|
Post by bigbombr on Dec 28, 2016 15:42:22 GMT
The thing about fantasy technology in SF is that it acts as motivation and inspiration for scientists and engineers. Were it not for Star Trek, anyone who wanted to research teleportation, FTL travel or cloaking devices would be laughed out of the laboratory. So I like to aim for that, but also aim for, well, realism. Create ships and colonies that are not only fantastic, but also believable. ... And then there's the issue of having to live in a ship for weeks or months on end without going straight-up mad. One of my ideas was a communications module that allowed for FTL internet/TV access and games galore. Cryosleep seems more plausible than FTL. This also creates an interesting balance: do you sleep the entire trip (and be horribly unaware of recent events) or do you keep to a normal rhythm (and deal with the horrible boredom).
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Dec 28, 2016 16:30:01 GMT
The thing about fantasy technology in SF is that it acts as motivation and inspiration for scientists and engineers. Were it not for Star Trek, anyone who wanted to research teleportation, FTL travel or cloaking devices would be laughed out of the laboratory. So I like to aim for that, but also aim for, well, realism. Create ships and colonies that are not only fantastic, but also believable. ... And then there's the issue of having to live in a ship for weeks or months on end without going straight-up mad. One of my ideas was a communications module that allowed for FTL internet/TV access and games galore. Cryosleep seems more plausible than FTL. This also creates an interesting balance: do you sleep the entire trip (and be horribly unaware of recent events) or do you keep to a normal rhythm (and deal with the horrible boredom). Probably a mix of both. Sleep for so long, then wake up stretch do look at some news, talk to your crewmates. Go back under after a week or two.
|
|
|
Post by srbrant on Dec 29, 2016 6:18:51 GMT
The thing about fantasy technology in SF is that it acts as motivation and inspiration for scientists and engineers. Were it not for Star Trek, anyone who wanted to research teleportation, FTL travel or cloaking devices would be laughed out of the laboratory. So I like to aim for that, but also aim for, well, realism. Create ships and colonies that are not only fantastic, but also believable. As for propulsion - and please forgive me if I already mentioned this - Reaction mass tanks would be noticeably smaller because of numerous advances in engine design and fuel efficiency. Ships would also have their reactors closer to habitat modules thanks to better radiation containment as well. Regarding colonies, I'm thinking that many of them on airless worlds would be built underground (Like the Vaults of Fallout fame) for a number of reasons, such as radiation shielding, meteoroid protection and greater defense from piracy. Because ship speeds around asteroids and dwarf planets are mind-bogglingly slow, getting to and from warp points would be a pain, meaning that their populations would be very self-sufficient and have to carefully manage their populations to ensure that everyone gets what they need. I imagine they would also have to have a number of tourist attractions to motivate trade and make long STL travel times worthwhile. And then there's the issue of having to live in a ship for weeks or months on end without going straight-up mad. One of my ideas was a communications module that allowed for FTL internet/TV access and games galore. And if the comms module is on the fritz or there's other communication problems, there's the textbook-sized issues of Helionaut Magazine - the space traveler's quarterly digest. Printed and written especially for long-haul flights. I'll elaborate on the subject tomorrow, I'm bushed. First question: How scientific-hard is your project? tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MohsScaleOfScienceFictionHardness[Going full science] 1. Yes, sci-fi is one of the main motivations, but plausibility. That's the problem. Cloaking devices are perfectly possible, and is invented. However, there's no way it can enable stealth in space because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Teleportation would requires quantum mechanic exploitation, and requires VERY, VERY smart Archai to do it. FTL violates Special Relativity, and thus, 'Special Relativity, Casualty, FTL.' Select any two. 2. I know, amat/conversion drives with Li-6 radshield, right? 3. You can, and should be using the brachistochrone trajectories within smaller bodies, because you wouldn't want to wait for the hohmann transfers which could take days around. 4. Most people in 5000 years' time wouldn't even know what a screen is. Their entertainment would be virtual worlds within their spacecrafts where they can upload themselves into one, and even that is possible in few hundred years' time. Communication between star systems is possible with systems of wormholes. Even Orion's Arm wormholes required to be placed far from any big objects, you might take it less serious and place one around every planet, and in larger ships to enable FTL travels and communications. I'd say 2.0 on the scale. 1. The only idea I have for making stealth in space work is a software that scrambles its Black Box so that, when detected, it will show up as a completely different ship (for example: The helionaval frigate Northern Star fears detection by an enemy faction, so it changes its electronic manifest so that it appears on sensors as the civilian freighter Tireless.) 2. Um, pardon? 3. May want to clarify that. 4. It takes place centuries after a war that resulted in thousands upon thousands of technologies being lost to time. Plus, it operates on a philosophical theory of mine which states that technology isn't so much about progression as it is about expression. "Who needs the holodrome when you have three friends and a poker deck?" as one of my characters would say. Plus, I imagine getting ripped out of a deep, virtual world and into harsh reality because of an engine fire would not be a pleasant experience. It may even twist a person's sense of reality into knots. Plus, nothing beats curling up with a good book. Also, video games and other applications aren't programmed anymore; they are taught how to operate and there's software that can reprogram itself to suit a certain task.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Dec 29, 2016 7:52:21 GMT
