What do you consider GOOD science fiction?

[Gatefan1976]

Dilithium crystals may be fictional but they are believable (and acceptable) because the science behind using minerals as motive devices has been proven. We actually had a working knowledge of nuclear fission via the use of "rocks", i.e. uranium, for several decades before ST:TOS. There is a proven scientific basis for using minerals to power engines as shown by the use of small nuclear reactors used to power submarines. That right there is the science, not magic, behind Dilithium crystals. So it is perfectly acceptable for ST to use Dilithium powered warp drive as the science fiction premise of the show. To put a finer point on it: The warp engines have a legitimate scientific explanation and basis. Yes warp engines are fictional, but that's why it's called science fiction. Nonetheless, there is genuine scientific theory behind this premise.

Yes, there is real science behind the idea of a warp engine.
What I asked was weather there is any known element that can govern / control a Matter/Anti-matter explosion in the same way that the control rods in a nuclear reactor do.
If your answer is "no"...................

Now you can argue that there is a scientific basis for using minerals in communication devices, quartz, silicon, etc., but the stones in SGU aren't backed up by any scientific explanation as to how those minerals work. Holding a cell phone to one's head is not the same as having one's consciousness ripped out of one's body and instantaneously transferred across the universe. Conversely, the subspace communication devices on ST make sense because they don't transfer people's consciousness, they simply "make a phone call", which is something that makes sense scientifically.

No, it does not. It is as equally impossible with our current understanding of technology and physics to achieve Real time communications over a single light year as it is to transfer a persons consciousness. it makes no sense whatsoever, and neither have ever been explained. It is made "more plausible" because it *is* just a phone call, something we have accepted as possible for over a century. We are also far more willing to give it a pass because of what it is used for. ST uses FTL subspace comms as a "MacGuffin" to further the story, SGU used them as a central plot element, rather than just a device.
Just remember here, I am NOT defending the *use* of the stones here, I found them stupid, and I reiterate that the use of the "plate" rather than the comm tower was even more stupid. What I am saying is that despite the veneer of science provided by ST, it still has many concepts that really do just break the laws of physics. Uranium may be able to fuel a nuclear fission reaction, but just because I call my version Dyranium, say it can power a Matter/antimatter reaction and couch it in understandable terms does not make that element any more "real".

 

[Gatefan1976]

That doesn't answer the question. You posited these "subgenres" as being representative of what you consider to be science fiction. So where's the science?

Again, I did NOT posit these sub-genres, that is how the writing community views them. I LINKED them yes, and I USE them yes, but I did not "Make them up"
As for where the science is, read the definitions. Not everything is "hard sci-fi", but do you think say the Cyberpunk genre does not have Science? If you go back and recall your first post into this thread, you posited that Scifi was just as much a reflection of tech as it's impact on people. (which is soft Sci-fi). If I write a book about the impact on humanity by the creation of replicators (ST replicators that is), and concentrate not so much on HOW the replicators work but how their creation affects US, is it not a sci-fi story?

What if I write a story about the effects of Humanity on an Alien being like Superman?
Alien beings are inherently Sci-fi as well, they are ALIEN, but instead of talking about Superman's powers, I write about how *we* influenced *him* It's won't be a hard Sci-fi story to be sure, but will it suddenly stop being sci-fi and go into speculative fiction?

 

[OMNI]

It has been clear for quite some time that you have MAJOR anger management issues, and you are completely lacking in communications skills (at least when typing) . Everybody is sick of your outbursts and your name calling and general disruption of the site. It is hard to imagine that you are the same relatively calm dude I played DayZ with an spoke online with. Whatever the case, if you leaving means no more having to clean up threads where you have vomited vitriol, then so be it.

Thanks for your participation! Best regards.

fuck off you goddamn crackhead take your non growing irrellevant buggy FAILED suposed "scifi" (scifi as labeled by the allmighty crackhead) site and shove it up your fucking ass!
personally i am sick of your lacking intellegence your will to bend over backwards and take it up the ass by christian fucktards and your goddamn valleygirl LA hippie Clean living BULLSHIT! along with your classist shit.

fuck you!

 

[Overmind One]

fuck off you goddamn crackhead take your non growing irrellevant buggy FAILED suposed "scifi" (scifi as labeled by the allmighty crackhead) site and shove it up your fucking ass!
personally i am sick of your lacking intellegence your will to bend over backwards and take it up the ass by christian fucktards and your goddamn valleygirl LA hippie Clean living BULLSHIT! along with your classist shit.

fuck you!

