Abstract
This note records an empirical method for estimating an implied time offset between two observed planetary configurations in the Elite: Dangerous System Map (orrery view). Approaching any Radicoida Unica site in HIP 87621 appears to induce an abrupt change in planetary longitudes and sometimes day/night presentation. We treat the two configurations as “snapshots” and solve for the elapsed time \(\Delta t \) that best reconciles their relative longitudes under the orbital periods displayed by the Elite System Map (ESM).
1. Observational setup
Measurements are taken in a top-down system map view (directly above the ecliptic plane), using a fixed angular reference:
- 0° points to screen-right.
- Angles are recorded as clockwise-positive (CW+).
- Reported values may be negative; these are treated as equivalent under a 360° wrap.
- Given UI presentation limits, uncertainty is modeled as approximately ±1°.
2. Data model
Let \( \theta_{i,A} \) and \( \theta_{i,B} \) be the measured longitudes (in degrees) for planet \(i\) at snapshots A and B. The displayed ESM orbital period \(P_i\) (in days) defines an angular speed \( \omega_i \) under a uniform circular approximation:
\[ \omega_i = \frac{360^\circ}{P_i} \]Under a continuous evolution model, the “true” displacement between snapshots is:
\[ \Delta\theta_i^{\ast} = \omega_i\,\Delta t \]However, map longitudes are only observed modulo 360°, yielding:
\[ \Delta\theta_i \equiv (\theta_{i,B} - \theta_{i,A}) \pmod{360^\circ} \]Therefore, each planet admits an unknown integer wrap count \(k_i \in \mathbb{Z}\):
\[ \omega_i\,\Delta t \approx \Delta\theta_i + 360^\circ k_i \]3. Measurement and handling the CW-positive convention
Two images were captured of the Sol system in Orrery Mode, pre and post timeshift. Most orbital mechanics conventions take counterclockwise-positive (CCW+) when viewed from ecliptic north. A measurement for each planetary position was recorded in degrees using Inkscape's angular measurement tool which takes clockwise-positive (CW+), so conversion was necessary using:
\[ \theta^{(\text{CCW})} = -\,\theta^{(\text{CW})} \pmod{360^\circ} \]4. Estimation algorithm (robust modulo fit)
We solve for \( \Delta t \) by searching wrap counts consistent with a bounded time window and selecting the solution minimizing a weighted residual.
4.1 Candidate generation
For a slow-moving “anchor” planet \(a\) (typically Saturn or Uranus), the candidate time for each integer wrap \(k_a\) is:
\[ \Delta t_{(k_a)} = \frac{\Delta\theta_a + 360^\circ k_a}{\omega_a} \]Candidate times outside a chosen window (e.g. \([0, 200\text{ years}]\)) are discarded.
4.2 Wrap snapping for each candidate
For each candidate \( \Delta t \), infer the best wrap for every planet by rounding:
\[ k_i = \mathrm{round}\!\left(\frac{\omega_i\,\Delta t - \Delta\theta_i}{360^\circ}\right) \]Then define residuals:
\[ r_i(\Delta t) = \omega_i\,\Delta t - (\Delta\theta_i + 360^\circ k_i) \]4.3 Objective function
With per-planet uncertainties \(\sigma_i\) (here, \(\sigma_i \approx 1^\circ\)), define weights \(w_i = 1/\sigma_i^2\). A simple least-squares objective is:
\[ J(\Delta t) = \sum_i w_i\,r_i(\Delta t)^2 \]If we expect occasional outliers (misread angles, UI drift, or staged values), a robust alternative is the Huber loss \(L_\delta\):
\[ L_\delta(r)= \begin{cases} \frac{1}{2}r^2, & |r|\le\delta,\\ \delta\left(|r|-\frac{1}{2}\delta\right), & |r|>\delta, \end{cases} \]yielding \( J(\Delta t)=\sum_i w_i\,L_\delta(r_i(\Delta t))\), typically with \(\delta \approx 2\sigma_i\) to \(3\sigma_i\)
5. The solution is naturally \( \pm \Delta t \)
Without an external arrow-of-time, the equations are time-reversible: if \(\Delta t\) is a solution, then \(-\Delta t\) also satisfies the congruences after consistent wrap adjustment. Thus the method returns a magnitude \(|\Delta t|\) and reports both signs unless contextual information selects one.
6. Results summary
Outer-planet-only fit
Restricting to Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus provides a stable estimate (slow bodies strongly constrain wraps). Using ESM orbital periods, the implied shift was:
\( \Delta t \approx \pm 26{,}510 \text{ days} \approx \pm 72.6 \text{ years}. \)
This is consistent with “about one Uranus-scale timespan” while allowing integer orbit wraps for Jupiter and Saturn.
7. Data table
| Planet | ESM Orbital Period (days) | Snapshot A angle (CW+) | Snapshot B angle (CW+) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercury | 88.0 | -162 | -28 |
| Venus | 224.7 | 18 | 28 |
| Earth | 365.3 | -139 | 28 |
| Mars | 687.0 | -36 | 168 |
| Jupiter | 4332.6 | 85 | 95 |
| Saturn | 10759.2 | 154 | -63 |
| Uranus | 30687.1 | 294 | -141 |
8. Notes and limitations
- The method assumes uniform angular motion based on ESM orbital periods. Deviations can occur if FDev have used staged or frozen configurations for specific instances.
- The outer planets provide the most stable epoch constraints; inner planets can function as “staging detectors.”
- An absolute epoch interpretation requires a known reference snapshot or a lore-based anchor; otherwise we report \( \pm\Delta t \).
9. Conclusion and a bit of tin foil
Solving the least-squares for seven planets has shown there is a single dominant magnitude at 26,518 days (≈72.6 years). There is no indication of a time arrow, so 26,518 holds true for epochs in the future and the past. While Uranus and Saturn hold stable for this duration, the inner planets are not shown in their respective corresponding positions; there is no precise time/position match, meaning Keplerian propagation was not used to generate the configuration of the inner planets shown after the time jump. This points to the Earth-Venus-Sun transit alignment being something curated, a flag of sorts, and something worthy of note. The angles of Venus and Earth at this epoch are shown at 28° and 28°, respectively, yet if we actually jumped back to that time, the planets would be at different positions and we would not witness a transit taking place. It should also be noted that the actual orbits of Venus and Earth are in a resonance period of 8 years (the number 8 is known to be significant, peppered throughout Elite lore).
At first I thought 72.6 years ago was insignificant in Elite lore, but after some digging, 72.6 years ago (3239) is exactly 88 years after the end of the first Thargoid War. At that time, The Alliance were making major advances in reverse engineering Thargoid technology; engineering which led to the development of the FSD. Is it possible the Thargoids are planning to halt the development of the FSD at source? (Probably not...)