22-07-2004 22:40									#121
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse It doesn't mean that there's no such thing as a 4 cylinder engine possible.

Only that's what he was saying... although I don't really care about this much.


My point was that the science in science fiction is sparse at best and is always made up without any [i]scientific explanation.

quote: His contention was that the three laws were engrained so deeply in the design history of robotic brains that to simply remove or alter certain pieces of the laws would cause unforeseen consequences without spending another 100 years starting from the simplest robotic brains and building forward.

Is a good example. It's a reasonable explanation to justify his claim that it's impossible to build a robot without the laws. Only it doesn't actually explain why. There is just as good of explanations (sometimes even better) behind why magic exists certain fantasy settings, but they also don't contain any actual reasons. This is why it is fiction, because it is based on fluff with no basis in reality.


Sci-fi and fantasy are the same genre, the only distinction between the two is setting. They are both predominately fiction - Star Trek is no more scientific than Lord of the Rings is historical.

	22-07-2004 22:48									#122
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

a) You're claiming that his stories said things they never did, AFAIK.

b) Science fiction is fiction.

	22-07-2004 22:50									#123
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse You demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of the difference between a linear system (gas in a box) and a nonlinear system (the Earth's weather patterns)

Weather != psychohistory. Both are chaotic systems, but even we've had success understanding the laws of history.

	22-07-2004 22:56									#124
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Forward, Clement, Lem.

	22-07-2004 22:57									#125
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse a) You're claiming that his stories said things they never did, AFAIK.

Alright, I might be wrong about him saying that it was impossible to build a robot without the laws. I remember that being said pretty explicitly, though, but I don't really care enough to go through the book looking for examples.

You can just put it down to bad fiction that none where built without it rather than bad science for it not being possible, if that's the case.

quote: b) Science fiction is fiction.

That's what I've been saying.

This was all a little tangent about Ajbera saying that he didn't consider authors like Ray Bradbury science fiction because they contained little science.

	22-07-2004 22:58									#126
	Kuciwalker Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Do you really want to argue about the suitability of statistical methods as a predictive tool in complex systems with somebody getting a doctorate in condensed-matter physics?

We've also had success understanding the laws of weather (rather more success, actually). There is every indication that society is a more chaotic system than is weather, as society is immeasurably more complex.

Until you can demonstrate the fundamental stability of society as a complex system when we have numerous examples to the contrary your little truisms about how statistical mechanics doesn't predict the motion of every gas molecule but can predict thermodynamic quantities is worth exactly zero.

	22-07-2004 23:03									#127
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Osweld:

Ray Bradbury is often closer to fantasy, but more suitably falls under the general heading of speculative fiction (which both Sci Fi and Fantasy do as well).

There is no hard line between the two genres, but to say that they are the same genre goes a bit far in my opinion.

	23-07-2004 00:52									#128
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Sikander I don't know, The Secret Wives of Poughkeepsie was pretty good, though it did have the advantage of being set in New York rather than Pennsylvania.

In that respect, I've also enjoyed John Updike's 'Couples' since I first read it in school many years ago now.

However, Agathon's sweeping dismissal of all other writers than the frankly frequently rather clunky Wells is absurd and hyperbolic, and seems based on nothing more than whimsy, rather than a close appreciation of the works of Thomas Disch, J.G. Ballard or Samuel R. Dealny, for instance, to say nothing of the majority of New Wave s.f. writers who were published in New Worlds, or writers such as Neal Stephenson.

It's the snobbish attitude of genre= entertainemt= not real literature that bugs me- after all, Dickens and Shakespeare were firstly entertainers, not art for art's sake literary scribes.

	23-07-2004 01:47									#129
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

The general point of science fiction is not to describe "science", or to give the reader a good understanding of physics-there are basicaly two types:

One which sets a common story in a future setting- for example, a Romeo and Juliet on Mars. The point of that type of sci-fi is to give a new "twist" to a fundamental human story.

The other type of sci fi creates a future or alien scenerio in order to explore a theme- for example, 1984 and totalitarianism, or Solaris and the inability to understand the alien/different, or childhood's end, or Enders game.

In Both , science is not the central theme of the story but a vehicle for somethign else-which is why it is so easy to write bad sci fi, a writer will get so engrossed in the specifics of their made up world and all sorts of unimportant tangents and such they lose the central point of the story, which is the core of sci fi.

	23-07-2004 05:50									#130
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by General Ludd The only books where scientific aspects aren't mere trappings are text books. the science part of science fiction is either made up pseudo-science, or not fictional and merely a documentation of what is already done.

Greg Egan's works of art would be the obvious rebuttals to this.

	23-07-2004 12:32									#131
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Jrabbit,

quote: Unmentioned here but a huge fave because of his imagination and his dedication to Making The Science Work -- Robert L. Forward.

He's not unmentioned. I mentioned it!