Why the fuck are you still here? I thought you were going to leave and go be with the other intellectually retarded cavemen who have issues. You just mosey on off to your own fantabulous scifi website and hang out with all the other maladjusted hotheads who have no social skills. Things are not working out for you here. Post a couple more of these dumbass personal attack posts on this website and you will be banned.

 

[Overmind One]

Again, I did NOT posit these sub-genres, that is how the writing community views them. I LINKED them yes, and I USE them yes, but I did not "Make them up"
As for where the science is, read the definitions. Not everything is "hard sci-fi", but do you think say the Cyberpunk genre does not have Science? If you go back and recall your first post into this thread, you posited that Scifi was just as much a reflection of tech as it's impact on people. (which is soft Sci-fi). If I write a book about the impact on humanity by the creation of replicators (ST replicators that is), and concentrate not so much on HOW the replicators work but how their creation affects US, is it not a sci-fi story?

The writing community is not placing science fantasy in a subgenre of scifi, they are putting it under fantasy.

What if I write a story about the effects of Humanity on an Alien being like Superman?
Alien beings are inherently Sci-fi as well, they are ALIEN, but instead of talking about Superman's powers, I write about how *we* influenced *him* It's won't be a hard Sci-fi story to be sure, but will it suddenly stop being sci-fi and go into speculative fiction?

Not really (bolded). The alien itself is only an element. The scifi part comes from the story and the premise, not just because there is an alien. Mork and Mindy is not science fiction, and neither was My Favorite Martian or Mars Attacks or Alien Nation. You cant do science fiction without having science as a main orienting component.

 

[Rac80]

Wow- this thread has been all over the place! So here’s my two cents worth:
For me, good Science Fiction depends on more than the medium. What works in a book may not translate well to a movie and a series may have a larger canvas than a movie. It is the quality overall that matters to me. Good Science Fiction (capitalized) IMHO is Isaac Asimov. I am a huge Asimov aficionado…BUT do not mention Will Smith’s I, Robot on pain of a slow torturous death! They took a great collection of short stories, changed the theme, the main character (Dr. Susan Calvin never in her life looked like Bridget Monahan! ), twisted it badly , put in FX and called it Asimov. Uh hell no! I shudder to think of his Foundation series put on film – it’s a cerebral story, not an action one. I can only think of a few Asimov books that would translate well to film. Actually much of Star Wars, IMHO, was stolen/borrowed from Asimov’s Galactic Empire and his writings of the 50’s, especially The Stars Like Dust and Pebble in the Sky.



I read other authors as well – Ray Bradbury, Arthur C. Clarke, Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, just to name a few. I have various of the post-Jedi Star wars books as well as a smattering of other writers.


I am a Trekkie from the beginning – I don’t insist on serious science in my sci-fi- I suspend my disbelief for most Trek because it is so fun! BUT I do heckle Trek (no way in hell Picard would have been given back his ship AFTER he was co-opted by the Borg as Locutus, just to mention one heckle…) for problems in their military, the hand-waving that happens, and lack of continuity. I loved DS9 because of the politics of Bajor and the religion aspects. (Loved watching Kai Wynn fret over Sisko being the Emissary.) It took a futuristic look at both.
I even enjoyed ENT and ignored the changes from “canon” merely because, IMHO, even in a futuristic society – things will be forgotten, over-written (for a more palatable “history” ), forgotten, and/or still be “classified”- so they aren’t widely known.




I enjoyed Stargate: SG1 and most of Stargate Atlantis on their premise and acceptable writing (mostly). The stories were fun, especially in the early SG1 and fulfilled my desire for sci-fi. (As my siggie shows- I am currently enjoying the later SG1 while working out ) Currently there is nothing on tv that fills that need. Yes I know Falling Asleep is coming back- hubby and I are debating on wasting our time with it.



I like sci-fi to make me think, give me hope for the future, and be fairly consistent within the story. For example: Asimov wrote few (if any) murderous robots which is why I, Robot fails spectacularly- the robots were made into killers, something Asimov never did, he only allowed for the possibility - his Three Laws of Robotics solved the killer robot problem. (side note- he coined the term “positronic brain” which TNG used to describe Data’s brain )



I enjoy movies like The Terminator, Trek, Stargate, Planet of the Apes, Star Wars, the Matrix, Somewhere in Time, etc… It’s a pretty broad scope I know, but if it is well done, well-written, and well-acted; science fiction is my preferred movie genre. I don’t mind a bit of fantasy thrown in (Star Wars), mystery/spy stuff (Total Recall), family relations (Journey to the Center of the Earth) romance (Somewhere in Time), or even super heroes (Superman)- as long as it’s well done. The trick is finding something that I consider well done.
So for me, I guess, “the science” isn’t as important as the quality of the writing.

