spot the stupid mistake
- Thread starter cassar
- Start date
Oh it would definitely not change the laws of motion, But 50 years ago, if someone told you of a portable phone so small that you could forget you had it in your pocket, one that you didn't even need to touch to use, would you have found it possible? Or even comprehensible? I'm not sure I would have. And most of these shows and stories are set quite far ahead in the future(to discard those that use a completely different universe altogether). With today's technology it might be impossible to adapt to directional changes at near light speed but does that mean that it will always be impossible no matter what?
My point being, if we look at say, the recent 500 years of human history, a relatively short period considering how long we've been on this rock, and take what they had then and what we have now and compare them, our tech would be very, very incomprehensible and will most definitely be called 'Magic'. I'm going to be bold and say that our tech compared to what we will have in 500 years from now will look equally magic to us.
IdofEntity
New member
Sounds very similar to Arthur C. Clarke's assertion that any sufficiently advanced technology will be indistinguishable from magic to a less developed species. To an extent I can believe that. Those that remain logical though will theorize that there is a scientific explanation as for why that technology exists, but may not know what that explanation is. I doubt the term 'magic' would be used, but we would definitely be in awe and unable to explain it.
Science fiction stories are best related to when they're still couched in the same basic scientific laws that we understand in the present. There are two terms I keep coming across amongst Science Fiction writers. AM and FM. Actual Machinery, and F^*#ing Magic. Actual Machinery gives off noise, needs regular maintenance, breaks, needs lubricant, rusts, etc. FM is a dangerous thing to use in Science Fiction because it's indistinguishable from the kind of Magic you'd read about in Fantasy novels. (Magical Teleportation vs. the Enterprises' Teleporter)
Einion is right that we can imagine force shields that a super-human in power armor can carry which will absorb the kinetic and thermal energy of an Orbital Bombardment of Plasma Missiles. It could run for 30,000 years on a single battery charge and turn homing missiles back at their target with the precision of a sniper. Thermal energy from the sun will be admitted through the barrier, but it will deflect the thermal energy from a Lasgun. HE explosive rounds will simply rock the Marine back on his heels while he can accept a hug from an orphan. The shielding will conform perfectly with his legs and feet so that he can maintain mobility and keep traction.
But unless it's based in theories we can comprehend then it loses all credibility of being possible. I'm not saying Warhammer 40k is the most believable setting, but when FM overwhelms the presence of AM in a setting it's just turned to arbitrary crap. The trick is finding the right blend to make it seem fantastic, and plausible. Improbable is fine as long as it can sound plausible. Objects that defy the laws of physics as we know it that are commonplace? It needs at least a pseudo-explanation. The fact that we're even trying to discuss the merits or plausability of the setting implies that it has at least some merit to it.
Please note: I don't mean to come across as hostile. This is just a subject I enjoy and am enthusiastic about.
Science fiction stories are best related to when they're still couched in the same basic scientific laws that we understand in the present. There are two terms I keep coming across amongst Science Fiction writers. AM and FM. Actual Machinery, and F^*#ing Magic. Actual Machinery gives off noise, needs regular maintenance, breaks, needs lubricant, rusts, etc. FM is a dangerous thing to use in Science Fiction because it's indistinguishable from the kind of Magic you'd read about in Fantasy novels. (Magical Teleportation vs. the Enterprises' Teleporter)
Einion is right that we can imagine force shields that a super-human in power armor can carry which will absorb the kinetic and thermal energy of an Orbital Bombardment of Plasma Missiles. It could run for 30,000 years on a single battery charge and turn homing missiles back at their target with the precision of a sniper. Thermal energy from the sun will be admitted through the barrier, but it will deflect the thermal energy from a Lasgun. HE explosive rounds will simply rock the Marine back on his heels while he can accept a hug from an orphan. The shielding will conform perfectly with his legs and feet so that he can maintain mobility and keep traction.
But unless it's based in theories we can comprehend then it loses all credibility of being possible. I'm not saying Warhammer 40k is the most believable setting, but when FM overwhelms the presence of AM in a setting it's just turned to arbitrary crap. The trick is finding the right blend to make it seem fantastic, and plausible. Improbable is fine as long as it can sound plausible. Objects that defy the laws of physics as we know it that are commonplace? It needs at least a pseudo-explanation. The fact that we're even trying to discuss the merits or plausability of the setting implies that it has at least some merit to it.
