Modern Sci-Fi - the enslavement of scientific reality to religious delusion

wrote:

If you wanted to be limited to a "verified phenomena", you can write
about builiding a Moon base or expedition to Mars - and thats all.

Maybe we could define subgenres in terms of what you can't write about.
For instance, the
non-vampire subgenre, the non-telepathy subgenre, the non-FLT subgenre,
and so forth.

Gene Ward Smith wrote:

Maybe we could define subgenres in terms of what you can't write about.
For instance, the
non-vampire subgenre, the non-telepathy subgenre, the non-FLT subgenre,
and so forth.

I particularly like that last one. It cuts out a huge percentage of the
sci.math cranks.

--
Erik Max Francis && && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && AIM, Y!M erikmaxfrancis
But you're not going to be there tomorrow. And it's all about
tomorrow. -- Montgomery Brogan

Erik Max Francis wrote:
Gene Ward Smith wrote:

Maybe we could define subgenres in terms of what you can't write about.
For instance, the
non-vampire subgenre, the non-telepathy subgenre, the non-FLT subgenre,
and so forth.

I particularly like that last one. It cuts out a huge percentage of the
sci.math cranks.

Not to mention Star Trek.

Gene Ward Smith wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:

Gene Ward Smith wrote:


Maybe we could define subgenres in terms of what you can't write about.
For instance, the
non-vampire subgenre, the non-telepathy subgenre, the non-FLT subgenre,
and so forth.

I particularly like that last one. It cuts out a huge percentage of the
sci.math cranks.


Not to mention Star Trek.


I don't recall Star Trek having anything involving Fermat's Last
Theorem.

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/

Sea Wasp wrote:

I don't recall Star Trek having anything involving Fermat's Last
Theorem.

As they say, Google is your friend:

The Royale

In this episode, Picard is studying Fermat's Great Theorem, and says it
has remained unsolved for 800 years. Five years after the episode was
made the theorem was actually solved, by Andrew Wiles and Richard
Taylor from Princeton University. In the Star Trek universe, this was
referred to in an episode of Deep Space Nine, and is considered as a
subtle correction for Picard's statements.

When I saw this episode, I yelled at the screen that everyone knows
that Fermat had been proven in the 21st century. So, I was wrong also.
My reasoning was that Ribet had very recently proven that
Taniyama-Shimura implies Fermat, and I thought sometime in the 21st
century Taniyama-Shimura was likely to be proven. It didn't seem like
1987 was a very good year to commit to the proposition that Fermat was
still going to be open by Picard's day, though I doubt very much anyone
connected with the show knew of Ribet's work, which was not yet
published.

Gene Ward Smith wrote:

It didn't seem like
1987 was a very good year to commit to the proposition that Fermat was
still going to be open by Picard's day, though I doubt very much anyone
connected with the show knew of Ribet's work, which was not yet
published.

Betting on anyone connected with the show pretty much knowing much of
anything is probably a bad idea.

--
Erik Max Francis && && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && AIM, Y!M erikmaxfrancis
When in doubt, win the trick.
-- Edmund Hoyle

Gene Ward Smith wrote:
When I saw this episode, I yelled at the screen that everyone knows
that Fermat had been proven in the 21st century. So, I was wrong also.
My reasoning was that Ribet had very recently proven that
Taniyama-Shimura implies Fermat, and I thought sometime in the 21st
century Taniyama-Shimura was likely to be proven. It didn't seem like
1987 was a very good year to commit to the proposition that Fermat was
still going to be open by Picard's day, though I doubt very much anyone
connected with the show knew of Ribet's work, which was not yet
published.

Well, you were wrong about "everyone knows" in 1987. I think that they
did check details like this, didn't they? Absent Google, they would
phone someone who should know. Just to make sure it hadn't /been/
proved.

Now I'm not sure if UK TV has yet shown the story where Data explains
that Britain conceded the War Against Terrorism to the IRA in 2030 or
something. This while the Enterprise apparently is fighting Irish
terrorists in space who have kidnapped Dr. Crusher, or was it Dr.
Pulaski. Well, there's still time for that one.

Robert Carnegie wrote:

Well, you were wrong about "everyone knows" in 1987. I think that they
did check details like this, didn't they?

I very much doubt it. I suppose someone may have asked if it had been
proven yet. However, they don't fact-check the science, so why the math?