 

[Overmind One]

Wow- this thread has been all over the place! So here’s my two cents worth:
For me, good Science Fiction depends on more than the medium. What works in a book may not translate well to a movie and a series may have a larger canvas than a movie. It is the quality overall that matters to me. Good Science Fiction (capitalized) IMHO is Isaac Asimov. I am a huge Asimov aficionado…BUT do not mention Will Smith’s I, Robot on pain of a slow torturous death! They took a great collection of short stories, changed the theme, the main character (Dr. Susan Calvin never in her life looked like Bridget Monahan! ), twisted it badly , put in FX and called it Asimov. Uh hell no! I shudder to think of his Foundation series put on film – it’s a cerebral story, not an action one. I can only think of a few Asimov books that would translate well to film. Actually much of Star Wars, IMHO, was stolen/borrowed from Asimov’s Galactic Empire and his writings of the 50’s, especially The Stars Like Dust and Pebble in the Sky.

All of this^^^ Im a huge Asimov fan too. And there is no doubt that his work on Galactic Empire influenced Star Wars, even if only loosely. I also agree on Foundation. If anyone ever does it, they need to do it in a trilogy or quadrilogy and do it on the level of epic-ness they used for Lord of the Rings. I Robot took too much license and deviated too much from the book IMO.

I read other authors as well – Ray Bradbury, Arthur C. Clarke, Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, just to name a few. I have various of the post-Jedi Star wars books as well as a smattering of other writers.

Earlier in the thread, I mention those same exact scifi writers as being my favorites. I want to read the EU Star Wars books Gatefan mentioned because they sound interesting.

I am a Trekkie from the beginning – I don’t insist on serious science in my sci-fi- I suspend my disbelief for most Trek because it is so fun! BUT I do heckle Trek (no way in hell Picard would have been given back his ship AFTER he was co-opted by the Borg as Locutus, just to mention one heckle…) for problems in their military, the hand-waving that happens, and lack of continuity. I loved DS9 because of the politics of Bajor and the religion aspects. (Loved watching Kai Wynn fret over Sisko being the Emissary.) It took a futuristic look at both.

Agree. And I will be the first to admit that of all the Trek shows, DS9 was actually an interpersonal drama...space opera. But because it was set in the Trek scifi universe, there were plot devices we could use from that universe and use a "connectedness" to bring it all together. I could imagine the Enterprise off somewhere else in that universe, exploring other quadrants and having adventures . There were lots of stumbles with canon in Trek, but not overt crap except the Prophets and the Q.

I even enjoyed ENT and ignored the changes from “canon” merely because, IMHO, even in a futuristic society – things will be forgotten, over-written (for a more palatable “history” ), forgotten, and/or still be “classified”- so they aren’t widely known.

I got into Ent later, but hated it when it was being aired.

I enjoyed Stargate: SG1 and most of Stargate Atlantis on their premise and acceptable writing (mostly). The stories were fun, especially in the early SG1 and fulfilled my desire for sci-fi. (As my siggie shows- I am currently enjoying the later SG1 while working out ) Currently there is nothing on tv that fills that need. Yes I know Falling Asleep is coming back- hubby and I are debating on wasting our time with it.

I like sci-fi to make me think, give me hope for the future, and be fairly consistent within the story. For example: Asimov wrote few (if any) murderous robots which is why I, Robot fails spectacularly- the robots were made into killers, something Asimov never did, he only allowed for the possibility - his Three Laws of Robotics solved the killer robot problem. (side note- he coined the term “positronic brain” which TNG used to describe Data’s brain )

I enjoy movies like The Terminator, Trek, Stargate, Planet of the Apes, Star Wars, the Matrix, Somewhere in Time, etc… It’s a pretty broad scope I know, but if it is well done, well-written, and well-acted; science fiction is my preferred movie genre. I don’t mind a bit of fantasy thrown in (Star Wars), mystery/spy stuff (Total Recall), family relations (Journey to the Center of the Earth) romance (Somewhere in Time), or even super heroes (Superman)- as long as it’s well done. The trick is finding something that I consider well done.
So for me, I guess, “the science” isn’t as important as the quality of the writing.

