[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 503 KB, 961x749, SaturnS1D_01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10746182 No.10746182 [Reply] [Original]

What science fiction universe is the least fictional, and what problems does it still have? What will actual armed spaceships look like? Are lasers actually any good as space weapons?

regards /k/

>> No.10746186
File: 49 KB, 637x358, download.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10746186

The Expanse seems pretty close but still has some handwavium specifically with the Epstein Drive basically being magic, also it's never clearly explained why anti-torpedo-torpedos aren't widespread when they are already IRL

>> No.10746539

>>10746182

You'll like Robert Forward's Rocheworld series. It's what happens when a NASA scientist decides to write science fiction.

Comes up with plausible mechanisms for interstellar travel, slight B.S.ing with life extension tech but very well done, nothing that technically breaks the laws of physics

>> No.10747335

>>10746182

Where the fuqqq does da fuel go?!

>> No.10747344

>>10746182
asimov, foundation

>> No.10747384

>>10746186
Expanse is not just handwavy, it's a total fantasy/space opera with complete disregard to reality. You don't spin Ceres for "gravity".

>>10746182
>What science fiction universe is the least fictional
Most works by Greg Egan and Robert Forward are as hard as it can get, as an example. Beware though, they aren't anywhere close to what you possibly want (a bunch of Hominidae waging wars in the Solar System, I guess). Also, Planetes. Yeah, that's a chink moving picture.

What you really want for your purpose is not sci-fi, but educating yourself about orbital mechanics, deep space communication, and thermodynamics of things in space.

>What will actual armed spaceships look like?
Some anons here will recommend taking a look at Project Rho and Children of a Dead Earth. Don't listen to them, they are just pulling numbers out of their asses like everybody else.

>Are lasers actually any good as space weapons?
No, they have pretty large divergence and need a lot of power to operate, and any power source in space is limited by thermodynamics.

>> No.10747415

>>10747344
> dude what if we did the roman collapse but in space

Good books, but no, not at all

>> No.10747417
File: 156 KB, 1000x843, and so on.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10747417

>>10746182

Contrary to what many early science fiction authors believed (and most readers still kinda assume even today) - Science fiction is absolutely not about an accurate depiction of a probable future.

It can't be. Every fictional story is either a reflection on current events or trends in some way, or a story about human conditions (like redemption or growth, or search for happiness or something like that).

The setting is, while fun, not the story.

That's why most of the great science fiction is set in not scientifically accurate worlds. And science fiction writers that go out of their way to make it seem plausible, usually create shit stories that nobody wants to read.

>> No.10747421

>>10746182
>armed spaceships
For ship-to-ship combat or what?
Ships are expensive so probably detachable/disposable fighters and boarding actions to kill crews and capture the craft intact.

>> No.10747425

>>10747417
>Science fiction is absolutely not about an accurate depiction of a probable future
Nobody even started to assume that ITT, and you're already making excuses.

>> No.10747457

>>10747425

The whole premise of the OP is about that.

Basically
>give a science fiction universe with no bullshit

Not possible. Otherwise that science fiction universe would be a precise prediction of the conditions that will actually happen in the real world.

>> No.10747471

>>10746182
Violence is retarded. It's easier to just send a bunch of ships in all directions and if some die well of the fuck well. Evolutionary principles stop applying when you can spam a trillion versions of yourself across infinite distances. There's no meaningful sense of tactical superiority in the void. You're not gaining anything by blowing up the "enemy" ship; there is literally no sense of territory that could make that at all meaningful.

>> No.10747476

>>10747471
>there is literally no sense of territory that could make that at all meaningful.
There is the total number of ships the enemy has.

>> No.10747479

>>10747457
>with no bullshit
With the least amount of assumptions, if you read carefully.

>> No.10747489

>>10747479
>With the least amount of assumptions, if you read carefully.

Well then you are limited to extreme near future scenarios like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001:_A_Space_Odyssey_(film)
And despite Kubrick being as autistic as possible about "muh realism", turns out we didn't have a giant space station with artificial gravity by rotation, in the year 2001.

>> No.10747495

>>10747476
Then they wasted their time and resources going in one direction when they could have went in 20, 80, 1000, doesn't really matter. In space, there's so little to support life that literally any ship showing up is cause for celebration. "Yay! More resources to help build our next civilization!" Blasting it out of the sky hurts you as much as them.

>> No.10747505

>>10747495
>In space, there's so little to support life that literally any ship showing up is cause for celebration. "Yay! More resources to help build our next civilization!" Blasting it out of the sky hurts you as much as them.

ASSumptions

That really depends on where you are in space and how fast you can travel, doesn't it? If you can comfortably travel among planets, there is no shortage of resources for you. Just jump to the nearest asteroid belt and start mining.

https://www.universetoday.com/37425/what-are-asteroids-made-of/

>> No.10747506

>>10746182
>Are lasers actually any good as space weapons?
Yes

>> No.10747508

>>10746186
This. The expanse is dead on.

>> No.10747521

>>10747508
>The expanse is dead on.

I'll make a screenshot of this post for use in the 23 century.

(I don't know about you, but I plan to be alive and well, and still shitposting 200 years from now)

>> No.10747525

>>10747505
>Just jump to the nearest asteroid belt and start mining
Yes, to build ships to send in all directions. Unless you're planning on maximizing the damage X-risks can do to your species.

Honestly though I think humanity lucked out with its asteroid belt. I don't know as every solar system is going to have one. We're basically home free as soon as we have our first modularly expanding generation ship.

You will literally colonize the universe slower if you stop to waste time on self-defense, or worse, actual offense (resource destruction).

>> No.10748850

>>10747415
You know Krugman was inspired by these books, right?