Orionsarm.org

[Oddity]

Aren't they currently worshipping wormholes as the ideal and perfect hard-scifi means of getting around?

No, as the only semi-plausible means of travelling interstellar distances without spending years, decades and centuries on the trip.

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

The Matrix - perhaps the seminal and intellignet work of popular Science Fiction since 2001 a Space Odessy.

Teeheehee.

[SirNitram]

Aren't they currently worshipping wormholes as the ideal and perfect hard-scifi means of getting around?

No, as the only semi-plausible means of travelling interstellar distances without spending years, decades and centuries on the trip.

What a pity you need nonexistant material to open one.

[Peregrin Toker]

Aren't they currently worshipping wormholes as the ideal and perfect hard-scifi means of getting around?

No, as the only semi-plausible means of travelling interstellar distances without spending years, decades and centuries on the trip.

Not to blatantly promote myself, but this is why I chose to have wormholes as the only way of interstellar travel in my sci-fi universe, which (surprise!) is called "The Wormhole War."

In other words - the concept of wormholes doesn't blatantly violate any known laws of physics IIRC.

Also - in TWW there's a reason why both the Xril and the Jardra species are humanoid, but I won't reveal it as it's a potential mega-spoiler....

[Oddity]

Aren't they currently worshipping wormholes as the ideal and perfect hard-scifi means of getting around?

No, as the only semi-plausible means of travelling interstellar distances without spending years, decades and centuries on the trip.

What a pity you need nonexistant material to open one.

So? Have they ever claimed 'exotic matter' exists in real life? Scientists have theorized about the stuff, and it doesn’t break any physical laws - which is a lot more than you can say about warp drive and hyperdrive.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Wong Essay On Hypermatter

Negative matter is so much more realistic than complex mass. Right.

Now, you're thinking that this is all just a s**tload of meaningless mathematical mumbo-jumbo, right? Well, you'd have a point. But it's exactly the same kind of meaningless mumbo-jumbo that's used to justify wormhole theory. Imaginary mass is bizarre, but certainly no less than negative mass. What does -5 kg look like? Any sci-fi fan who scoffs at the ICS description of complex mass manipulation but wholeheartedly accepts macroscopic wormholes is not being fair.

[Oddity]

The Matrix - perhaps the seminal and intellignet work of popular Science Fiction since 2001 a Space Odessy.

Teeheehee.

Love the way you quote out of context. Reminds me of RSA.

The Matrix - perhaps the seminal and intellignet work of popular Science Fiction since 2001 a Space Odessy. While the concept of human-generated bio-energy is ridiculous (why not just use anaerobic microbes?), and the battle between man and machine and old cliche, the special effects are magnificent, and concepts such as virtual reality, rogue ai and superhuman ai programs are quite appropriate to OA.

[Oddity]

Wong Essay On Hypermatter

Negative matter is so much more realistic than complex mass. Right.

Granted that 'hypermatter' and 'exotic matter' is both 'far out', but the point remains that hyperdrive break physical laws while the artificial wormholes of OA doesn't - none that we know of anyway.

Regardless of how it is achieved, you can't have FTL, relativity, and causality in the same universe. Why? Because FTL would involve travel paradoxes and therefore violate causality.

[Peregrin Toker]

Wong Essay On Hypermatter

Negative matter is so much more realistic than complex mass. Right.

Granted that 'hypermatter' and 'exotic matter' is both 'far out', but the point remains that hyperdrive break physical laws while the artificial wormholes of OA doesn't - none that we know of anyway.

As for negative matter, that is entirely hypothetical IIRC. Just like tachyons.

[Dooey Jo]

Granted that 'hypermatter' and 'exotic matter' is both 'far out', but the point remains that hyperdrive break physical laws while the artificial wormholes of OA doesn't - none that we know of anyway.

If you try to calculate the relativistic velocity -15 kg would get if you apply 50 J of kinetic energy to it, you get a non-real answer. Much like if you try to calculate the relativist energy of a massive object moving faster than c. So negative matter (which wormholes need to exist) is no more (or less) plausible than FTL travel.

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

The Matrix - perhaps the seminal and intellignet work of popular Science Fiction since 2001 a Space Odessy.

Teeheehee.

Love the way you quote out of context. Reminds me of RSA.

The Matrix - perhaps the seminal and intellignet work of popular Science Fiction since 2001 a Space Odessy. While the concept of human-generated bio-energy is ridiculous (why not just use anaerobic microbes?), and the battle between man and machine and old cliche, the special effects are magnificent, and concepts such as virtual reality, rogue ai and superhuman ai programs are quite appropriate to OA.

So? Human batteries is not the only stupid part of the Matrix.

[kojikun]

I've been speaking with Alan (the director at OA) since the beginning of this thread and he has updated the VS page to include more factual information about the VS debates. Most importantly, he has added that noone is arguing for plausibility. It's actually kinda cool, because he practically quoted me word for word in some spots [ex: "Mike Wong for example doesn't claim that anything in either SW or ST is plausible. Rather, he analyses the way the society and tech stuff works in that universe, as if it were real, because thats the only method that functions properly. The same goes for "Darkstar" (the author of ST-v-SW.Net) and other debaters as well. In vs. debates, the debates are not about which is the most plausible or realistic (although there are a few debaters who apparently do believe the universe of their choice is the more realistic) but which has the superior technology and military power, all other things being equal."]

[SirNitram]

Wong Essay On Hypermatter

Negative matter is so much more realistic than complex mass. Right.

Granted that 'hypermatter' and 'exotic matter' is both 'far out', but the point remains that hyperdrive break physical laws while the artificial wormholes of OA doesn't - none that we know of anyway.