All that stuff!

 

[shavedape]

Yes, there is real science behind the idea of a warp engine.
What I asked was weather there is any known element that can govern / control a Matter/Anti-matter explosion in the same way that the control rods in a nuclear reactor do.
If your answer is "no"...................



No, it does not. It is as equally impossible with our current understanding of technology and physics to achieve Real time communications over a single light year as it is to transfer a persons consciousness. it makes no sense whatsoever, and neither have ever been explained. It is made "more plausible" because it *is* just a phone call, something we have accepted as possible for over a century. We are also far more willing to give it a pass because of what it is used for. ST uses FTL subspace comms as a "MacGuffin" to further the story, SGU used them as a central plot element, rather than just a device.
Just remember here, I am NOT defending the *use* of the stones here, I found them stupid, and I reiterate that the use of the "plate" rather than the comm tower was even more stupid. What I am saying is that despite the veneer of science provided by ST, it still has many concepts that really do just break the laws of physics. Uranium may be able to fuel a nuclear fission reaction, but just because I call my version Dyranium, say it can power a Matter/antimatter reaction and couch it in understandable terms does not make that element any more "real".

That's exactly the point I'm making so why are you trying to disagree? That makes no sense.

 

[Overmind One]

That's exactly the point I'm making so why are you trying to disagree? That makes no sense.

He wants to make them seem like they are just a sideline plot device like subspace (I think). They might have gotten away with making them just be able to transmit audio...in a stretch. Maybe even audio and video (like in Voyager). But full on vacations on earth, and to go clubbing, to have sex, to sign divorce papers (they actually did that), it is just way way out there and is magic.

 

[Gatefan1976]

That's exactly the point I'm making so why are you trying to disagree? That makes no sense.

It's not so much that I am disagreeing with you, but trying to show that just because one is used as a central element, and one is used as a Macguffin does not mean that the MacGuffin is any more or less science based. There is no hard science behind any method of FTL communication, no matter what you use it for, or how much or little you use it.

 

[Overmind One]

It's not so much that I am disagreeing with you, but trying to show that just because one is used as a central element, and one is used as a Macguffin does not mean that the MacGuffin is any more or less science based. There is no hard science behind any method of FTL communication, no matter what you use it for, or how much or little you use it.

You are correct. At the moment, I dont believe there is any sort of theoretical science which could allow electromagnetic waves (even light) travel faster than light. A ship with warp technology or the ability to fold space? Maybe. But a signal? Not really. Having said that, you need to have interstellar communications to tell the story in a connected universe. You cant make it a tedious affair to just communicate orders to a ship's captain, or to talk to somebody on the next planet over. It is like the requisite "whoosh" you hear when a ship passes the camera in space. There cant ever really be a "whoosh" and the writers and viewers know that. But it does make the ship movement seem more real. But it doesnt get put in the realm of fantasy because of those elements.

If the show is centered around FTL communications, there is a big problem. Like say..."Galactic Switchboard" where our protagonists eavesdrop on all FTL communications like an interstellar NSA! Or, if those communications were such a huge overwhelming aspect of the show that their nature became obvious (it is made up).

 

[Joelist]

There also is no solid scientific basis behind any of the FTL transport methods either. All of the warp drive theories have big holes in them as does space folding FTL. Hyperspace is an out and out fantasy at this point in time. As a result, we wind up having to classify it science fiction if it is explained and if the explanation has at least the veneer of plausibility.

 

[Overmind One]

There also is no solid scientific basis behind any of the FTL transport methods either. All of the warp drive theories have big holes in them as does space folding FTL. Hyperspace is an out and out fantasy at this point in time. As a result, we wind up having to classify it science fiction if it is explained and if the explanation has at least the veneer of plausibility.

There is a solid basis behind warp engines, not so for hyperspace or anything like transwarp travel or folding space. The warp science is here (you have seen this):

http://www.space.com/22430-star-trek-warp-drive-quantum-thrusters.html

The science is solid enough for NASA to have moved from theoretical to applied testing on the principle. But none of the other concepts qualify as "imminent" or even within the realm of remote possibility...yet. But warp drive could happen within your lifetime.
But you cannot attach an engine or a warp drive to a transmitted signal. Even the soliton wave was unstable.

