Oct 15, 2013 Dodecahedron Books Media Centre, Edmonton Alberta
Part
Two – Categories of Science Fiction and the Limits of Scientific Possibility
Writer: Helena Puumala (Kati
of Terra series, Witches Stones, Northern Gothic short story collection).
Astrophysicist: Scott
Olausen ( PhD student, several papers in The Astrophysical Journal).
Blogger: Dodecahedron Books
blog writer (also a statistician in his day job).
Blogger:
Previously, we talked about
categories of science fiction/fantasy and the boundaries that define them,
however indistinctly. How about we give
some concrete examples that might typify these categories. So, the
next question: From your different perspectives, give me an idea of what
you would include in the categories Hard SF, Middle SF, Soft SF and Fantasy.
Writer: I
think Kim Stanley Robinson is a good example of Hard Science Fiction. He wrote the very scientifically credible
Mars trilogy. For Middle SF, I will give
my own book, The Witches’ Stones: Igniting the Blaze as an example. Is that ok?
Blogger: That’s always acceptable on my
Dodecahedron Books blog.
Writer:
No surprise there. Well, then, for Soft SF
I will go with my Kati of Terra books, which follow the conventions of Science Fiction,
but focus on the human side of things and throw in a nice side order of
romance.
Blogger:
They do, at that.
Writer: And for my example of Fantasy, I will go with
a classic, the Toklien stories - The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.
Astrophysicist: I will use the previously mentioned move “Gravity” for my example of
Hard SF. All the science in it is
completely credible, though you might say that the engineering takes
liberties. I think I would place the
Star Trek universe in the Middle SF category.
They have a lot of far out edge science, such as teleportation and warp
drive, but they still sort of care about the science being at least vaguely
plausible. For Soft SF, I will go with
Dr. Who. It gives a nod to science, but
is generally a lot further out there than Star Trek. For Fantasy, I will say Game of Thrones.
Writer:
Dr. Who is interesting. It seems to me that series intersects with
folklore archetypes to a great extent.
It is both Science Fiction and Fairy Tale. That’s not surprising, since the show started
off as a kid’s show and is meant to appeal to both kids and adults now.
Blogger: Yes, a recent Dr. Who episode had a wonderful
scene where the Doctor explains to someone the scientific creation story of the
Big Bang and the brings alive the concept of the many universes theory. It really did make the Big Bang seem as amazing
as any religious myth or fairy tale - and I mean that in a good way.
What about books like 1984 or Brave
New World? Where do they fit in?
Astrophysicist:
Political dystopia, with the trappings of SF.
Writer:
And since the year 1984 has come and gone, you can’t really say it is even
futuristic, which is a pretty significant aspect of science fiction.
Blogger:
How about James Bond?
Writer:
Skirts the edges of SF, but that’s
about it.
Blogger:
Ok, here’s a little Rorschach test regarding science and
Science Fiction. On a scale from 1 to 10,
rate the scientific credibility or plausibility of the following:
Life on Other Planets
Astrophysicist:
Almost a sure thing, at least some form of life.
Writer: I consider it an established fact, based on
some of the Viking Lander results, the obvious existence of water on Mars, and
the reports of methane in the atmosphere there.
Beyond that, we now know of so many exoplanets that there must be life
on some of them.
Intelligent Life on Other Planets
Astrophysicist:
It’s probably much less common than life in general, but given our
existence, we are pretty well guaranteed that intelligent life is out there
somewhere, or at least has been out there somewhere. Otherwise, we would be absolutely unique,
which goes against the principle of mediocrity.
We can use the Drake Equation as a guide to the question, but there are
a lot of unknowns, so it doesn’t narrow things down much. At least not yet.
Writer: All that being said, we shouldn’t necessarily
expect intelligent life elsewhere in the universe to be much like us. Naturally in the Kati of Terra universe I
have had to make the intelligent creatures recognizable to us, but in the real
universe that might not be the case. It
could vary immensely - intelligent gas clouds, intelligent undersea creatures,
non-Oxygen based, non-Carbon based, perhaps pure energy, perhaps beings in other
dimensions as in the frontier physics we read about.
Signals from or Contact with
Intelligent Life on Other Planets (SETI/CETI)
Astrophysicist:
Not impossible, but probably technically very difficult. There are so many things that have to come
together just so - for example, proximity in space, proximity in time (e.g. the
lifespan of civilizations, the length of time that signals will be sent, accidentally or on purpose) and the likelihood
of actually being able to make any sense out of a signal even if one is
detected.
Writer: It’s possible that if it happens it could be
through something like ESP rather than physical signals, like radio or laser
light. If the physical is impossible
then it will happen in a non-physical way, something to do with consciousness
reaching out and contacting other consciousness. Anyway, I posit that sort of thing in the
Kati books, if anyone wants to explore those ideas further.
Interstellar Travel
Astrophysicist:
Well, in a limited sense we are on
our way with Pioneer and Voyager, which are interstellar ships of a sort. Generation ships are possible, I suppose, but
you almost need breakthrough physics, as the economics of generation ships are
so formidable. Near light speed ships
also have formidable technical and economic challenges. Warps and wormholes get talked about, but
they are still a long ways off, if ever.
Current theories say you would need strange matter, for example. But who knows, in 1000 years what might be
possible.
Writer
- Well, as a science fiction writer, I have to assume that this is
possible. The actual means of doing it
may be so beyond our current understanding, though, that we can’t even begin to
guess.
Blogger:
I will just put in a word or two about
rockets and warp drive. Supposedly, the
first rockets were used by the Chinese in the twelfth century. So, in principle, the basic idea for the
propellant technology that was eventually used for Apollo and the other
interplanetary probes existed for nearly a millennium, before humanity
perfected it for those purposes. So,
perhaps warp drive might be the same.
Perhaps the current theorising
behind things like the Alcubierre drive
is the equivalent of those twelfth century rockets.
Machine Intelligence, that would
pass the Turing Test
Astrophysicist:
It seems possible, but we still
don’t know much about consciousness and sentience. It may be a lot more difficult than the
optimists (e.g. The Singularity is Near) believe.
Writer:
I admit that I really don’t like the
idea. It seems to postulate a rigid
materialism that I am not comfortable with.
If it ever did come about, it might still be that some sort of
non-physical entity would be instantiated or be used by this apparent machine
intelligence.
ESP
Astrophysicist:
Shrug, can’t say. That’s getting a little too far out there for
someone without tenure.
Writer:
I think we all have it. I think I do.
Time Travel
Astrophysicist:
There are ways to solve general
relativity and special relativity that can lead to these possibilities. But still, the logical paradoxes…
Writer:
You would need multiple universes to
deal with paradox, but hey, I’m a Science Fiction writer.
Blogger:
So, summing up our discussions,
what’s more important - a good story or good science?
Astrophysicist:
Ultimately, a good story is most
important. That’s the point of
fiction. If I want something narrowly
focussed on science, I can read the Astrophysical Journal (or write for it).
Writer:
Who can argue with that? Fiction is fiction, and we need our
entertainment. Exceeding the bounds of
current science also helps to inspire hope and wonder, and we need that too.
Blogger:
Indeed, who can argue with any of that?
Based on our discussions, I would say that creative people should keep
the science at least vaguely plausible, don’t insult the audience’s
intelligence, maintain internal consistency, and write a compelling story. That’s good Science Fiction.
No comments:
Post a Comment