	23-07-2004 13:12									#132
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom In that respect, I've also enjoyed John Updike's 'Couples' since I first read it in school many years ago now. However, Agathon's sweeping dismissal of all other writers than the frankly frequently rather clunky Wells is absurd and hyperbolic, and seems based on nothing more than whimsy, rather than a close appreciation of the works of Thomas Disch, J.G. Ballard or Samuel R. Dealny, for instance, to say nothing of the majority of New Wave s.f. writers who were published in New Worlds, or writers such as Neal Stephenson. It's the snobbish attitude of genre= entertainemt= not real literature that bugs me- after all, Dickens and Shakespeare were firstly entertainers, not art for art's sake literary scribes.

I agree completely, and frankly don't understand how one could actually construct a well-defined barrier between "literature" and entertainment. Btw, I just made up the "Secret Wives of Poughkeepsie" because it sounded funny and that sort of fiction has little general appeal to me also. But your larger point still stands, in that I'm sure that there are individual works in almost any genre that I would find interesting.

	23-07-2004 13:16									#133
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker You're a bad Marxist

Actually, I'm a very good Marxist. You just don't understand Marxism. That's not surprising, because most people don't, including most people who call themselves Marxists.

	23-07-2004 18:26									#134
	Remove this text

My top 3 is easy, because I've only ever read 2 sci-fi authors...

1. H.G. Wells (The War of the Worlds, The Time Machine)
2. Arthur C. Clarke (the 2001 series: 2001, 2010, 2061, 3001)

	23-07-2004 19:00									#135
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by LDiCesare Jrabbit, He's not unmentioned. I mentioned it!

I stand corrected re Bob forward, LD.

Another fave I don't recall seeing in this thread is William Gibson of the so-called cyber-punk genre.


While the genre was inevitable, his stuff is both stylistically aggressive and well imagined.

	23-07-2004 19:00									#136
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by GePap One which sets a common story in a future setting- for example, a Romeo and Juliet on Mars. The point of that type of sci-fi is to give a new "twist" to a fundamental human story.

Simply setting Romeo and Juliet on Mars would not be science fiction. Speculative fiction must contain some elements that are beyond our contemporary understanding of our existance.

	23-07-2004 19:02									#137
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH Simply setting Romeo and Juliet on Mars would not be science fiction. Speculative fiction must contain some elements that are beyond the our contemporary understanding of our existance.

Like living on mars?

	23-07-2004 19:04									#138
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Actually, I'm a very good Marxist. You just don't understand Marxism.

REAL marxists are meglomaniacal brutal oppressors, anything else is jus 'marxist lite' and not worth screwing around with. (and they don't eat quiche, either)

	23-07-2004 19:10									#139
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I'll admit its tough to define, but simply setting Romeo and Juliet on Mars is not enough. Change the characters to robots, throw in a problem associated with robot life rather than families that are enemies and OK, it passes muster.

	23-07-2004 20:54									#140
	Remove this text

Has anyone mentioned Jules Verne yet?

	23-07-2004 21:35									#141
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Yes.

	23-07-2004 21:55									#142
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I never read too much SciFi, but I really loved Jules Verne as a kid. And even today, I still love the setting in which his stories happen. I can only imagine, this high-tech world devoid of computers, where most machines are made of wood and heavy steel.

This "high tech 19th century" has an excellent potential, and would make a great environment for any novel, movie or videogame (Myst draws on it)

	23-07-2004 22:05									#143
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

How about J.G. Ballard? I don't think he's been mentioned.

	23-07-2004 22:44									#144
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker Yes.

Then I salute whoever mentioned that great man.



Jules Verne, Michael Crichton, all great. Timothy Zahn did an excellent job in the Star Wars universe.

	23-07-2004 22:46									#145
	Support Apolyton

Iain M Banks, Julian May, Frank Herbert.

Not that I like all their stuff... but I reckon the quality is consistently high with their output.

	23-07-2004 22:47									#146
	Put an end to popups!

I like Zahn, but I don't think the Star Wars novels are quite enough.

	23-07-2004 23:20									#147
	Suffering from ads?

Asimov, Bradbury, Clarke.

	23-07-2004 23:24									#148
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker I like Zahn, but I don't think the Star Wars novels are quite enough.

Nor do I. Still, he deserves my honorable mention. Thrawn was the uber-bad guy.

	23-07-2004 23:25									#149
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Funny, I never really thought of him as a bad guy...

	23-07-2004 23:33									#150
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor This "high tech 19th century" has an excellent potential, and would make a great environment for any novel, movie or videogame (Myst draws on it)

Aware of the subgenre of "steam punk"? The basic idea is that much higher technological levels were reached in the Victorian era than in our timeline, but society stayed basically Victorian.

It does contain computers (comparable to ~1950 ones in our timeline, perhaps), but The Difference Engine by Sterling and Gibson is very good.