Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Science Fiction When There's Spaceships Already?
Tram law
Member (Idle past 4705 days)
Posts: 283
From: Weed, California, USA
Joined: 08-15-2010


Message 1 of 30 (611704)
04-10-2011 7:45 AM


One of the things I wonder about from time to is if we lived in a society with high levels of technology, such as say that in Star Trek, were commonplace and humanity can travel among the stars, I often think about what would science fiction be like.
Would it still be like it is today? That is being set in the backdrop of space and include spaceships with fantastic technology fighting each other? Or would it be in a different form? And would it be as popular as it is today?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by subbie, posted 04-10-2011 10:22 AM Tram law has not replied
 Message 3 by ringo, posted 04-10-2011 10:55 AM Tram law has not replied
 Message 4 by Hyroglyphx, posted 04-10-2011 11:10 AM Tram law has not replied
 Message 5 by fearandloathing, posted 04-10-2011 11:30 AM Tram law has not replied
 Message 12 by frako, posted 04-11-2011 3:24 PM Tram law has not replied
 Message 23 by Briterican, posted 04-11-2011 4:33 PM Tram law has not replied
 Message 25 by Taq, posted 04-11-2011 4:43 PM Tram law has not replied
 Message 29 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-12-2011 4:32 AM Tram law has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 2 of 30 (611712)
04-10-2011 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tram law
04-10-2011 7:45 AM


Would it still be like it is today? That is being set in the backdrop of space and include spaceships with fantastic technology fighting each other?
You have a very narrow view of what science fiction is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tram law, posted 04-10-2011 7:45 AM Tram law has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 3 of 30 (611713)
04-10-2011 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tram law
04-10-2011 7:45 AM


Tram law writes:
Would it still be like it is today? That is being set in the backdrop of space and include spaceships with fantastic technology fighting each other?
You seem to see science fiction as fundies see prophecy, as a prediction of the future. A more accurate view, I think, is that both science fiction and prophecy are a reflection of current society.
To answer the question, "What would Captain Kirk read?" he'd probably read about even more woo-woo technology used by people who still have the old primitive instincts to fight each other.

If you have nothing to say, you could have done so much more concisely. -- Dr Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tram law, posted 04-10-2011 7:45 AM Tram law has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 30 (611715)
04-10-2011 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tram law
04-10-2011 7:45 AM


Tram law writes:
One of the things I wonder about from time to is if we lived in a society with high levels of technology, such as say that in Star Trek, were commonplace and humanity can travel among the stars, I often think about what would science fiction be like.
Would it still be like it is today? That is being set in the backdrop of space and include spaceships with fantastic technology fighting each other? Or would it be in a different form? And would it be as popular as it is today?
How the hell is anyone supposed to know what something is going to be like in the future?
If we were going to go by the Jetsons, we should all have flying cars, but we don't base the future on cartoons or Sci-Fi series.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tram law, posted 04-10-2011 7:45 AM Tram law has not replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 5 of 30 (611716)
04-10-2011 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tram law
04-10-2011 7:45 AM


Isaac Asimov
I like some sci-fi myself, but not the star trek stuff so much.
If you enjoy reading I would recommend you try some Isaac Asimov if you havent already, Foundation series of books is a good one in my opinion. He is not every ones cup of tea, If you enjoyed the movie I Robot then you might enjoy some of his other works as well.
I would also say read some H.G. Wells also, some sci-fi is much better when read in my opinion.
Read all 4 of the 2001 A Space Odyssey series, 2010, 2061, 3001.
Fahrenheit 451, War of the Worlds, The time Machine
There is so many others....
BTW if you havent seen the movie "Sunshine', 2007 british movie, check it out, I liked it.
Edited by fearandloathing, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tram law, posted 04-10-2011 7:45 AM Tram law has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by arachnophilia, posted 04-10-2011 4:47 PM fearandloathing has replied

  
Tram law
Member (Idle past 4705 days)
Posts: 283
From: Weed, California, USA
Joined: 08-15-2010


