Planetfurry BBS Forum Index Planetfurry BBS
Forums for Planetfurry Site Members and more
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   DonateDonate   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Sci-fi tech: Science wonder or utter confusion?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Planetfurry BBS Forum Index -> Everyday blither-blather
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Asalis
Registered User


Joined: 08 Oct 2004
Posts: 2020
Location: Fort Worth, Tx

PostPosted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:03 am    Post subject: Sci-fi tech: Science wonder or utter confusion? Reply with quote

Originally i wanted to put this in the writers corner further below but after thinking about it further I decided to post this here. Anyway here goes.

Have you ever watched a sci-fi movie TV series, or just read a novel and read or saw something in the tech involved that just really made you think? Did it make you all the more amazed and amused when you realized that the possibility of the technology could one day become real? like for a few examples lets take a look at the two biggest sci-fi influences to the media. Star Trek and Star Wars. Now lets take a look at things like Forcefields. This can be found in both universes. Before it was thought to be barriers of pure light but as science advanced suddenly the fantasy has become a possible reality with a new technology referred to as Cold Plasma technology. Here's a link for reference.

http://media.www.lawrentian.com/media/storage/paper409/news/2008/01/25/Features/Cold-Plasma.Cool.Stuff-3163731.shtml

Another thing they don't mention is that it's also capable of sustaining an air tight environment but the 'plasma windows' they're able to create with it right now are just small windows due to power constraints. I have a link explaining that to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZnwl76hJhU&feature=PlayList&p=7EE8F3248804943C&index=59

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8xSRdw2yVg&feature=PlayList&p=7EE8F3248804943C&index=62&playnext=5&playnext_from=PL

Now for the other part of this discussion. Have you ever seen or read something of pure Science Fiction and thought about the tech only to be utterly confused at how unbelievable it is? If worked right this can still be worked in as a very entertaining story. Case in point being none other than The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy and the improbability drive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4674WHJlg0

but there are other things that some Science Fiction movies, shows, and even novels seem to take for granted and that's propulsion. A good example for this is Star Trek. Though I actually think their definition of warp travel is plausible there is just one thing that irks me. In accordance to the schematics I've looked at I've not seen the ships with any form of propulsion other than the nacelles. If that is the only form of propulsion then technically the ship should flip end over end in accordance to physics wherever it goes. How does the ship turn? how does it move up or down? They never explain this in Star Trek. Only that it's only form of propulsion comes from the nacelles.

http://www.strekschematics.utvinternet.com/bprintlinks/fed/enta/enta.html

The current US space shuttles, One of which is named Enterprise, uses mini retrorockets to turn and move about in space. when it wants to get somewhere quickly it fires the thrusters on the back which covers pretty much most of the back while still using the thrusters all over the ship to steer.

But let's not leave Star Wars out of this. It's also just as guilty of this though it's not as apparent as Star Trek. One of those being that there seems to be no variance to the technology level in Star Ware. Doesn't seem to matter what world it's on or where in the Star Wars Galaxy it is. They either have super advanced technology, or they don't. There doesn't seem to be an in-between. no planets with aliens still using fossil fuels, no hand guns that still use solid ammo, no primitive computers. You either have advance technology in the Star Wars Universe or you don't.

Anyway that's all just my two cents on the topic of Sci-fi Tech. Are there any instances for any other kind of sci-fi that you had similar thoughts? did it fill you with more wonderment? did it confuse you? There any part of my argument here that you disagree or agree with? Whatever it is please share? Mr. Green

_________________
Asalis: (uh*sah*lis)

We, dig, giant robots!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7PjQnw_E0U

I hate the DMV
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Skype Name
anthony
Site Owner
Site Owner


Joined: 12 Nov 2001
Posts: 1304
Location: Norway

PostPosted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In Star Wars you can pretty much assume that every planet where spacecraft lands regularly they have adopted 'standard imperial' technology and junked whatever they had themselves.
(The Empire has an enormous production capability. It also helps them to have their tech adopted everywhere as it means easier access to local power, simpler logistics and so on)


Now, if you want to really bend someone's mind, take a look at the first Robotech series; (Macross war).
This was made in 1984, I think...
Not ONCE in that series do they use anything resembling a cell-phone.
Instead they page pilots using a ship-wide PR system.
(And when the ship in question is best measured in 'city blocks'... )

_________________
"My name's Lion, Anthony Lion"
A fur with a license to purr...
---
Like my Avatar?
Why not surf over to www.micecomics.com and tell Mary what a stellar job she did...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Shadu
Registered User


Joined: 21 May 2003
Posts: 336
Location: Barranquilla

PostPosted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Taking the other Sci Fi show...

