75 m/s (your years are 0.2425 days
undersize).


>Peak velocity = a.t = 7500000000 m/s = 7,500,000 km/s
>
> Actually more like 25 times legal max.

Exactly. Mean speed = 50 LY / 4 Y, peak is double mean.


> [ relativistic ] ...
> Hmmm, I don't have the maths to rearrange that to get a direct
>solution, but approximating and iterating I still get, for a 2 year
>journey (ship time), and a leg length of 25LY, an acceleration on the ship
>of 23 m/s/s, which still is a touch more than you'd want to live in
>without artificial gravity.
> Can you check the maths.

22.823 m/s/s.

Done with <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/astron-3.htm#TDA>,
inserting 50 LY, Turnover, and adjusting the acceleration to get the
desired classical and relativistic ship times taken.

The code is visible in the box below, which scrolls.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.
 >> Stay informed about: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Aidan Karley

External


Since: May 14, 2005
Posts: 63



(Msg. 8) Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:02 am
Post subject: Re: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

In article <zmyQ1ODswfzEFwHj DeleteThis @merlyn.demon.co.uk>, Dr John Stockton
wrote:
> >Therefore, average acceleration is 118.91 m/s/s
>
> A Newtonian leg of 50 light-years, taking 4 years, with turnover,
> requires acceleration of 118.75 m/s (your years are 0.2425 days
> undersize).
>
Not my worst approximation.

> > Actually more like 25 times legal max.
>
> Exactly. Mean speed = 50 LY / 4 Y, peak is double mean.
>
DOH!


--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Written at Tue, 01 Aug 2006 12:19 +0100, but posted later.
 >> Stay informed about: 'Ringworld' - the Citybuilder trade planets? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
   Book Forums (Home) -> Larry Niven All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Page 1 of 1

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]