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 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 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 Greg Chalik (22 Jul 2015 06:43 UTC)

Re: [TML] Better situational awareness rupert.boleyn@xxxxxx 19 Jul 2015 09:02 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 Traveller'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 privileged frame of reference out there somewhere, and for now background
radiation is the stand-in IMTU.