Author Topic: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?  (Read 11678 times)

Offline Galvatron

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 502
  • No matter where you go, there you are
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #15 on: June 11, 2013, 06:29:39 PM »
There is nothing wrong with bio-tech in sci-fi, there is plenty of room for that sort of thing to be worked in.
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side"

Offline Wordmaker

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 917
  • Paul Anthony Shortt
    • View Profile
    • Paul Anthony Shortt's Blog
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #16 on: June 11, 2013, 06:43:45 PM »
So you don't believe that the same basic fantasy story can be told in a high fantasy, western, Victorian or World War 2 setting? Because they've all been done. They just get dressed up differently.

At their core, for example, Star Wars is the same story as Eragon, Pirates of the Caribbean, and the recent Captain America movie. The detail just get changed to suit the setting.

As for thrillers? For sure you can tell the same stories. For one thing, you can take cell phones out of the equation in a number of plausible ways.

Offline the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh

  • O. M. G.
  • ***
  • Posts: 39098
  • Riding eternal, shiny and Firefox
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #17 on: June 11, 2013, 07:08:31 PM »
So you don't believe that the same basic fantasy story can be told in a high fantasy, western, Victorian or World War 2 setting? Because they've all been done. They just get dressed up differently.

Maybe we're seeing things on different scales, then, because when you say "dressed up differently", I am seeing different degrees of contrivance within the shape of the world to make the story work.

Quote
At their core, for example, Star Wars is the same story as Eragon, Pirates of the Caribbean, and the recent Captain America movie. The detail just get changed to suit the setting.

IIRC, all of those stories have points where they would break if everyone in the story had the same functional communications capacity, relative to the scale of the setting, as having cellphones (or internet access) as default enables.

Quote
As for thrillers? For sure you can tell the same stories. For one thing, you can take cell phones out of the equation in a number of plausible ways.

Oh aye, of course you can.  But having to do that is to my mind itself making the story a different shape; it is throwing in a factor you don't get for free the same way you do in a pre-industrial setting.

For another example, I can think of maybe two or three examples of fantasy authors who have actually thought through the intersection of a world with fairly common magical healing, and what that does to population growth in a quasi-medieval setting, and the economics of the whole deal. 
Mildly OCD. Please do not troll.

"What do you mean, Lawful Silly isn't a valid alignment?"

kittensgame, Sandcastle Builder, Homestuck, Welcome to Night Vale, Civ III, lots of print genre SF, and old-school SATT gaming if I had the time.  Also Pandemic Legacy is the best game ever.

Offline Wordmaker

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 917
  • Paul Anthony Shortt
    • View Profile
    • Paul Anthony Shortt's Blog
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #18 on: June 11, 2013, 07:16:24 PM »
We probably are. I'm thinking of story in very broad terms, along the lines of "boy from humble origins discovers secret heritage and becomes a hero."

Offline Ulfgeir

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #19 on: June 11, 2013, 07:38:07 PM »
How hard the science has to be depends on what kind of story you write. If the rest of the setting is down-to earth gritty pigfarming then you can't very well have FTL-travel without having the mechanics of it worked out. Otherwise it would just be a miracle. On the other hand if it is a larger than life space opera, no need to have it worked out.

The important is that the degree of science you use fit with the setting and the story, and is internally consistent.

/Ulfgeir
I have not lost my mind, it is backed up somewhere on disc...

Offline the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh

  • O. M. G.
  • ***
  • Posts: 39098
  • Riding eternal, shiny and Firefox
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #20 on: June 11, 2013, 07:47:00 PM »
How hard the science has to be depends on what kind of story you write. If the rest of the setting is down-to earth gritty pigfarming then you can't very well have FTL-travel without having the mechanics of it worked out. Otherwise it would just be a miracle.

I'd actually be a little nitpickier here again.  In that I am perfectly fine with SF that is doing "here is the One Thing we are making up out of whole cloth. let us work through the interesting consequences and ramifications of that One Thing" in which the specific One Thing itself is essentially a miracle, but the mechanics of everything else are realistic; I think that sort of exploration is one of the things SF does best.
Mildly OCD. Please do not troll.

"What do you mean, Lawful Silly isn't a valid alignment?"

kittensgame, Sandcastle Builder, Homestuck, Welcome to Night Vale, Civ III, lots of print genre SF, and old-school SATT gaming if I had the time.  Also Pandemic Legacy is the best game ever.

