Overused Silly Sci-Fi Science.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

OSHA would have a field day with that Holodeck! Any captain that allowed that many mishaps on his ship without shutting down the system for good would probably be busted back to ensign!

Especially considering the crew could figure their way free of quantum strings and endless time-loops, but no one could rewire and fix the holodecks. Lt. Barkley, a holodeck addict and smart enough to contact Voyager in another quadrant, couldn't reprogram the holodecks to lock down the safety protocols and make sure a user could "end program" at any time. This is the finest ship in the fleet?

[Steven Lake]

Originally Posted by Freeshadow

that space ship nav thingy is IMO to blame why there are next to none space flightsim games with proper 0G behaviour.

I've actually run into a few like that. One of them was an ages old game called "Subspace" (now known as Continuum) that was a top down 2d space shooter with real space flight dynamics. Well, except for the fact that all of the ships can bounce off the walls without getting hurt, and ships can fly through each other. Other than that it had realistic space flight and physics.

Originally Posted by dadioflex

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia_damper

"The phrase inertial damper is commonly misused in science fiction to describe a device that negates inertia and removes it from surrounding mass. It is more properly described as inertia negation."

Um, THAT's how spaceships turn on a dime - by misunderstanding the term "inertial damper".

My understanding of an inertial dampener is that it's merely an accessory device to the ship's existing artificial gravity system, and merely provides reactive gravitational forces in the opposite direction of the forces being applied against a ship. So if you were to make a 90G turn, the dampeners wouldn't actually "dampen" or negate the initial forces, but would instead provide an equal amount of anti-gravity (or possibly counter-gravity) in the opposing direction in order to maintain a stable 1G of downward force, and 0G of lateral force. This too would be scientifically accurate, since gravity is considered an electromagnetic wave (No joke, it really is. So is light!), and there is no known method by which electromagnetic waves can be neutralized, except through absorption, and given gravity's unique nature, absorption isn't possible. Therefore to dampen it you would have to provide an equally powerful counter force to cancel it out.

Originally Posted by teh603

I freaking *hate* this trope. I've had to work with plucky, brilliant kids. Every last one of the little stinkers has been more concerned with causing trouble and breaking things for lulz than actually doing anything worthwhile.

Hey! I was one of those plucky, brilliant kids and I never destroyed anything! Well, not intentionally anyways. Usually if I destroyed anything, it was because I wasn't paying attention to my work. ^_^;;

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

AFAIK, gravity on space ships still counts itself as a silly sci-fi trope: On the largest to the smallest ships, it can provide full gravity; be turned off and on; it might be used to provide additional gravity where there is little or none, but is never used to remove too much gravity from a ship; there is absolutely no attempt to explain how it works, where it is installed, or how (in tandem with inertial dampers) it manages to change orientation well-nigh instantaneously in response to directional changes, impacts or unexpected turbulence.

It's just there, it works, end of discussion.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

AFAIK, gravity on space ships still counts itself as a silly sci-fi trope: On the largest to the smallest ships, it can provide full gravity; be turned off and on; it might be used to provide additional gravity where there is little or none, but is never used to remove too much gravity from a ship; there is absolutely no attempt to explain how it works, where it is installed, or how (in tandem with inertial dampers) it manages to change orientation well-nigh instantaneously in response to directional changes, impacts or unexpected turbulence.

It's just there, it works, end of discussion.

Like FTL travel in most cases.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Like FTL travel in most cases.

I've seen much serious theory and discussion of an FTL drive, its components and their overall operation, especially in books, and on Trek... but no similar discussion of how gravity generation works. Trek has avoided it like the plague.

But yes, there are a number of sci-fi movies and shows that just take for granted that FTL works: Just showing a complex-looking piece of machinery is enough to satisfy the audience (they should call that the "flux capacitor trope").

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by teh603

I freaking *hate* this trope. I've had to work with plucky, brilliant kids. Every last one of the little stinkers has been more concerned with causing trouble and breaking things for lulz than actually doing anything worthwhile.

One of the things I liked about Pullman's His Dark Materials was that the plucky main character kid was actually treated with respect but NOT deference by the adults... and she responded in kind, since she knew they wouldn't cut her out of the loop. Adults and children working together to save the world! Without either side being the "superior" one? Brilliant!

[altworld]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

I've seen much serious theory and discussion of an FTL drive, its components and their overall operation, especially in books, and on Trek... but no similar discussion of how gravity generation works. Trek has avoided it like the plague.

But yes, there are a number of sci-fi movies and shows that just take for granted that FTL works: Just showing a complex-looking piece of machinery is enough to satisfy the audience (they should call that the "flux capacitor trope").

Since the best Sci-fi is used as an analogy for society, I find the best stories are the ones that treat Tech such as FTL as everyday objects. Like driving a car, or using a cellphone and don't get bogged down in the details of how everything works. It just does...

I think in Trek artificial gravity is generated by force fields pushing down, much like there use of the inertia dampeners. Reading about pseudo-tech can be fun after the fact, most of the time it bogs down the story and is a huge red flag that the story will be resolved through technical brilliance, and not by the characters.

[dworth]

Some more:

- Robots will often desire to be human, even if their brains are millions of times more sophisticated.

- A disproportionate number of wormholes to the past lead to World War II or Ancient Rome.

