Return-Path: To: maelstrom@csnet.net From: Samuel Penn Subject: Re: NET SF: Ground work [960226-1] Reply-To: sam@bifrost.demon.co.uk References: <9602261806.AA01124@mhv.net> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 23:06:08 GMT Organization: Somewhere in Aldershot > Return-Path: > Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 10:39:21 -0600 (CST) > From: Thorne Aaron W > Subject: NET SF: Jumping in > To: maelstrom@csnet.net > > inopportune) times. These latter races would probably be non-oxygen > breathing, and have an extremely odd (by human standards) logic process. OTOH, it can be fun to have the aliens with wierd physiology to be more human intellectually than the oxygen breathing ones. > Okay, here's my real last thought. I have a "generic" sci-fi rpg called > Journeyman. It's great, just doesn't have a universe for it. So > whatever we come up with I'm going to adapt it to Journeyman. Just as I'll be thinking of things in terms of Yags (Yet Another Game System). -- Be seeing you, Sam. ---- Return-Path: Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 15:43:16 -0600 (CST) From: Thorne Aaron W Subject: NET SF: some more thoughts... To: maelstrom@csnet.net I am going to respond to some of the items mentioned in the 960226 digests. First, I believe it was Samuel that mentioned an idea about 'roadways' spanning the galaxy, kind of a route of successful jump points. I like this idea, just remember that colonization would obviously take place only along these roadways. Would there be roadways to every star? Would the type of star determine the probability of a roadway near it? Would there be roadways that terminated in the middle of open space, with no stars for light years around? Alan's discussion of alien races reminded me of something that I read a long time ago. In the old board game Freedom in the Galaxy, they had a little history/story booklet. The way that they handled aliens was that the human explorers met the aliens on the expeditions. Now, the aliens were always of less-advanced tech. The aliens tended to be really weird in shape and form, so they couldn't use human tech. To try to fix this, some of the aliens allowed their DNA to be altered so that they and their offspring ended up as humanoids so that they could use human tech. Kind of a bizarre idea, but it's a possibility to keep in mind whenever we reach that bridge (DNA altering of some races, not making them all humanoid). Alan also mentioned 2-3 alien races as PC choices. This sounds OK, just make sure that they are oxygen-based so they have significant contact with humans. Would we allow mixed-race "teams" of players? Alan mentioned something else that I hadn't thought about with his discussion of the depletion of resources being a major force behind interstellar exploration. It is true that most people don't like change, and trying to just ship a bunch of people out to Alpha Centaure to form a colony "just to see if it works" isn't going to appeal to most people. So a good reason will be needed to start colonization. About the reasons for humans having the Q-drive, I really like the alien derelict spacecraft idea. That is great. And to solve the problem of sending scouts to another star to find out, how about making it pretty old (200 - 300 years or so) and have it drifting out around Jupiter or Neptune. Maybe that race wanted to try to make humans their slaves by conquering our planet and the other race wanted to keep us neutral? About the government idea, "Guild Space" would work. Another option would be a Confederacy of some sort. How about this: The corporations basically take over government on their respective worlds that they colonize. After awhile, with the "corporate war" problems and also just to promote growth, a sort of UN type body is set up. It doesn't have much bite, but it would probably have a small space fleet funded by all members to act as a police force of somekind. All of the member corporations are autonomous, but the confederacy binds them together loosely so that if a really major threat showed up they could band together behind a neutral banner. What do you all think? Last note, we need Earth around if we are going to be hard sci-fi, IMHO. Yes, this puts some restraints on us, but it also gives us a solid framework to use. - Aaron Thorne ---- Return-Path: To: maelstrom@csnet.net From: Samuel Penn Subject: Re: NET SF: Ground work [960226-2] Reply-To: sam@bifrost.demon.co.uk References: <9602261806.AB01124@mhv.net> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 22:25:17 GMT Organization: Somewhere in Aldershot > Return-Path: > Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 16:55:18 -0700 > X-Sender: hwkwnd@johnny.poky.srv.net > To: maelstrom@csnet.net > From: hwkwnd@poky.srv.net (Alan D Kohler) > Subject: Re: NET SF: List [960223] > > Let's start tossing the ball around about history and politics. > > I proposed a figure of 2500 for the first discovery and use of the Q-drive. > There's a few reasons I set this about far in the future. > > I figure that if we extrapolate from today, we may have some trouble getting > into space at any kind of breakneck speed. Putting people into space isn't > cheap, and putting industries in space would be more expesive yet, and no > one is going to do it without GOOD incentive, being relatively convinced > that this is one of the best ways to make a profit - or other suitably good > reason. > > Perhaps some minor segments of industry will get into space before 2300 or > so, but no major interplanetaty resource shipping is likely to occur before > 2200 or so. But a lot of economists figure have us running out of various > non-renewable