Offline Galvatron

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 502
  • No matter where you go, there you are
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #21 on: June 11, 2013, 07:59:37 PM »
I would also caution againts worlds were normal things like pig farmers dont exist, unless you have a good reason why no one wants to eat bacon anymore.

Just because man can travel the stars doesnt mean we dont still want a bacon cheese burger.

And I would imagine pig farming could still be a down and dirty job, its always been that way and there is a good chance it always will be. It was gritty and dirty in the bronze age and its still dirty now, putting a man on the moon would have seemed a mircle to the Spartans, not so much a mircale to us, running a pig farm is still a gritty and dirty thing.

Everything doesnt need to change, of course you could come up with new ways to do things, thats up to you, and one of the reasons I enjoy writing science fiction more than any other genre =)
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side"

Offline Ulfgeir

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #22 on: June 11, 2013, 08:06:25 PM »
I'd actually be a little nitpickier here again.  In that I am perfectly fine with SF that is doing "here is the One Thing we are making up out of whole cloth. let us work through the interesting consequences and ramifications of that One Thing" in which the specific One Thing itself is essentially a miracle, but the mechanics of everything else are realistic; I think that sort of exploration is one of the things SF does best.

Ok, I give you that. That is of course totally valid, but then that takes a hell of a lot better writing than a lot of authors can do. Or are willing to make the effort.

For example take Star Trek, if you have so you can effectively teleport anyone or anything from anyplace, why then isn't it standard operating procedure for their ships to just beam the whole bridgecrew away from another ship before the combat even happens. Or just beam aboard a really powerful bomb. Especially if you have cloaking capability. The other guys won't know what hit them.

/Ulfgeir
I have not lost my mind, it is backed up somewhere on disc...

Offline Ulfgeir

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #23 on: June 11, 2013, 08:15:17 PM »
I would also caution againts worlds were normal things like pig farmers dont exist, unless you have a good reason why no one wants to eat bacon anymore.

Just because man can travel the stars doesnt mean we dont still want a bacon cheese burger.

And I would imagine pig farming could still be a down and dirty job, its always been that way and there is a good chance it always will be. It was gritty and dirty in the bronze age and its still dirty now, putting a man on the moon would have seemed a mircle to the Spartans, not so much a mircale to us, running a pig farm is still a gritty and dirty thing.

That is absolutely true. Maybe I should explain the term pigfarming. On a Swedish rpg-forum, they coined the phrase for settings that basically had very low levels of magic (if any), and that well the high-end stuff you played were maybe one village's cattleraid against another village. Basically the idea that everying back in mediaeval (or other such period) times were damp, grey, and just plain sucked, and that you would die from blood poisoning if you as much as scratched yourself. As opposed to stuff like D&D where you are expected to have a golf-bag of magical weapons and batman's utilitybelt of magical goodies (and if you don't well you won't stand a chance), yet noone reflects on how the abundance of such magic would affect the world.

/Ulfgeir
I have not lost my mind, it is backed up somewhere on disc...

Offline the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh

  • O. M. G.
  • ***
  • Posts: 39098
  • Riding eternal, shiny and Firefox
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #24 on: June 11, 2013, 08:47:40 PM »
I would also caution againts worlds were normal things like pig farmers dont exist, unless you have a good reason why no one wants to eat bacon anymore.
Just because man can travel the stars doesnt mean we dont still want a bacon cheese burger.

Pigs aren't up there with the most efficient ways to generate food on a starship of finite size; even presuming people still wanting meat, I can see poultry, fish or guinea pigs as a sight more efficient.

(In my particular setting, cats are essentially extinct, after a couple of incidents where people realised that carnivores smart enough to track down all the weaknesses in your tightly managed ecosystem but not smart enough to realise why taking advantage of those weaknesses is anti-survival are a Very Bad Idea for starships or space stations.  For values of "incidents" with five-figure-plus casualty counts.)
Mildly OCD. Please do not troll.

"What do you mean, Lawful Silly isn't a valid alignment?"

kittensgame, Sandcastle Builder, Homestuck, Welcome to Night Vale, Civ III, lots of print genre SF, and old-school SATT gaming if I had the time.  Also Pandemic Legacy is the best game ever.

Offline the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh

  • O. M. G.
  • ***
  • Posts: 39098
  • Riding eternal, shiny and Firefox
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #25 on: June 11, 2013, 08:49:00 PM »
Ok, I give you that. That is of course totally valid, but then that takes a hell of a lot better writing than a lot of authors can do. Or are willing to make the effort.

Agreed entirely.