- Lots of problems can be solved by talking gobbledook, waving something with lots of lights on at the problem and causing something to happen that basically puts the entire problem back where it came from by the end of the episode. Yes, Star Trek and Doctor Who, I'm looking at you.

- Spaceships might have faster than light drives, laser cannons, funky looking hulls and enough velour uniforms for a thousand crew members, but they don't appear to have any loos. The Battlestar Galactica is exception to this, and has large, well appointed unisex toilets.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by dworth

... - Spaceships might have faster than light drives, laser cannons, funky looking hulls and enough velour uniforms for a thousand crew members, but they don't appear to have any loos. The Battlestar Galactica is exception to this, and has large, well appointed unisex toilets.

Here again 2001: A Space Odyssey was an exception to the normal cliche-ridden sci-fi genre: There was a scene where Dr. Haywood Floyd looked quite concerned as he read the Zero Gravity Toilet's instructions for use.

[etopian]

I have recently developed an interest in Phillip K. Dick and he avoids a lot of the clichés in Sci Fi... His universe is quite different from your average pop Sci Fi, which actually often mirror consumer psychology of the times... rather than dark, pessimistic with very little hope for salvation.

[VydorScope]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

AFAIK, gravity on space ships still counts itself as a silly sci-fi trope: On the largest to the smallest ships, it can provide full gravity; be turned off and on; it might be used to provide additional gravity where there is little or none, but is never used to remove too much gravity from a ship; there is absolutely no attempt to explain how it works, where it is installed, or how (in tandem with inertial dampers) it manages to change orientation well-nigh instantaneously in response to directional changes, impacts or unexpected turbulence.

It's just there, it works, end of discussion.

Yes, and thats the way it should be. How many normal people have a clue how their computer works? The press a power button and it comes on. Same with cellphones, cars, and well EVERYTHING. Most people do not know how stuff works, and even those that do dont talk about it.

If I were to travel into the future and board a ship in a time when artificial gravity had existed for a long time, I would not expect anyone to be talking about how it works. Just as in our day I do not need an explanation on how I can speak into my cell phone and you can hear my voice anywhere in the world... it just works.

Do you know where you air comes from here on earth? Earth is essentially a really big spaceship... do you know how gravity works on Earth?

In my current scifi books I explain FTL travel because it matters to some of the story arc's but I do not bother explaining artificial gravity because how it works does not impact the story.

IMO in a realistic world, the normal tech that has been around a long time is just that... normal. People do not talk about how the generator in their car charges their batter while they drive, it just works.

Just my take...

[xg4bx]

i've watched shows on Discovery that showed how actual space combat would play out.....its kinda boring.

however a planetary bombardment with kinetic weapons is still pretty cool.

[JSWolf]

The Enterprise NCC-1701 did not actually have a bathroom.

[Steven Lake]

Originally Posted by altworld

Since the best Sci-fi is used as an analogy for society, I find the best stories are the ones that treat Tech such as FTL as everyday objects. Like driving a car, or using a cellphone and don't get bogged down in the details of how everything works. It just does...

Hear! Hear! I fully agree! That was something which was also taught to me early on in my writing. "Extreme techno-geeks want to know why it ticks. The other 99% of your readers don't. So abstain from giving any details about an object unless it's relevant to the story." I've used that rule to great success in my own writing.

I think in Trek artificial gravity is generated by force fields pushing down, much like there use of the inertia dampeners. Reading about pseudo-tech can be fun after the fact, most of the time it bogs down the story and is a huge red flag that the story will be resolved through technical brilliance, and not by the characters.

Actually, it *was* explained *once* in a Star Trek book. I don't remember the title, but it was one of the 2nd generation TOS books where Kirk came back to life after Generations and became captain of his own ship, and had to fight against some psychic Vulcans who got their conscience trapped in some weird crystal ball which then later reimprinted them on another host body. Anyhow, one of the battles in the book involved a race who lived in 2x gravity and Scotty ended up fighting them by raising and lowering the gravity in the ship until he knocked everyone unconscious.

Anyhow, according to them, the artificial gravity on the ship is generated by a device that spins a special mix of gases inside a sealed chamber at high speed, which apparently generates gravity which is in turn piped through the ship like water and used to generate the artificial gravity experienced on the ship. Well, that's their definition anyways. lol. My explanation for how the gravity plates used by the characters in my books work follows the scientific law which states that Gravity is simply another form of electromagnetic radiation similar to magnetism, or the strong and weak atomic forces. To make gravity you simply charge a special plate in a given way and it creates unidirectional gravity. But anywho, I digress. lol.

Originally Posted by dworth

- Robots will often desire to be human, even if their brains are millions of times more sophisticated.

I don't find this at all unusual. This kind of thinking is simply an analog to existing human thoughts where people wish to be something they're not because they believe the grass is greener on the other side.

- Spaceships might have faster than light drives, laser cannons, funky looking hulls and enough velour uniforms for a thousand crew members, but they don't appear to have any loos. The Battlestar Galactica is exception to this, and has large, well appointed unisex toilets.

I think the reasons for that are simple. How often has taking a poo been an important story plot? I don't have them in any of my books, save one (and it's only a brief reference), because they're completely irrelevant to the story.

[VydorScope]

Originally Posted by Steven Lake

I think the reasons for that are simple. How often has taking a poo been an important story plot? I don't have them in any of my books, save one (and it's only a brief reference), because they're completely irrelevant to the story.

Exactly.