resources starting about about 2300 and continuing in > different categories through about 3100 - so resources start becoming a > major concern. By one of life's amazing coicidencies, this weeks New Scientist has an article on near-term space exploration. I've reproduced a few parts of it here for people's interest: "But the technology already exists for a prototype of a fully reusable, aeroplane-like launcher, and its development costs need only be equivalent to about two space shuttle flights (about $1000 million). The cost per prototype spaceplane flight would be about 1% of that for the shuttle, and the cost per person carried into orbit in an enlarged version of such a spaceplane could be as low as $10,000, or 0.1% of the cost of the space shuttle." "According to recent market research in Japan, more than a million people a year would be prepared to pay such a price for a brief visit to a space station (Journal of Space Technology and Science, vol 10, 1994). If correct, this level of space tourism would provide the sort of commercial incentive and operating experience needed to achieve airliner standards." Something often overlooked is the fact that the NASA Shuttle is a pretty bloody-awful design. It's expensive, over-complex and not particularly reliable. Getting things into space which are a lot cheaper doesn't require amazing technology. Just the courage not to let NASA anywhere near the designs... Several companies in Japan btw, are seriously looking into the prospects of mining the moon within the next few decades. I'd say there is very good probability that we'll start doing some real development of space travel by 2050. I'd be very surprised (if I was still around) if it has happened by 2100. Remember that there are such things as DC-X (prototypes of which have flown very well, and a totally unplanned test of its safety systems showed it was still capable of relaunch within a few hours even after a pretty nasty crash), Spacecub (a while to go for this one unfortuneatly) etc being either planned or tested. > I figure by 2300 also, population pressure is going to be a MAJOR problem. > Cities will have sprung up where rural communities now stand, and farmlands > (hydroponics domes?) will have sprung up everywhere to feed the masses. Recent population studies have suggested that it is not that likely that Earth's population will ever double again. Given sufficient technological and social 'advances', there is no reason why population will _force_ us to go to the stars. > So, how does mankind get the Q-drive? Well, here's one aproach - yes I'd How about Mad Scientist working in shed in back garden? :) > said I'd talk about aliens again. Two ways involving aliens come to mind. > > First, we had said that aliens in the universe would logically have > radically varying levels of technology. And, while I based the Q-drive on a > few concepts in quantum mechanics, there's really not much to justify it in > any technology we have today beyond the so-called "tunnel effect". So maybe > it's REALLY advanced. Perhaps there's an alien coalition that has observed > earth from time to time and knows that they NEED the technology. So they > give it too us because (pick one) > > 1) They feel our "coming of age" as a race has come (had to choke that one > out - sort of gives me hankerings of "Childhoods end", which I have NO > desire to base any SF universe on, and a little of the uplift wars, which is > good, but again, I do not want to use as inspirational material). > > 2) They are merchants by nature, or otherwise give it too us in exchange for > something we have There's a very good short story by Niven - "The Fourth Profession". Alien traders come to Earth, offering to do some trade and practically give away plans for an interstellar launching system. As it turns out, they have only two options for getting home. Either we build the launch system for them, or they blow up the sun and use the energy from that. > Lastly, I won't talk about it much, but want to propose a model for an > interstellar goventment. > > Empires? Been done - too much > Federations - less than empires, but ditto. Each world could have its own government. Or maybe a big democracy (given FTL comunication, and a powerful computer net, such is possible). Of course, the question in such a campaign would be - is it really a democracy? And if not, just who is really in charge... > That left me at a loss, because those are 2 extremes my mind tends to dwell > on, and I was groping for something ELSE. > > One of the contributors recommended colonies. Well, why would anyone > colonise a place just for it to be there in the first place? Why did anyone bother colonising America? Or Australia? Religious extremists seeking to live apart from the rest of (tainted) humanity, people wanting land of their own, or just because they fancy living in a true wilderness, now such are so hard to find on Earth. > I pondered on his a little, and a friend I talked to about this project > recommended something that would fit both of those schemata. > > He called it "Guild space" [snippity snip] > What do y'all think? Has anyone (RPG or SF writers) ever done this before? Dune. A big powerful feudal Empire, but the guilds have a very tight strangle hold on certain areas of technology (space travel for instance). > ---- > Okay, I don't have much time to write, but I'll try to get some things down. > > I think what's going to happen (similar to what he wrote) is that as time > goes on, corporations (especially, large international mega-corps) will be > the basis of life on earth. governments will take a back seat to the corps, > if not, they may just be abolished