None that you know of. Does the term 'Relativity' mean anything to you?

Hyperdrive, on the other hand, does not break any laws of physics beyond this; it merely requires things we have observed to be manipulatable to extreme levels. Wormholes require something we have never even observed to be real, creatable, and manipulatable. But hey. Gotta love the snobbery of the 'hard sci fi' crowd.

Regardless of how it is achieved, you can't have FTL, relativity, and causality in the same universe. Why? Because FTL would involve travel paradoxes and therefore violate causality.

So you didn't admit wormholes break physical law just a moment ago... Why?

[Stofsk]

This thread got me thinking of something: is scientific realism necessary to make a sci-fi story more enjoyable, or is it secondary to the story? I had a conversation (more like an argument) with someone over a definition of sci-fi; he basically said that some form of scientific advancement has to be introduced. NOTE: he made this definition as an affront to SW, which I was using as an example of sci-fi (ie SW isn't "true" sci-fi).

Why are the hard sci-fi crowd such snobs?

[NecronLord]

I imagine it makes them feel intellectually superior.

Of course, the fact that SD.Net exists would counter that claim.

[Eleas]

Well, I met Anders Sandberg a year or two ago. Interesting guy, certainly not a snob. He used to gamemaster several campaigns in the OA universe - one of them during the 80th century and one during the "raw and primitive" 50th century (where most planets didn't even have beanstalks!). He never pretended OA was realistic, just that it was a very fun setting which he attempted to add semi-plausible flavor to.

And I do applaud the effort. Just take a look at the languages section for some pretty impressive work.

[Drooling Iguana]

This thread got me thinking of something: is scientific realism necessary to make a sci-fi story more enjoyable, or is it secondary to the story? I had a conversation (more like an argument) with someone over a definition of sci-fi; he basically said that some form of scientific advancement has to be introduced. NOTE: he made this definition as an affront to SW, which I was using as an example of sci-fi (ie SW isn't "true" sci-fi).

Why are the hard sci-fi crowd such snobs?

All fiction works better when it operates according to a self-consistant set of rules. authors have two choices: Either they read up on the rules that govern our own universe and apply them to their fictional one, or they make up their own. Most authors choose the latter, however actually coming up with a good ruleset and sticking to it is a difficult job, and doing it improperly invites all sorts of annoying plotholes to creep in, which is why there's so much bad sci-fi and fantasy that really doesn't stand up to any kind of close analysis. Using real-world rules in your fictional worlds nicely side-steps that problem, with the added benifit of making it much easier for others to check your work for errors you might have missed, since you won't have to explain your unique ruleset to them.

[Oddity]

None that you know of. Does the term 'Relativity' mean anything to you?

Hyperdrive, on the other hand, does not break any laws of physics beyond this; it merely requires things we have observed to be manipulatable to extreme levels.

Well, I guess breaking the lightspeed barrier could be defined as manipulating 'things' to 'extreme levels'...

Wormholes require something we have never even observed to be real, creatable, and manipulatable.

Exchange 'wormhole' with 'hyperdrive' and you still have an accurate statement.

But hey. Gotta love the snobbery of the 'hard sci fi' crowd.

Sorry for claiming that OA is more plausible than your favourite franchise.

Regardless of how it is achieved, you can't have FTL, relativity, and causality in the same universe. Why? Because FTL would involve travel paradoxes and therefore violate causality.

So you didn't admit wormholes break physical law just a moment ago... Why?

It may be because English is not my native tongue, but I'm not getting what you're saying here....

[SirNitram]

None that you know of. Does the term 'Relativity' mean anything to you?

Hyperdrive, on the other hand, does not break any laws of physics beyond this; it merely requires things we have observed to be manipulatable to extreme levels.

Well, I guess breaking the lightspeed barrier could be defined as manipulating 'things' to 'extreme levels'...

The fundamental problem is revealed: You have no idea what you're talking about. Okay.

Wormholes require something we have never even observed to be real, creatable, and manipulatable.

Exchange 'wormhole' with 'hyperdrive' and you still have an accurate statement.

Negative energy has never been proven to exist, complex mass has. Sorry to burst your bubble, though you may need some research before you actually understand what those terms mean, or how they impact this.

[Kuroneko]

Negative energy has never been proven to exist, complex mass has. Sorry to burst your bubble, though you may need some research before you actually understand what those terms mean, or how they impact this.

I don't get you. Wouldn't the rest energy of a particle with complex mass with no real component be negative? Besides, how and when have complex massed been observed?

[Dooey Jo]

They have observed complex mass? How did they do that?

[Kuroneko]

I don't get you. Wouldn't the rest energy of a particle with complex mass with no real component be negative? Besides, how and when have complex massed been observed?

Ah, no. But the last question remains. I'd like to know.

[Oddity]

For the next week or so, real life will prevent me from pursuing this debate. I therefore concede all points.

[SirNitram]

I don't get you. Wouldn't the rest energy of a particle with complex mass with no real component be negative? Besides, how and when have complex massed been observed?

Ah, no. But the last question remains. I'd like to know.

Assuming I've been reading the math right, it's been observed in hypermatter. No, I'm not bullshitting here; there's RL stuff called hypermatter. I'll see if I can find the article I read from online somewhere. If only to prove that yes, someone named a real-life form of matter Hypermatter(I think, a result of the fact it seemed to be more massive than it should be).

[Kuroneko]

Assuming I've been reading the math right, it's been observed in hypermatter. No, I'm not bullshitting here; there's RL stuff called hypermatter.

Are you sure this is more than simply a collection of hyperons? That can plausibly be called `hypermatter', though it would have real, positive mass.