|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
10 Myths About Space Travel That Make Science Fiction Better
"We all love to point out the ridiculous bad
physics in science fiction — it's like an awesome sport that everybody wins. (Except physics.) But the truth is, sometimes you have to violate the laws of physics to create science fiction stories that people want to watch. We asked six great physicists to name their favorite occasions when breaking the laws of physics makes science fiction better, and here's what they told us. Here are 10 myths about space travel that make science fiction more fun." See: http://io9.com/5936924/10-myths-abou...fiction-better |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
10 Myths About Space Travel That Make Science Fiction Better
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 20:34:13 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
wrote: The easy solution here is that, in those future societies, numerous breakthroughs in physics have occurred, such as zero point energy, inertial dampers, etc. ;) Star Trek did attempt to explain many of the problems listed in this article, such as with the Universal Translater (which is scoffed at), Inertial Dampeners, Warp Drive, and Subspace Communications (both solving the FTL problem). Phasers have never really been explained very well, but they don't seem to be "beams of light" (we saw Picard and Riker dodge one in Next Generation's "Conspiracy", for example.) The "ships shouldn't be bunched together" complaint is the weakest argument. The seven seas on Earth are pretty expansive too, yet fleets and convoys of ships still stick close together, for navigation, defensive and security purposes. The "safety in numbers" point is probably even more pronounced in space. Brian |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
10 Myths About Space Travel That Make Science Fiction Better
Interesting mention of 2001: A Space Odyssey as the lone exception.
I was fascinated by all those space scenes in the mid-part of the movie. And NONE required any violation of physics. The most intriguing (to me) was the jogging scene with Frank Poole running along the spin-ward direction of the centrifuge and all those bizarre camera angles Kubrick used to show the audience just how odd the locally normal scene actually was. (Yeah I know about the unique "squirrel cage" set that was employed). If the special effect budget has been higher, it would have been cool watching Poole BOUND across the centrifuge with 30ft leaps in the anti-spin-ward direction... Ha! You don't need to screw with physics to make SF interesting. Dave |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
10 Myths About Space Travel That Make Science Fiction Better
David Spain used his keyboard to write :
You don't need to screw with physics to make SF interesting. Depends on how tightly you want to limit yourself. Other than _Orphans of the Sky_, the idea of travel to distant planets using the physical principles we currently know about ... makes _Moby Dick_ and _War and Peace_ seem like short stories. /dps -- Who, me? And what lacuna? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
10 Myths About Space Travel That Make Science Fiction Better
"Brian Thorn" wrote in message
... The "ships shouldn't be bunched together" complaint is the weakest argument. The seven seas on Earth are pretty expansive too, yet fleets and convoys of ships still stick close together, for navigation, defensive and security purposes. The "safety in numbers" point is probably even more pronounced in space. Yes and no. Keep in mind, except during UNREP, even ships in a fleet may be miles apart, even possibly over the horizon. It depends a lot on the situation. That said, I do think BSG actually did it well given how quick the Raiders could pop in and out, you'd want the the other ships close by so it could provide flak cover and fighter cover (the Vipers didn't have jump capability) until the fleet could jump. Brian -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
10 Myths About Space Travel That Make Science Fiction Better
On 8/25/2012 3:18 PM, Snidely wrote:
David Spain used his keyboard to write : You don't need to screw with physics to make SF interesting. Depends on how tightly you want to limit yourself. Other than _Orphans of the Sky_, the idea of travel to distant planets using the physical principles we currently know about ... makes _Moby Dick_ and _War and Peace_ seem like short stories. /dps Orphans of the Sky was one of my favorite SF stories, FWIW. There is another way to the stars that also doesn't stretch physics even if it stretches engineering beyond today. And that is ship the DNA and grow the people on-site. Could make for a very interesting 1st person SF story. Maybe been done already? Anyone? Dave |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
10 Myths About Space Travel That Make Science Fiction Better
David Spain wrote:
Interesting mention of 2001: A Space Odyssey as the lone exception. In the space arena, agreed. There are some others that approach. In Bablyon 5 the Earth ships used rotating hulls and actual thrust for everything but hyperspace travel, so there are partial examples. You don't need to screw with physics to make SF interesting. If anyone has not seen Gattaca I urge you to rent of buy it. A movie about genetic engineering with no special effects and no violation of physics. Proof that a good enough script in SF needs no special effects. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
10 Myths About Space Travel That Make Science Fiction Better
In article , Doug Freyburger
wrote: David Spain wrote: Interesting mention of 2001: A Space Odyssey as the lone exception. In the space arena, agreed. There are some others that approach. In Bablyon 5 the Earth ships used rotating hulls and actual thrust for everything but hyperspace travel, so there are partial examples. There was one episode where a starfury, attacking a ship, rotated 180 degrees after passing its target so it could keep firing at it while continuing on its original path. One of the guys I was watching it with jumped to his feet. "Yes! That's how you do it!" -- Chris Mack "If we show any weakness, the monsters will get cocky!" 'Invid Fan' - 'Yokai Monsters Along With Ghosts' |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
10 Myths About Space Travel That Make Science Fiction Better
"Invid Fan" wrote in message ...
In article , Doug Freyburger wrote: David Spain wrote: Interesting mention of 2001: A Space Odyssey as the lone exception. In the space arena, agreed. There are some others that approach. In Bablyon 5 the Earth ships used rotating hulls and actual thrust for everything but hyperspace travel, so there are partial examples. There was one episode where a starfury, attacking a ship, rotated 180 degrees after passing its target so it could keep firing at it while continuing on its original path. One of the guys I was watching it with jumped to his feet. "Yes! That's how you do it!" The remake of the BSG was often good in this way. There's a battle scene where they're strafing the Resurrection ship and basically point the noise at the target and then fly "sideways". Which totally works in space. There's another scene where Starbuck is discussing tactics and how "flying" in space is not the same as in the atmosphere and how you can do things like flip over in .X seconds without changing your heading. -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Educational value in science fiction | [email protected] | History | 0 | March 13th 09 02:55 PM |
Science fiction writers on Science Channel tonight | Rtavi | Misc | 3 | August 7th 06 01:42 PM |
Science Fiction | LAH | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | August 7th 05 04:15 PM |
sci.space.policy = science fiction | Andrew Nowicki | Policy | 4 | June 22nd 04 04:46 PM |
Science Fiction Film Name | Greg D. Moore \(Strider\) | Space Shuttle | 7 | April 15th 04 08:33 AM |