completely - unless a single, large > government comes into power. Given long enough, the corporations will become governments. They start taxing, start providing public services, and eventually farm off bits of themselves in "privatisation" deals. The the whole cycle begins again. > I'm running out of time so I will end there with the corporations. I just > have one question - Are we going to go with a more non-fictional or > fictional universe? What I mean is the following... Are we going to have > Earth and the known astronomical star systems, etc or are we going to have a There are plenty enough stars about that using real ones isn't going to be restrictive. The only real problem will be getting data on star systems over a large area. I've got a list of coordinates, spectral types etc for starts out to 50ly (about 750 star systems). I haven't been able to find anything on regions larger than this. -- Be seeing you, Sam. ---- -- maelstrom@csnet.net Return-Path: Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 13:14:58 -0600 (CST) From: Thorne Aaron W Subject: NET SF: Alines ideas To: maelstrom@csnet.net After reading the last digest, I have refined my theory of how the Q-drive was received. First, I meant to say that the wreck was around Pluto or Neptune. Second, if we want to assume that the chlorine breathers are our allies, then they could have been the ones to destroy the offending ship. Of course, this would mean that they would probably keep ships at the fringes of our system, if not a military base, maybe on Pluto or its moon. This would be the first race that humans had contact with. Of course, if they had a base in the system then we wouldn't need to find the wrecked ship, just run across the base. More to come as I think of it... - Aaron Thorne ---- Return-Path: Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 17:45:14 -0700 X-Sender: hwkwnd@johnny.poky.srv.net To: maelstrom@csnet.net From: hwkwnd@poky.srv.net (Alan D Kohler) Subject: Re: NET SF: Ground work [960227-1] >Besides creating roadways between stars, this system has game advantage >of forcing some non-ftl travel on systems to move to real destination. This >is good from point of view of any space battles/piracy/encounters. True, which is something we will have to think about. The "Hard SF" half of me wants to stick with reaction drives - which means very low accelerations (.1 G over an extended period would be very fast), but on the other hand, a reaction drive is less realistc, but more suitable for a gaming type universe. Any thoughts? (More to follow - it's easier for me to post comments on each digest individually) ---- Return-Path: Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 18:12:31 -0700 X-Sender: hwkwnd@johnny.poky.srv.net To: maelstrom@csnet.net From: hwkwnd@poky.srv.net (Alan D Kohler) Subject: Re: NET SF: Ground work [960227-2] >I am going to respond to some of the items mentioned in the 960226 digests. > >First, I believe it was Samuel that mentioned an idea about 'roadways' >spanning the galaxy, kind of a route of successful jump points. I like >this idea, just remember that colonization would obviously take place >only along these roadways. Would there be roadways to every star? Would >the type of star determine the probability of a roadway near it? Would >there be roadways that terminated in the middle of open space, with no >stars for light years around? With Q-drive, massive star = end of a roadway. BTW, I've been contemplating using AutoCAD LT and works to make a descritive essay on Q-drive physics. Anyone with MS Works would be able to view or print it. It is possible to convert these files, but the AutoCAD pictures would have to be in separate image files vice imbedded in the text. >About the reasons for humans having the Q-drive, I really like the alien >derelict spacecraft idea. That is great. And to solve the problem of >sending scouts to another star to find out, how about making it pretty >old (200 - 300 years or so) and have it drifting out around Jupiter or >Neptune. Maybe that race wanted to try to make humans their slaves by >conquering our planet and the other race wanted to keep us neutral? > >About the government idea, "Guild Space" would work. Another option >would be a Confederacy of some sort. How about this: The corporations >basically take over government on their respective worlds that they >colonize. After awhile, with the "corporate war" problems and also just >to promote growth, a sort of UN type body is set up. It doesn't have >much bite, but it would probably have a small space fleet funded by all >members to act as a police force of somekind. All of the member >corporations are autonomous, but the confederacy binds them together >loosely so that if a really major threat showed up they could band >together behind a neutral banner. What do you all think? not bad. I've heard three major variations here: confederacy, corporate, guilds. I'll let you all bat this around for a while and see what you like best, but I'll give a compromise proposal: All 3. There is no reason to have just one major human goventmental body. I picture the guild formation being a logical extension of powerful corporation, but some corporations probably didn't get absorbed in the guilds and banded together to keep from getting overtaken by the guilds. Some other worlds, when the "guild revolution" occurred, retreating (to the "corporate space") corporations and the fact that the guilds wer young and didn't reach that far yet, leaving these worlds basically on their own. Ones widely separated would probably be absorbed by the guilds or corporations eventually, but in one (or more) area(s), there is