 

[Joelist]

Actually the article itself speaks of the holes. They need exotic matter that we don't even have a theoretical way to create or keep stable. Also the only actual work they have is a slightly different light wave reading on an interferometer, which they readily admit does not mean a warp drive is feasible.

Space folding is in a different yet similar bind. In this case ( based on work by Kip Thorne and Stephen Hawking) we know WHAT we want to induce ( a super intense gravity gradient sort of like a black hole) but not how to do it and especially how to do it without crushing the ship.

The other FTL concepts are all fantasies at this point in time.

 

[Joelist]

As to other tech, I would note that this paradigm would place the SGU communications stones and both the SG-1 and SGA body swapping relics in the fantasy realm. Can you create a "scientific sounding" explanation for them? Perhaps. Will it be plausible? NOPE!



One problem that immediately comes to light is how human memory works according to current medical knowledge. There is a neurological process that does involve physiological changes in the brain. How would this be transferred? How would the transferred consciousness call up memories? Basically, this "tech" requires an understanding of human being as having consciousnesses that are utterly divorced from their bodies - a.k.a. fantasy.

 

[Gatefan1976]

how do you transfer a compete hologramatic Doctor and have him go commando based on his memories?

 

[Overmind One]

Actually the article itself speaks of the holes. They need exotic matter that we don't even have a theoretical way to create or keep stable. Also the only actual work they have is a slightly different light wave reading on an interferometer, which they readily admit does not mean a warp drive is feasible.

Space folding is in a different yet similar bind. In this case ( based on work by Kip Thorne and Stephen Hawking) we know WHAT we want to induce ( a super intense gravity gradient sort of like a black hole) but not how to do it and especially how to do it without crushing the ship.

The other FTL concepts are all fantasies at this point in time.

Still, there is SCIENCE behind the principle, which makes it fit squarely within the definition of "science fiction":

science fiction
noun
: stories about how people and societies are affected by imagined scientific developments in the future

Now, try and give me anything even remotely theoretical which can explain the communications stones or a magic wand or witches. If there is a path to the science, it is still science despite what is missing in present time. They were using communicators in Star Trek TOS exactly the same way as we use them in reality now (thanks to TOS for their existence).

You cant just imagine FTL communications into existence, but you can follow a scientific path (theoretical) to a warp engine. The only way to make something do what those stones were doing is to conjure them up.

 

[Joelist]

Still, there is SCIENCE behind the principle, which makes it fit squarely within the definition of "science fiction":



Now, try and give me anything even remotely theoretical which can explain the communications stones or a magic wand or witches. If there is a path to the science, it is still science despite what is missing in present time. They were using communicators in Star Trek TOS exactly the same way as we use them in reality now (thanks to TOS for their existence).

You cant just imagine FTL communications into existence, but you can follow a scientific path (theoretical) to a warp engine. The only way to make something do what those stones were doing is to conjure them up.

I already did so in my next post after this one - it can't be done.

 

[Joelist]

how do you transfer a compete hologramatic Doctor and have him go commando based on his memories?

The Doctor at least is a computer program. So long as there is a computer on the receiving end with sufficient processor, memory, a compatible basic operating system and holo emitters he can function. His memories after all are just stored code in his program. And Voyager was pretty good about respecting those parameters.

 

[Overmind One]

As to other tech, I would note that this paradigm would place the SGU communications stones and both the SG-1 and SGA body swapping relics in the fantasy realm. Can you create a "scientific sounding" explanation for them? Perhaps. Will it be plausible? NOPE!



One problem that immediately comes to light is how human memory works according to current medical knowledge. There is a neurological process that does involve physiological changes in the brain. How would this be transferred? How would the transferred consciousness call up memories? Basically, this "tech" requires an understanding of human being as having consciousnesses that are utterly divorced from their bodies - a.k.a. fantasy.

Okay, you do get it. . That was the other problem...memory. How could one go to earth via the stones, have new experiences (memories) which are stored...where? In the host brain or in the "ghost"? What happens with the brain of the host after the "ghost" leaves it? Do they remember that they were inhabited by the ghost? If not, why? Despite it being impossible, where is the power source in the stone which allows it to "find" the other stone billions of light years away? Being able to do that implies some sort of "listening" mode, and there needs to be some sort of signal transmitted and received in order for these transfers to take place.

They just fail no matter how they are looked at.
--- merged: Apr 29, 2014 1:19 AM ---

I already did so in my next post after this one - it can't be done.

I didnt see it until I posted mine.