Message 6 of 30 (611718)
04-10-2011 12:22 PM


quote:
You have a very narrow view of what science fiction is.
I consider superheroes science fiction. But the one I like the most means space ships and space battles.
quote:
You seem to see science fiction as fundies see prophecy, as a prediction of the future. A more accurate view, I think, is that both science fiction and prophecy are a reflection of current society.
Gee, thanks for lumping me in with those people. And I wish people would stop assuming such mean spirited things about me.
Secondly, that might be an accurate way to view science fiction, but there's a couple more descriptions that are being missed. Sometimes science fiction is wrong and presents a more idealized version of humanity, sometimes negative, sometimes positive.
Science fiction is great at inspiring technology. The submarine from Jules Verne. The cell phone from Star Trek. And there is even a transporter, except in a very limited way. I can't remember the specific article, but a few years ago they were able to transport a single atom from one place to another.
It's also a way of describing someone's view on how the future and society should be. Star Trek's view, as inaccurate and implausible as it is, is about humanity overcoming petty bigotries and beliefs like religion, as one example. Except for 2009 Trek. That's how G.R. wanted things to be.
But in a world where there is a lot of high technology, I don't think it'd be very good about the technology.
Edited by Tram law, : added stuff for I accidentally hit the wrong button

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by ringo, posted 04-10-2011 2:39 PM Tram law has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 7 of 30 (611723)
04-10-2011 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Tram law
04-10-2011 12:22 PM


Tram law writes:
The cell phone from Star Trek.
Dick Tracy already had a 2-way wrist radio in 1946. It was inspired by existing technology - e.g. the walkie-talkie.
What I find interesting is where science fiction writers really miss the boat with out-of-date technology.

If you have nothing to say, you could have done so much more concisely. -- Dr Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Tram law, posted 04-10-2011 12:22 PM Tram law has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 04-10-2011 2:58 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied
 Message 13 by Briterican, posted 04-11-2011 3:34 PM ringo has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 8 of 30 (611724)
04-10-2011 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by ringo
04-10-2011 2:39 PM


ringo writes:
Tram law writes:
The cell phone from Star Trek.
Dick Tracy already had a 2-way wrist radio in 1946. It was inspired by existing technology - e.g. the walkie-talkie.
What I find interesting is where science fiction writers really miss the boat with out-of-date technology.
A great example was the scifi view of computers, they almost all saw them as getting bigger and bigger physically, some even planet sized.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by ringo, posted 04-10-2011 2:39 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by frako, posted 04-11-2011 3:55 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 9 of 30 (611727)
04-10-2011 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by fearandloathing
04-10-2011 11:30 AM


"sunshine"
fearandloathing writes:
BTW if you havent seen the movie "Sunshine', 2007 british movie, check it out, I liked it.
i see "sunshine" as a movie about human stupidity.
pretty much everything that happens in the movie is the result of someone doing something really, really dumb.
for starters, they need a crew of seven to hit a target like the sun. i think i could program a 386 to hit the sun. i'm not even sure i'd need a computer to do it. the sun is the larget, most massive target in the solar system by far. all you'd have to do to hit it is make sure you don't fall into orbit with it or anything else. and that's pretty easy: fire your rocket so it goes outside the ecliptic plane, and then have it turn toward the sun. why they need people on this mission in the first place, i don't know.
but the one that really gets me, every time i watch this movie, is when they get trapped on the icarus 1, and have to get back to the icarus 2 with only one spacesuit. so they fire capa in the suit, and two other guys, out of the airlock, and leave one behind to die. why not fire the other three out of the airlock, and then slowly depressurize the ship, and the guy with the suit can take his sweet time getting back?

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by fearandloathing, posted 04-10-2011 11:30 AM fearandloathing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by fearandloathing, posted 04-10-2011 5:00 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 10 of 30 (611729)
04-10-2011 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by arachnophilia
04-10-2011 4:47 PM


Re: "sunshine"
arachnophilia writes:
fearandloathing writes:
BTW if you havent seen the movie "Sunshine', 2007 british movie, check it out, I liked it.
i see "sunshine" as a movie about human stupidity.
pretty much everything that happens in the movie is the result of someone doing something really, really dumb.
for starters, they need a crew of seven to hit a target like the sun. i think i could program a 386 to hit the sun. I'm not even sure i'd need a computer to do it. the sun is the larget, most massive target in the solar system by far. all you'd have to do to hit it is make sure you don't fall into orbit with it or anything else. and that's pretty easy: fire your rocket so it goes outside the ecliptic plane, and then have it turn toward the sun. why they need people on this mission in the first place, i don't know.
but the one that really gets me, every time i watch this movie, is when they get trapped on the Icarus 1, and have to get back to the icarus 2 with only one spacesuit. so they fire capa in the suit, and two other guys, out of the airlock, and leave one behind to die. why not fire the other three out of the airlock, and then slowly depressurize the ship, and the guy with the suit can take his sweet time getting back?
LOL...you are right, the science behind it is way off too.
I pick apart war movies like you just did with Sunshine, but I still enjoyed it, although if I see it a few times I will pick it apart. Also seems like an alarm shoulda let them Know that the shield was going to be out of alignment, but I missed the very beginning and have only caught it on cable once.

