RE: A flaw in science fiction.

RE: A flaw in science fiction. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

garyFLR -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/9/2013 4:46:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 quote: ORIGINAL: garyFLR Okay Zonie, what's wrong with this lovely lady? Well, nothing, except that one night with her, and you won't live to see morning. [;)] I have to tell you Zonie, I'm strangely aroused [:)].

MalcolmNathaniel -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/9/2013 3:10:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: garyFLR Yes, I remember that one, very nasty! Was it the Psions in Red Dwarf that tried to suck Lister's brains out, while disguised as the lovely Kochanski? No. It was the Psirens and she was the weather girl from channel 27. RIMMER: What's the delay? LISTER: (VO. Dist.) A couple of Psirens wiped each other out fighting over my brains ... Oh, no. It's the TV weather girl from channel 27. KRYTEN: Sir. Fight it! Don't look at her. LISTER: (VO. Dist.) It's not that easy, Kryten -- you can't see what she's doing with her pointy stick.

MalcolmNathaniel -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/9/2013 3:16:48 PM)
Back the the OP: In actuality, anything not accelerating at 1 G (give or take due to height above the surface, angle of incidence, etc.) is going to be artificially maneuvered. Very few of the decent novels I've read use 1 G. Any "hard" science fiction will have the author doing lots of math to figure out the proper orbital mechanics. Larry Niven would be a good place to start. He gets most of his research done with the help of people from JPL.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/9/2013 6:34:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 This is serious, just about every book or movie dealing with earth encountering an alien life form, there is always the clue that it is an artificial body because it is "decelerating at one gee." There in lies the flaw. One gee is the gravitational constant on the earth, but on a planet with lighter of heavier gravity, it would be different. They all come from a 1 gee planet. (Problem solved).

garyFLR -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 5:40:42 AM)
The Sontarans, in Doctor Who come from a heavier gravity planet, I think, because, when they get to Earth, don't they implode if you prick their spacesuits/armour...or something?

SoulAlloy -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 6:18:35 AM)
Nope - they have a vent at the back which if you whack can stun them... No self destruct buttons though the only self exploding aliens I can think of are the Bomber Squigs from Warhammer 40k...

MercTech -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 12:00:35 PM)
On 1G etc... I have a feeling that it may be the Hollywood attitude that anyone that can pass ninth grade science is overqualified to write a script. Or, that the producer insists on lowest common denominator dialog and uses a term even the proles will have heard before. Most science fiction has flaws in it. "What if" stories are predicated that if this and such condition actually existed, this is how things could turn out. "Hard" science fiction often uses a current, but unproven, theory as its "what if". The other end of the spectrum pulls a "what if" out of the imagination and runs with it. We usually call that fantasy. My girl gets miffed at me when I point out the continuity and science flaws in movies. <sigh> I like to point them out and giggle. I'm reminded of what Leigh Richmond said in her class on Science Fiction: Structure and Theory, "No one minds what your errors of theory are in a story as long as you consistently apply them throughout the story." Stefan

MasterCaneman -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 3:18:19 PM)
The problem with "hard" SF is it's harder to replicate than what we're used to seeing. And frankly, less interesting, mainly because most of us have seen real spacecraft in some manner already. The "one-g-lay-everything-out-like-an-oceangoing-vessel" is simply because it'd cost a fortune to the SFX to show a ship in any other manner. Most of the SF you see on TV (at least the good stuff) tends to distract the viewer from the technical impossibilities and focus on the characters instead. While it'd be nice to see the heroes getting their asses kicked in real high-G maneuvers, the problems and costs required would be (no pun intended) astronomical. Star Trek introduced the 'lean on command' shot while someone shook the camera because it was cheap to do and served its purpose. Written SF tends to breeze by the limits with liberal doses of 'handwavium' and 'unobtainium' to dance around the how and why of how the characters get where they're going. It saves them from weeks or months of research, and the inevitable wonk who points out why their mass-conversion ratios were all wrong or some BS like that. Yeah, it pisses off the hard-cores, but the authors are in business to sell books, and if smoothing out some technical issues or tossing them out altogether gets their manuscript completed and edited on time, it's all good.

MalcolmNathaniel -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 3:44:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie They all come from a 1 gee planet. (Problem solved). This may be more accurate than you think. Current theory is that most life (or at least any that would want to settle on Earth) is going to come from a fairly narrow orbital band which is likely to produce Earth sized planets (give or take.) It's sort of a "sweet spot" for life as we know it. And on that note: Star Trekkin'

MarcEsadrian -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 4:14:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 This is serious, just about every book or movie dealing with earth encountering an alien life form, there is always the clue that it is an artificial body because it is "decelerating at one gee." There in lies the flaw. One gee is the gravitational constant on the earth, but on a planet with lighter of heavier gravity, it would be different. Personally, I'm always annoyed by the idea aliens would attack us in conventional ways, using armadas of ships and exotic artillery. And alien invasion would most likely begin with a quick and efficient biological attack that would wipe us out completely and leave a silent earth ripe for the taking.