In Star Trek you need to pay attention to detail. though they might have the full science wrong since its just a show, it does not mean they don't have a generally good idea.

For movement there is a very important thing in Star Trek and its one that can in my guess solve as it where the problem with e equals mc squared. They use an inertial dampener (sorry if i misspell). this is basically an electron shield that separates the ship in a personal space keeping the rest of the vacuum away from the ship.

For me, this gives the ship warp capacity because while inside an electron field (or maybe a smaller particle since they have so many in the series) the energy required to move is only limited by the field itself no the ship. inside the field, they can somehow set any option they want (gravity and stuff) and they can move in-system by manipulating the forces in the field (Also known as inertia drive). This is what would allow a ship in space to do whatever without the passager's feeling the effects of it since for the things inside the field they are all static.

that's what my thoughts on it say and to me they kind of ring true though i'm not sure i can explain it so well.

_________________
__________________
New Dog In Town!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Concolor
Registered User


Joined: 19 Nov 2001
Posts: 832
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 8:23 am    Post subject: Re: Sci-fi tech: Science wonder or utter confusion? Reply with quote

Asalis wrote:
Originally i wanted to put this in the writers corner further below but after thinking about it further I decided to post this here. Anyway here goes.

Have you ever watched a sci-fi movie TV series, or just read a novel and read or saw something in the tech involved that just really made you think? Did it make you all the more amazed and amused when you realized that the possibility of the technology could one day become real?

ALL THE TIME.

Asalis wrote:
like for a few examples lets take a look at the two biggest sci-fi influences to the media. Star Trek and Star Wars. Now lets take a look at things like Forcefields. This can be found in both universes. Before it was thought to be barriers of pure light but as science advanced suddenly the fantasy has become a possible reality with a new technology referred to as Cold Plasma technology.

Now for the other part of this discussion. Have you ever seen or read something of pure Science Fiction and thought about the tech only to be utterly confused at how unbelievable it is?

Yeah, some, now and then. The older I get, the MUCH less frequently I think, "That couldn't happen." (one glaring exception to this is practically everything that took place in The Core, which is arguably the worst sci-fi movie ever made. And, yes, I am remembering all the rotten Japanese stuff. They didn't take themselves seriously. The Core is just ... execrable.)

Asalis wrote:
If worked right this can still be worked in as a very entertaining story. Case in point being none other than The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy and the improbability drive.

Agreed. Great fun it was.

Asalis wrote:
But there are other things that some Science Fiction movies, shows, and even novels seem to take for granted and that's propulsion. A good example for this is Star Trek. Though I actually think their definition of warp travel is plausible there is just one thing that irks me. In accordance to the schematics I've looked at I've not seen the ships with any form of propulsion other than the nacelles. If that is the only form of propulsion then technically the ship should flip end over end in accordance to physics wherever it goes. How does the ship turn? how does it move up or down? They never explain this in Star Trek. Only that it's only form of propulsion comes from the nacelles.

There is also the assumed artificial gravity, an INCREDIBLY useful tool that they HARDLY EVER even referenced. Heck, ships that were DEAD IN SPACE still had a discernable gravity field. Even as a kid, I thought that was pretty cheesy.

Asalis wrote:
The current US space shuttles, One of which is named Enterprise, uses mini retrorockets to turn and move about in space. when it wants to get somewhere quickly it fires the thrusters on the back which covers pretty much most of the back while still using the thrusters all over the ship to steer.

But let's not leave Star Wars out of this. It's also just as guilty of this though it's not as apparent as Star Trek. One of those being that there seems to be no variance to the technology level in Star Wars. Doesn't seem to matter what world it's on or where in the Star Wars Galaxy it is. They either have super advanced technology, or they don't. There doesn't seem to be an in-between. no planets with aliens still using fossil fuels, no hand guns that still use solid ammo, no primitive computers. You either have advance technology in the Star Wars Universe or you don't.