First question: How scientific-hard is your project? tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MohsScaleOfScienceFictionHardness[Going full science] 1. Yes, sci-fi is one of the main motivations, but plausibility. That's the problem. Cloaking devices are perfectly possible, and is invented. However, there's no way it can enable stealth in space because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Teleportation would requires quantum mechanic exploitation, and requires VERY, VERY smart Archai to do it. FTL violates Special Relativity, and thus, 'Special Relativity, Casualty, FTL.' Select any two. 2. I know, amat/conversion drives with Li-6 radshield, right? 3. You can, and should be using the brachistochrone trajectories within smaller bodies, because you wouldn't want to wait for the hohmann transfers which could take days around. 4. Most people in 5000 years' time wouldn't even know what a screen is. Their entertainment would be virtual worlds within their spacecrafts where they can upload themselves into one, and even that is possible in few hundred years' time. Communication between star systems is possible with systems of wormholes. Even Orion's Arm wormholes required to be placed far from any big objects, you might take it less serious and place one around every planet, and in larger ships to enable FTL travels and communications. I'd say 2.0 on the scale. 1. The only idea I have for making stealth in space work is a software that scrambles its Black Box so that, when detected, it will show up as a completely different ship (for example: The helionaval frigate Northern Star fears detection by an enemy faction, so it changes its electronic manifest so that it appears on sensors as the civilian freighter Tireless.) 2. Um, pardon? 3. May want to clarify that. 4. It takes place centuries after a war that resulted in thousands upon thousands of technologies being lost to time. Plus, it operates on a philosophical theory of mine which states that technology isn't so much about progression as it is about expression. "Who needs the holodrome when you have three friends and a poker deck?" as one of my characters would say. Plus, I imagine getting ripped out of a deep, virtual world and into harsh reality because of an engine fire would not be a pleasant experience. It may even twist a person's sense of reality into knots. Plus, nothing beats curling up with a good book. Also, video games and other applications aren't programmed anymore; they are taught how to operate and there's software that can reprogram itself to suit a certain task. SCI-FI HARDNESS: 2.0"In 2.0, you can add as many physic laws as you wish, but remember to keep them from conflicting each others. It's your world, and nothing is in your way. As my prediction power ends at 5.0, so I no longer be able to help you." 1. It's a good, and terribly dangerous idea, provided that these warships look identical to a civilian freighter. 2. Orion's Arm words (amat = antimatter, conversion drive -> Singularity 3 tech, Li-6 shield = 3. Brachistochrone trajectory: the fastest and most delta-v expensive travel route that's making sense. The method to do this is to burn until midpoint, flip, then retro-fire the rockets until you stop at the destination. In the other end, Hohmann transfer/ Bi-elliptic transfer is usually the least expensive trajectories. 4. I don't feel like this thing is very effective. It's perfectly possible, but efficiency? Anyways, I won't discuss about this too much.
|
|
|
Post by srbrant on Jan 6, 2017 4:12:00 GMT
Not what I meant by that regarding the 2.0 scale. What I meant was that there are _some_ liberties taken. The science is pretty hard for the most part, with the rest handwaved as sufficiently advanced technology.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jan 7, 2017 12:55:34 GMT
Not what I meant by that regarding the 2.0 scale. What I meant was that there are _some_ liberties taken. The science is pretty hard for the most part, with the rest handwaved as sufficiently advanced technology. Then it will be the 3.0. You continued to use the realistic physics but with seemingly improbable/imagined technology liberties. I can help you a bit here, but not much. Good luck.
|
|
|
Post by srbrant on Feb 9, 2017 3:32:45 GMT
And then there's this issue: The ships (most of them) have artificially generated gravity, but even then should I have the decks be arranged horizontally like a seaship or vertically like a rocket?
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Feb 9, 2017 7:01:11 GMT
And then there's this issue: The ships (most of them) have artificially generated gravity, but even then should I have the decks be arranged horizontally like a seaship or vertically like a rocket? Do note that if your artificial gravity is of the handwavium variety instead of centrifugal, you will also have gravity cannons and passive anti-kinetic shields. And the gravity generator will have to have an equal force acting on it in the opposite direction of the gravity, as strong as the gravity experienced by everything it affects (or else you get reactionless gravity drives, which means relativistic weapons of planet destruction). So cylindrically seems most natural, to balance forces and cut out some bracing mass. Vertically would work in combination with a spinal gravity cannon.
|
|
|
Post by lieste on Feb 9, 2017 13:00:57 GMT
If you use continual thrusting for transit time reduction then floors 'across' the ship make some sense.
Alternatively rotating portions of the ship can provide centripetal "gravity" without requiring handwavium.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Feb 12, 2017 1:27:18 GMT
If you use continual thrusting for transit time reduction then floors 'across' the ship make some sense. Alternatively rotating portions of the ship can provide centripetal "gravity" without requiring handwavium.Note that if you use only one rotating ring, it will acts like a reaction wheel. Always adds two, counter rotating each other.
|
|
|
Post by Easy on Feb 13, 2017 16:37:33 GMT
If you use continual thrusting for transit time reduction then floors 'across' the ship make some sense. Alternatively rotating portions of the ship can provide centripetal "gravity" without requiring handwavium.Note that if you use only one rotating ring, it will acts like a reaction wheel. Always adds two, counter rotating each other. In previous attempts at SciFi I used small (10-30m diameter) moon gravity rotating drums much like 2001. You could achieve Earth gravity or greater when jogging on the narrow track on the bottom ring. The slow rotation reduced sickness and let people sleep and eat with some gravity.
|
|
|
Post by grigsbybrianne on Oct 24, 2023 21:23:04 GMT
I know what you mean. I often have trouble writing, too. That is why I decided not to take any risks and asked for research proposal online for help. This research paper is very important to me.
|
|
|
Post by yehang79 on Oct 25, 2023 12:10:47 GMT
I know what you mean. I often have trouble writing, too. That is why I decided not to take any risks and asked for research proposal online for help. This research paper is very important to me. I strongly advise you to check when was this post last updated. Just a reminder
|
|