Please note: I don't mean to come across as hostile. This is just a subject I enjoy and am enthusiastic about.
Last edited:
cassar
BALLSCRATCHER
dont be daft mush this is exactly the kind of debate the threads for. a very sensible opinion and explained so even i can get the drift, nothing up there i dont agree with in fact if ah cud yoos ma wurds proper i would have said much the same thing
Ah, Ditto!
Sorry Id, I can't rep your post for some reason, I'll just rep it in my heart.
Einion
New member
Haha :sarcastic:
Read much Iain M. Banks?
A vast army of SF fans, myself included, would be very unhappy to hear his science (let's call it tech if it helps) maligned by being classed as F^*#ing Magic yet in many cases the Culture's science is totally beyond any current expectation of ever being possible. Not even talking about their high-end stuff, that they use to build their ships or the weapons available to the GSVs, even their small arms can be something else. But still completely believable in context.
And this isn't anything new - FTL is already an entrenched idea of this kind, which we generally accept now without batting an eyelid.
So do we now draw a line and say because it's not couched "in the same basic scientific laws that we understand in the present" that it's FM and shouldn't be used in serious SF? Because I can tell you, going back about 30 or 40 years science-fiction writers have been debating about whether they should use the crutch of FTL... and you know what the general consensus was of course; even among hard-SF writers it wasn't a universal no.
Who said anything about batteries :glasses-nerdy:
Zero-point energy? Portable nuclear (fusion, not fission) powerplants? Once you buy that fusion is possible it's not a stretch that it can be made smaller - especially with a thousand years and an unlimited number of scientists to work on the problem! It wasn't a stretch to have man-portable nukes in the late 50s, so why is it a stretch to accept small fusion plants in 2011? Especially given the era we're considering.
Oh come on, let's get realistic about what we're starting with here. I call into being *waves wand* a new term, TBS, and use that as the descriptor for nearly all the tech in the 40K universe.
The new Total BS class of tech of course includes tanks in the far far far future - where we have reasonable means to travel interstellar distances let's not forget - that are clearly not fit for purpose. Seriously the AFVs have designs straight from the furtive imagination of a 12-year-old! Yikes, best not to throw any reasonable science in there it might spoil things.
Einion
IdofEntity
New member
Given, FM is a harsh term to apply to it. Still, Iain Banks has admitted in interviews himself that it's technobabble. It's believable if you suspend your disbelief. That's fine, and I have nothing against suspending disbelief. But this thread is about being skeptical, isn't it?
This is an example on how our viewpoints differ. My eyelids bat. Physicists don't agree on this. At all. Relative FTL is theoretically possible. Even probable (with light itself). But Strict FTL is not generally accepted. There are a few basic concepts sketched out, including manipulating the 11th dimension of an area around an object, but no real ideas as of yet. (No one is even sure if manipulating the 11th dimension around an object can be accomplished) Even an alternate universe theory (which The Warp of Warhammer 40k is based on) is technically possible on the sole basis of it hasn't been disproven. We'd have to prove their are no alternate universes, or that there's no way for us to harness one.
Authors are of course free to use whatever they want. But if you say that a miniaturized reactor fueled by unobtanium is allowing an impenetrable force field to be projected, then you may as well say it's fairy dust enchanted with the tears of a sea cow for all that it matters. They become exchangable and arbitrary. Good fiction can be written with either of these in place, but it's not the technobabble/pixiebabble that makes it good fiction. The mettle of the story then rests on the ideas and interactions of the sentient beings within it. After all, it's conflict that makes good fiction. Not unicorn poop. Kind of like a Macguffin. You just need some arbitrary nonsense to get the plot moving.
If the fluff backed it up I'd say it's improbable for their society, but not impossible. With the current fluff (and especially with the tongue in cheek attributes I posted earlier) I'd say we may as well have them wear bowler hats that harness the radiation of sunspots to amplify their intelligence before they can manage a field like that.
Yeah, it's not consistent. I agree.