You are absolutely dead-on there! And think about this: one decently-trained Force Recon unit with half a dozen portable mini-guns could have WIPED UP THE FLOOR with any other character in the movies. If that silly armor couldn't stop a blaster bolt, it sure as HAIL wouldn't stop a hypersonic slug of depleted uranium. And I don't care how fast a Jedi might be with his light saber, he isn't going to catch all the fire when they are coming at him at a rate of 5,000 per minute. He's Swiss cheese. And why didn't the droid armies ever employ poison gas? They'd be immune, and it would make the battle very brief.

And another thing: if Harry Potter, or any of the good guys for that matter, had had access to semi-automatic shotgun, the series would have been REALLY SHORT.

Asalis wrote:

Anyway that's all just my two cents on the topic of Sci-fi Tech. Are there any instances for any other kind of sci-fi that you had similar thoughts? did it fill you with more wonderment? did it confuse you? There any part of my argument here that you disagree or agree with? Whatever it is please share? Mr. Green

Oh, heck, yes! One that comes immediately to mind is in the works of E. E. "Doc" Smith, the Golden Age author of the Lensmen series and the Skylark books, and the Circus of the Galaxy. All these tales are set in the far future, with FTL travel and all sorts of great little gee-gaws. At one point the main character is in his private ship, hanging around in intergalactic space and trying to figure his next move. He's doing some calculations, and "snaps shut his reference table of seventeen-place logarithms". Nowhere in any of the series are small, powerful electronic computing devices anticipated.

The only Golden Age author that I know of that did manage something like that is Heinlein, in his story "A Logic Named Joe". His descriptions are EERILY like the modern internet, only cooler.

_________________
Oddly enough, my life is based on a true story. (Ashleigh Brilliant)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Asalis
Registered User


Joined: 08 Oct 2004
Posts: 2020
Location: Fort Worth, Tx

PostPosted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 3:30 pm    Post subject: Re: Sci-fi tech: Science wonder or utter confusion? Reply with quote

Concolor wrote:
Oh, heck, yes! One that comes immediately to mind is in the works of E. E. "Doc" Smith, the Golden Age author of the Lensmen series and the Skylark books, and the Circus of the Galaxy. All these tales are set in the far future, with FTL travel and all sorts of great little gee-gaws. At one point the main character is in his private ship, hanging around in intergalactic space and trying to figure his next move. He's doing some calculations, and "snaps shut his reference table of seventeen-place logarithms". Nowhere in any of the series are small, powerful electronic computing devices anticipated.

The only Golden Age author that I know of that did manage something like that is Heinlein, in his story "A Logic Named Joe". His descriptions are EERILY like the modern internet, only cooler.
I'll have to check some of those out.

anthony wrote:
In Star Wars you can pretty much assume that every planet where spacecraft lands regularly they have adopted 'standard imperial' technology and junked whatever they had themselves.
(The Empire has an enormous production capability. It also helps them to have their tech adopted everywhere as it means easier access to local power, simpler logistics and so on)

Sometimes older technology can be better than the newer stuff. One thing being solid amunition guns vs energy blasters and phazers. In both Star Trek and Star wars this tech is a bit vague on it's descriptions. In Star Wars a blaster bolt as many have theorized is possibly made of plasma. Now plasma is a super heated form of matter. As it travels this bolt of plasma would cool off as it got further. Eventually it would reach a distance of a few feet and essentially evaporate. Now a solid bullet fired from an actual gun would go much further and have a higher penetration rate based on the type or rounds you use. The exact same argument could be applies with Phazers as well. They may use the tech a bit different but it's still the same principle. They have a limited range and charge. In many cases solid ammunition may prove more favorable. Guaranteed a bullet to the head or an armor piercing round through the chest would stop any oncoming Klingon, or dominion if you prefer next generation or DS9.

_________________
Asalis: (uh*sah*lis)

We, dig, giant robots!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7PjQnw_E0U

I hate the DMV


Last edited by Asalis on Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Skype Name
Asalis
Registered User


Joined: 08 Oct 2004
Posts: 2020
Location: Fort Worth, Tx

PostPosted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

delete accidental double post please?
_________________
Asalis: (uh*sah*lis)

We, dig, giant robots!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7PjQnw_E0U

I hate the DMV


Last edited by Asalis on Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Skype Name
Syrius
Registered User


Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1463
Location: The S.S. ScurvyDog, Arizona! YARR!