Quote
For example take Star Trek, if you have so you can effectively teleport anyone or anything from anyplace, why then isn't it standard operating procedure for their ships to just beam the whole bridgecrew away from another ship before the combat even happens. Or just beam aboard a really powerful bomb. Especially if you have cloaking capability. The other guys won't know what hit them.

Indeed. I don't believe I have ever defended Star Trek as good SF and there are reasons for that.
Mildly OCD. Please do not troll.

"What do you mean, Lawful Silly isn't a valid alignment?"

kittensgame, Sandcastle Builder, Homestuck, Welcome to Night Vale, Civ III, lots of print genre SF, and old-school SATT gaming if I had the time.  Also Pandemic Legacy is the best game ever.

Offline Galvatron

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 502
  • No matter where you go, there you are
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #26 on: June 11, 2013, 09:23:25 PM »
Pigs aren't up there with the most efficient ways to generate food on a starship of finite size; even presuming people still wanting meat, I can see poultry, fish or guinea pigs as a sight more efficient.

(In my particular setting, cats are essentially extinct, after a couple of incidents where people realised that carnivores smart enough to track down all the weaknesses in your tightly managed ecosystem but not smart enough to realise why taking advantage of those weaknesses is anti-survival are a Very Bad Idea for starships or space stations.  For values of "incidents" with five-figure-plus casualty counts.)

Indeed, the only thing is I wasnt just talking about how life on a starship goes, more that there are things going on down on the planets and not just on the ships.  Somewhat how firefly does it, lots of ships and all but also lots of people that just live on one world and dont travel around and live a fairly primitive/older life style.

Basiclly saying you can have the starships and space travel, but still have a fairly normal non advanced life on the ground at the same time.

If that makes sense lol

"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side"

Offline Galvatron

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 502
  • No matter where you go, there you are
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #27 on: June 11, 2013, 09:26:46 PM »
That is absolutely true. Maybe I should explain the term pigfarming. On a Swedish rpg-forum, they coined the phrase for settings that basically had very low levels of magic (if any), and that well the high-end stuff you played were maybe one village's cattleraid against another village. Basically the idea that everying back in mediaeval (or other such period) times were damp, grey, and just plain sucked, and that you would die from blood poisoning if you as much as scratched yourself. As opposed to stuff like D&D where you are expected to have a golf-bag of magical weapons and batman's utilitybelt of magical goodies (and if you don't well you won't stand a chance), yet noone reflects on how the abundance of such magic would affect the world.

/Ulfgeir

lol got it, please excuse my hill billy ways, I thought you ment the actual farming of pigs
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side"

Offline Ulfgeir

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #28 on: June 11, 2013, 09:45:01 PM »
lol got it, please excuse my hill billy ways, I thought you ment the actual farming of pigs

Heh. The term they used in Swedish was actually "grisodling", which is silly as "odling" is reserved for growing things. Like plants (or maybe as short for "bakterieodling", like you do in petri dishes). I should have explained it better the first time, I forgot that not everyone had the same reference-point I had. =^_^=

/Ulfgeir
I have not lost my mind, it is backed up somewhere on disc...

Offline the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh

  • O. M. G.
  • ***
  • Posts: 39098
  • Riding eternal, shiny and Firefox
    • View Profile
Re: Science-Fiction: How 'real' must a technology be?
« Reply #29 on: June 12, 2013, 02:27:02 PM »
Indeed, the only thing is I wasnt just talking about how life on a starship goes, more that there are things going on down on the planets and not just on the ships.

But anything with humans on a non-Earth planet has to have been brought there on a starship in the first place, no ?

Quote
Somewhat how firefly does it, lots of ships and all but also lots of people that just live on one world and dont travel around and live a fairly primitive/older life style.

In most settings, that would be a plausibility-killer for me. In Firefly, complaining about that being a plausibility-killer is like compaining that you can;t scratch your itchy nose because someone just chopped both your arms off.

Quote
Basiclly saying you can have the starships and space travel, but still have a fairly normal non advanced life on the ground at the same time.

"Normal" is exactly the point I am quibbling with; you want to make another planet's setting look a lot like here and now, you need to have solid active reasons to convince me.
Mildly OCD. Please do not troll.

"What do you mean, Lawful Silly isn't a valid alignment?"

kittensgame, Sandcastle Builder, Homestuck, Welcome to Night Vale, Civ III, lots of print genre SF, and old-school SATT gaming if I had the time.  Also Pandemic Legacy is the best game ever.