"I hate to advocate the use of drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they always worked for me." - Hunter S. Thompson
Ad astra per aspera

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by arachnophilia, posted 04-10-2011 4:47 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by arachnophilia, posted 04-10-2011 5:20 PM fearandloathing has seen this message but not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 11 of 30 (611730)
04-10-2011 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by fearandloathing
04-10-2011 5:00 PM


Re: "sunshine"
fearandloathing writes:
LOL...you are right, the science behind it is way off too.
actually, it wasn't. they just severely messed it up between the script and the screen, and didn't go into any expository details. apparently, the reason behind the sun dying was a roving micro black hole, that had become lodged in the sun. and the bomb to dislodge was supposed to have the mass of the moon, not manhattan, as said in the movie. and all this is apparently somewhat plausible.
they made a few goofs, of course, but at least they portrayed space more realistically than most sci-fi movies. and made it dangerous again.
I pick apart war movies like you just did with Sunshine, but I still enjoyed it, although if I see it a few times I will pick it apart. Also seems like an alarm shoulda let them Know that the shield was going to be out of alignment, but I missed the very beginning and have only caught it on cable once.
i try not to pick apart movies, but sometimes, stuff just screams to me.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by fearandloathing, posted 04-10-2011 5:00 PM fearandloathing has seen this message but not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 12 of 30 (611849)
04-11-2011 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tram law
04-10-2011 7:45 AM


When There's Spaceships Already?
The government has them

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tram law, posted 04-10-2011 7:45 AM Tram law has not replied

  
Briterican
Member (Idle past 3949 days)
Posts: 340
Joined: 05-29-2008


Message 13 of 30 (611851)
04-11-2011 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by ringo
04-10-2011 2:39 PM


Sci-fi failures
ringo writes:
What I find interesting is where science fiction writers really miss the boat with out-of-date technology.
Yes. It's fun to look at some of the older sci-fi stuff (you don't even have to go very far back) to notice things like cathode ray tubes in what is meant to be the year 2500 or some such. I was just watching "Alien" the other night and the graphics technology presented is nowhere near what we have now, much less what we would have at a time when we have giant mining vessels travelling to other worlds (aka the Nostromo).
I am fascinated with the things that sci-fi has either consistently overestimated (flying cars, bases on the moon and mars) or almost completely overlooked ... the ONLY example that comes to mind immediately on that second point is the internet...
Although I'm sure there are other examples of older sci-fi predicting the internet (or some similar planet-wide information sharing technology), the ONLY example of such that I can think of is A Logic Named Joe - Wikipedia - from the March 1946 edition of Astounding Science Fiction - and adapted into a radio play on the brilliant (albeit dated) old-time-radio programme "X-Minus 1". It imagined a calculating machine that could be asked any question and it would give an answer. Of course the controversy came when someone asked it for advice on killing someone and it responded with a poison formula or something like that... my memory fails me.
If anyone has examples of pre-1960's sci-fi that predicted the internet, I'd love to give it a read.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by ringo, posted 04-10-2011 2:39 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Tram law, posted 04-11-2011 3:47 PM Briterican has seen this message but not replied
 Message 16 by fearandloathing, posted 04-11-2011 3:59 PM Briterican has replied
 Message 17 by arachnophilia, posted 04-11-2011 4:00 PM Briterican has replied
 Message 26 by ringo, posted 04-11-2011 4:48 PM Briterican has replied

  
Tram law
Member (Idle past 4705 days)
Posts: 283
From: Weed, California, USA
Joined: 08-15-2010


Message 14 of 30 (611853)
04-11-2011 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Briterican
04-11-2011 3:34 PM


Re: Sci-fi failures
You might want to look into Arthur C Clarke. He might not have fully predicted the Internet, but he did predict a world wide satellite communications as shown in this 1964 video here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT_8-pjuctM&feature=playe...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Briterican, posted 04-11-2011 3:34 PM Briterican has seen this message but not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 15 of 30 (611855)
04-11-2011 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by jar
04-10-2011 2:58 PM


well some writers do hit the nail on the head, one of the early bond movies had a GPS in his car. So did kit in knight rider. Oh and while weare by kit self driving cars are being invented now. The un invasive medical scanners from star treck well magnetic imaging comes to mind used worldwide not that portable as of yet tough
George Orwell wrote a book about a world where people are being watched by others on telescreens and nobody knows when and where tghey are being watched sound familiar cameras everywhere big brother is always watching
someone said for predictions of the Internet well i think mark twain did it 100 years ago.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 04-10-2011 2:58 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by fearandloathing, posted 04-11-2011 4:03 PM frako has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024