PostPosted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Concolor, this may be a bit of a stretch, but AFAIK, Republic and Imperial standard-issue suits come with respirators that render the use of airborne toxins moot. At least there is a canon use of such, in the Droids animated series.

Besides, gassed worlds would be useless to the Trade Federation, even if they had managed to get rid of the Republic armies.

Asalis, if I am not mistaken, the Wookie Bowcasters fire solid rounds that burn as hot or more than a blaster, but are slower because they are of course heavier.

_________________
Hey, Sony... IT'S PAYBACK TIME!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Skype Name
Concolor
Registered User


Joined: 19 Nov 2001
Posts: 832
Location: South Carolina

PostPosted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Syrius wrote:
Concolor, this may be a bit of a stretch, but AFAIK, Republic and Imperial standard-issue suits come with respirators that render the use of airborne toxins moot. At least there is a canon use of such, in the Droids animated series.

Ah. Guess I'm not up on my SW tech trivia.

Syrius wrote:
Besides, gassed worlds would be useless to the Trade Federation, even if they had managed to get rid of the Republic armies.

Depends on the gas. Mustard gas will sink into the ground and can act as fertilizer. Chlorine gas just dissipates. I'm sure the droid scientists could come up with SOMETHING that would knock out the fleshlings and not destroy the planet. Of course, it might not OCCUR to them to do it that way ...

_________________
Oddly enough, my life is based on a true story. (Ashleigh Brilliant)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Hawke
Registered User


Joined: 17 Jun 2009
Posts: 175
Location: Hickory Hills, IL (Near Chicago)

PostPosted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 12:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Nacelles create the Warp field of course, which moves the ship all at once in the same direction at the same time. That is the concept as I understand it.
_________________
"It's kind of like if you combined The Wizard of Oz and Reign of Fire...and Jonathan Livingston Seagull."

"^HuK'D aWN FoNYCs WuRKD 4 MEEEEEE!!!!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
D.F. Thompson
Registered User


Joined: 25 Jan 2005
Posts: 426
Location: Back home in Jenks

PostPosted: Sat Mar 20, 2010 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In the ST universe the nacelles at the back of the ship is where the warp field forms to surround the ship. And it's that field that moves the ship at FTL (Faster Than Light) speeds. The easiest way to think of it, is the warp field is like a giant hamster ball and the ship is the hamster. For STL (Slower Than Light) is what the impulse engines are for. Which are nothing more than very fancy thrusters. And just like the space shuttle the Star Trek ships have attitude thrusters for steering.

As for the Star Wars universe I would assume that when operating in normal space that for steering they use some sort of thruster system for steering. When operating in Hyper-space I couldn't tell you.

_________________
Beware the light at the end of the tunnel, just might be the headlights of my speeding truck. =0.0.=
http://www.furaffinity.net/user/dana/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
anthony
Site Owner
Site Owner


Joined: 12 Nov 2001
Posts: 1304
Location: Norway

PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:45 pm    Post subject: Re: Sci-fi tech: Science wonder or utter confusion? Reply with quote

Asalis wrote:

anthony wrote:
In Star Wars you can pretty much assume that every planet where spacecraft lands regularly they have adopted 'standard imperial' technology and junked whatever they had themselves.
(The Empire has an enormous production capability. It also helps them to have their tech adopted everywhere as it means easier access to local power, simpler logistics and so on)

Sometimes older technology can be better than the newer stuff. One thing being solid amunition guns vs energy blasters and phazers. In both Star Trek and Star wars this tech is a bit vague on it's descriptions. In Star Wars a blaster bolt as many have theorized is possibly made of plasma. Now plasma is a super heated form of matter. As it travels this bolt of plasma would cool off as it got further. Eventually it would reach a distance of a few feet and essentially evaporate. Now a solid bullet fired from an actual gun would go much further and have a higher penetration rate based on the type or rounds you use. The exact same argument could be applies with Phazers as well. They may use the tech a bit different but it's still the same principle. They have a limited range and charge. In many cases solid ammunition may prove more favorable. Guaranteed a bullet to the head or an armor piercing round through the chest would stop any oncoming Klingon, or dominion if you prefer next generation or DS9.


I'm not up to the latest theories of SW blasters, but as I see it, an energy weapon can be recharged anywhere there's an outlet, right?