Tercha
Member
Effectively science fiction interstellar or interplanetary combat is simple, approach target planet (assuming you would target a similar world to your own) at near light speed - totally undetectable - virus (sic) cobalt, or neutron bomb the planet, apply brakes, about a year later (based on 1G deceleration) turn around fly back and mop up the remnants. Though the munitions braking from near light speed before they hit will alert everyone, not much time to set up a defence if any were possible.
That wouldn't make a good game, so Science fantasy is employed utilising "deux ex machinea" to bypass physics, stopping almost instantly, teleporting, psychic navigation etc etc
That wouldn't make a good game, so Science fantasy is employed utilising "deux ex machinea" to bypass physics, stopping almost instantly, teleporting, psychic navigation etc etc
cyberakuma
New member
ooh ooh i know this one admittedly so does anyone with wiki-access but don't diminish my knowledge i learned it from an alan moore article in dodgem logic on pulp sci-fi it's thomas a swift's electric rifle...thing is though there was no a in the character's name from the novels he was just tom swift
and funnily enough in the same book where tom swift got his electric rifle he also built a new airship called the black hawk so this could be a sign that in 100 years time we may end up seeing a useless laser rifle lovingly referred to as a popgun or a torch
as for the fluff stuff why does sisters armour offer the same defense as a big hulking suit of space marine power armour while still being suitably figure hugging is this purely for asthetics reasons and that space marines want to hide the 17 tits they developed from genetic modification?
Einion
New member
Yes of course it is technobabble, virtually all future tech and science in Space Opera fiction could also legitimately be described that way.
All that stuff we're so accustomed to now, including artificial gravity (or something akin to it which is essentially the same thing just with a different name), inertial dampening (ha!), energy shields, workable FTL systems, is by what we know to be possible today unlikely to say the least. So do we now draw the line behind them to rule them all out or accept that they're a necessary fiction?
My point back on page 4 was that the 40K stuff looked to be more fantasy than anything from appearances and I've read nothing since that would discount that impression. Beyond that, consistency is a major factor to prevent the "Huh? Why this but not that?" effect and it's quite plain that it's lacking in the 40K universe.
Yes I'm aware of that. By 'we' I meant people in general; it should go without saying that every major SF franchise in English that takes place in space uses some form of FTL... I'm not even going to have a ponder about that since I'm pretty sure I'd remember Slow Ships if I'd seen them in anything really major.
*cough* I didn't say it was impenetrable. You inferred that, it wasn't implied (I didn't even imply they were strong enough to withstand orbital bombardment but I let that go).
I think it's also unfair to suggest it be fuelled by something unobtainable, surely you have some idea the amount of energy in just one cup of heavy water? Besides we know unobtainium is a structural material, not a fuel source LOL
I introduced the point about the arbitrary nature of these kinds of decisions dude.
And it's not in any way like saying it's enchanted fairy dust. There are some really sound ideas (by the standards of FTL etc.) presented in some stories about suit shields or small area shields and how they might work and be powered. I'll see if I can dig out a reference to a particularly good one, it might actually be Haldeman's The Forever War but I'm really not sure.
Yes indeed. Not necessarily any need to go there in person to try to slug it out. The energy in very fast collisions is quite staggering (square of the velocity) and there are plenty of follow-on effects to boot.
If wiping out the enemy is the primary concern it's much more efficient to just throw objects at them from the Oort cloud.
Einion
Torn blue sky
New member
So technically Einstein was right when he said "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones" then =P
freakinacage
Well-known member
some of the main invasion weaps they use in the algebraist by iain m banks is super accelerated space debris
Torn blue sky
New member
Just give me a Lightsaber, i'll be fine! *Twummm thwummmm*
Well I won't comment on "real" but I will make this one comment. Borg? You can't handle the Borg! And neither could the Star Trek writers who apparently couldn't handle the thought of a collective enemy that just "was" merely on the group think level. So they created the "queen" in order to get a central point of plot/hate. The Borg Queen ironicaly is the opposite of what the original vision of the borg was.
First example of this (as far as I know) is in "This Island Earth" (1955) with the bombardment of Metaluna by the Zagons. IIRC, they used simple rocket ships to aim the asteroids through the defense system and then broke off at the last second.
freakinacage
Well-known member
http://www.johnnolanfilms.com/animatronics/showreel-flash.php
got how i think the power fist in it near the beginning
got how i think the power fist in it near the beginning