KYsissy -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 5:36:34 PM)
If you are traveling at the speed of light and you turn the headlights on, can you see what's ahead?

KYsissy -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 5:50:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman I'm too busy to dig out the formula, but the deceleration is equal to their initial entry velocity when they enter the atmosphere. Some of the older Soviet capsules would go to six Gs coming back in. Humans can usually handle up to 9 for short periods of time. 10 meters per second squared is the gravitational constant for Earth. As for the Soviet capsules hitting 6 g's, that can only be when they hit the denser atmosphere and decelerated. In a vacuum, they would maintain 1 g acceleration and the feeling of weightlessness.

MalcolmNathaniel -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 8:03:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian Personally, I'm always annoyed by the idea aliens would attack us in conventional ways, using armadas of ships and exotic artillery. And alien invasion would most likely begin with a quick and efficient biological attack that would wipe us out completely and leave a silent earth ripe for the taking. The answer is far simpler: Drop rocks. This is covered very well in Niven and Pournelle's "Footfall." The basic idea is that if you drop something from orbit gravity puts all of the energy into the ensuing explosion. The asteroid belt has lots of really big rocks in it. A slight push and they fall out of orbit right into the path of the Earth. Big time boomies ensue.

garyFLR -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 10:31:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SoulAlloy Nope - they have a vent at the back which if you whack can stun them... No self destruct buttons though the only self exploding aliens I can think of are the Bomber Squigs from Warhammer 40k... Then why did they have a vent in the back of their spacesuits? Seems a bit daft to me.

MasterCaneman -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 11:39:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KYsissy quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman I'm too busy to dig out the formula, but the deceleration is equal to their initial entry velocity when they enter the atmosphere. Some of the older Soviet capsules would go to six Gs coming back in. Humans can usually handle up to 9 for short periods of time. 10 meters per second squared is the gravitational constant for Earth. As for the Soviet capsules hitting 6 g's, that can only be when they hit the denser atmosphere and decelerated. In a vacuum, they would maintain 1 g acceleration and the feeling of weightlessness. If they maintained a 1G acceleration, they would have Earth-normal gravity aboard, not weightlessness.

MasterCaneman -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/11/2013 11:41:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MalcolmNathaniel quote: ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian Personally, I'm always annoyed by the idea aliens would attack us in conventional ways, using armadas of ships and exotic artillery. And alien invasion would most likely begin with a quick and efficient biological attack that would wipe us out completely and leave a silent earth ripe for the taking. The answer is far simpler: Drop rocks. This is covered very well in Niven and Pournelle's "Footfall." The basic idea is that if you drop something from orbit gravity puts all of the energy into the ensuing explosion. The asteroid belt has lots of really big rocks in it. A slight push and they fall out of orbit right into the path of the Earth. Big time boomies ensue. The easiest and most effective weapon would be their drive system itself. All they'd have to do is turn it on overhead and it's lights out for us.

KYsissy -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/12/2013 3:31:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman quote: ORIGINAL: KYsissy quote: ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman I'm too busy to dig out the formula, but the deceleration is equal to their initial entry velocity when they enter the atmosphere. Some of the older Soviet capsules would go to six Gs coming back in. Humans can usually handle up to 9 for short periods of time. 10 meters per second squared is the gravitational constant for Earth. As for the Soviet capsules hitting 6 g's, that can only be when they hit the denser atmosphere and decelerated. In a vacuum, they would maintain 1 g acceleration and the feeling of weightlessness. If they maintained a 1G acceleration, they would have Earth-normal gravity aboard, not weightlessness. The space station and all the satellites have a 1 g acceleration and experience weightlessness. That is all the earth is capable of due to gravity alone. The moon is roughly 1/6 of g on earth. Acceleration can also be a change in direction of the velocity vector. Which is where the 6 gs jet pilots experience comes from.

Moonhead -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/12/2013 7:00:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MalcolmNathaniel Back the the OP: In actuality, anything not accelerating at 1 G (give or take due to height above the surface, angle of incidence, etc.) is going to be artificially maneuvered. Very few of the decent novels I've read use 1 G. Any "hard" science fiction will have the author doing lots of math to figure out the proper orbital mechanics. Larry Niven would be a good place to start. He gets most of his research done with the help of people from JPL. Apart from the stuff he just makes up. Myself, I think it's a bit of a cheek when somebody who's supposed to write his sf around real science comes out with all of this nonsense about hyperspace, alleged extraterrestials that are more or less human in perspective and wormholes. You can get that from any amount of pulp sf writers who are a lot more fun than Niven.

Moonhead -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/12/2013 7:02:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: garyFLR quote: ORIGINAL: SoulAlloy Nope - they have a vent at the back which if you whack can stun them... No self destruct buttons though the only self exploding aliens I can think of are the Bomber Squigs from Warhammer 40k... Then why did they have a vent in the back of their spacesuits? Seems a bit daft to me. It's a recharge socket where they plug themselves into their spaceship: they just call it a vent.

garyFLR -> RE: A flaw in science fiction. (11/12/2013 7:30:02 AM)
How come everyone's more knowledgeable than me [:(]?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875