Back when I was in the RNoAF, I have the chance to carry a 'full complement' of ammunition for my AG-3 assault-rifle.
That's 20 rounds in the magazine in the rifle and an additional 4 magazines of 20 attached to my belt.
That's 100 x 7.62 x 51mm NATO, not the piddly 5.56 used in some Toys 'R US weapons.
Wouldn't it be nice if instead of lugging all that ammo, we could just plug the gun into the AC outlet at the camp, the cigarette lighter in the nearest car, or...

And that brings us to another advantage to energy weapons.
You may be able to 'dial up' the charge depending on the situation; full power when you just have to take out that Bantha, or low down when you're laying down a barrage designed to scare off someone or just defoliating the forrest.
The alternative is to carry a .50" for knocking out war elephants, and an UZI or MP-5 for sweeping.

Of course, I'd like to see a young whippersnapper with a fancy lightsaber try to deflect a 7.62 bullet... or 20...

_________________
"My name's Lion, Anthony Lion"
A fur with a license to purr...
---
Like my Avatar?
Why not surf over to www.micecomics.com and tell Mary what a stellar job she did...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Styx
Site Owner
Site Owner


Joined: 25 Dec 2002
Posts: 3176
Location: West Covina, California

PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Back when I was in the RNoAF, I have the chance to carry a 'full complement' of ammunition for my AG-3 assault-rifle.
That's 20 rounds in the magazine in the rifle and an additional 4 magazines of 20 attached to my belt.
That's 100 x 7.62 x 51mm NATO, not the piddly 5.56 used in some Toys 'R US weapons.
Wouldn't it be nice if instead of lugging all that ammo, we could just plug the gun into the AC outlet at the camp, the cigarette lighter in the nearest car, or...


Likely any power cell able to carry that kind of charge is going to be almost as heavy as the solid ammo if not as heavy and here's the kicker. As you use up the charge the power cell isn't going to get any lighter.

_________________
"Political Correctness is tyranny with manners." Charlton Heston

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Wulfie_Vulphyre
Registered User


Joined: 27 Apr 2009
Posts: 261
Location: Nashville TN

PostPosted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just a thought. Any Jedi that would be "versed" enough with the force to pull or push objects could essentially deflect bullets. Kinda like Neo in The Matrix. Problem is if a large enough quantity from various directions occurred I think said Jedi would end up a human hunk of swiss cheese.

Also a Disadvantage of energy weapons. Say you don't have access to a power outlet of some sort and you've run out of charge with a few enemies to take out? Granted it would be the equal to having X amount of rounds with Slightly more then X enemies to kill. Now an " endless " type energy source for a power cell weapon could make it advantageous. Something kinda like the reactor that powers the Iron Man suit perhaps? But then we get into even more difficult movie-type tech. * shrug *

_________________
There is no signature here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Asalis
Registered User


Joined: 08 Oct 2004
Posts: 2020
Location: Fort Worth, Tx

PostPosted: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wulfie_Vulphyre wrote:
Also a Disadvantage of energy weapons. Say you don't have access to a power outlet of some sort and you've run out of charge with a few enemies to take out? Granted it would be the equal to having X amount of rounds with Slightly more then X enemies to kill. Now an " endless " type energy source for a power cell weapon could make it advantageous. Something kinda like the reactor that powers the Iron Man suit perhaps? But then we get into even more difficult movie-type tech. * shrug *
That sounds similar to the Mass generators they use in the game Mass Effect, Though the description for the guns is that the portable mass field generators in the gun accelerates the bullet down the chamber at anything you aim it at. Of course in that game everything is based on Mass field generator technology. In theory this technology is supposed to be self perpetuating, meaning that you basically just turn it on and never have to worry about running out of power so long as it's maintained.

In the sequel game however they demonstrate a more practical approach with the mass effect fields. All it does is accelerate the bullet down the chamber, still uses solid clips of ammunition. Basically you have a magnetic rail gun shrank down to fit nicely in the palm of your hand.

Bioware sure is thorough about how they do things. They even go as far as figuring out how such tech could possibly work.

_________________
Asalis: (uh*sah*lis)

We, dig, giant robots!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7PjQnw_E0U

I hate the DMV
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Skype Name
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Planetfurry BBS Forum Index -> Everyday blither-blather All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group