a large cluster of now independant worlds that band together in loose confederacies to maintain their independance. >Last note, we need Earth around if we are going to be hard sci-fi, IMHO. >Yes, this puts some restraints on us, but it also gives us a solid >framework to use. Yes. >> I figure by 2300 also, population pressure is going to be a MAJOR problem. >> Cities will have sprung up where rural communities now stand, and farmlands >> (hydroponics domes?) will have sprung up everywhere to feed the masses. > >Recent population studies have suggested that it is not that likely >that Earth's population will ever double again. Given sufficient >technological and social 'advances', there is no reason why population >will _force_ us to go to the stars. Can you cite some sources, I could work these into my model. The whole issue of population pressure is just damned inconvenient, as I picture any world with more than 20-50 billion or so as being a lot like larry niven's earth in the known space stories - i.e. lottery tickets to see who has the right to reproduce, capital punishment for minor crimes, etc. I would hate for every core world to be such a world. >> >> He called it "Guild space" > >[snippity snip] > >> What do y'all think? Has anyone (RPG or SF writers) ever done this before? > >Dune. A big powerful feudal Empire, but the guilds have a very tight >strangle hold on certain areas of technology (space travel for instance). Yeah, but dune's empire is an EMPIRE, I'm talking about a society where guilds are THE govenment, not just a bunch of guys with a lot of clout. ;) >There are plenty enough stars about that using real ones isn't going to >be restrictive. The only real problem will be getting data on star systems >over a large area. I've got a list of coordinates, spectral types etc for >starts out to 50ly (about 750 star systems). I haven't been able to find >anything on regions larger than this. Well, like a said in an earlier letter, well just use what we have for detailed information on near stars, and fill in the rest with randomly rolled stuff. Nothing too original today, guys, A) I'm tired B) Giving everyone else a shot at the center stage. later Alan D. Kohler ---- Aaron wrote: >After reading the last digest, I have refined my theory of how the >Q-drive was received. First, I meant to say that the wreck was around >Pluto or Neptune. Second, if we want to assume that the chlorine >breathers are our allies, then they could have been the ones to destroy >the offending ship. Of course, this would mean that they would probably >keep ships at the fringes of our system, if not a military base, maybe on >Pluto or its moon. This would be the first race that humans had contact >with. Of course, if they had a base in the system then we wouldn't need >to find the wrecked ship, just run across the base. First off, the chlorine breathers do not necessarily have to be our allies, nor do oxygen breathers our enemies. All that was stated was that the implications of various respiratory systems in aliens can have interesting effects such as during settlement of a planet between two oxygen breathing races. Oxygen breathers may actually decide to share, etc. Sometimes motives are that simple, but sometimes there has to be more to it. Secondly, what were those two races doing in our system in the first place? Why if there was no contact before the finding of the wreckage, would the chlorine breathers want to protect us? Also, if those two races are present in our system, the probability that they control the nearby systems is higher. If that is the case, the possibility of the human race expanding outward is much more difficult without... most likely conflict. If conflict was to arise, humans would most likely be holding the losing hand - it would be obvious to note the other races are more advanced. Without aid, humans really are stuck. This could prove to be a good campaign setting. Humans somehow get the ability to use a q-drive. They expand where they can (not too much) and realize to expand any further they must enter into conflict. However, who do you go into conflict with? Who should be your allies, if any? Do you trust your allies? So on and so forth. It would be fun, however, it is straying away from what we've been discussing. However, we are discussing ground work (nothing is set in stone... q-drive perhaps the exception) so we could look into something more based around this instead if people want to. >More to come as I think of it... Of course! Feel free to comment! ---- Alan wrote: >>Besides creating roadways between stars, this system has game advantage >>of forcing some non-ftl travel on systems to move to real destination. This >>is good from point of view of any space battles/piracy/encounters. > >True, which is something we will have to think about. The "Hard SF" half of >me wants to stick with reaction drives - which means very low accelerations >(.1 G over an extended period would be very fast), but on the other hand, a >reaction drive is less realistc, but more suitable for a gaming type >universe. Any thoughts? Hmm... I have to think this over... >With Q-drive, massive star = end of a roadway. >BTW, I've been contemplating using AutoCAD LT and works to make a descritive >essay on Q-drive physics. Anyone with MS Works would be able to view or >print it. It is possible to convert these files, but the AutoCAD pictures >would have to be in separate image files vice imbedded in the text. No, I do not own MS Works or AutoCAD LT. If there is some way you could make a PCX, BMP, GIF, JPG, or PNG file and send it to me UUdecoded, I'd appreciate it. Don't worry about size. Size does not matter to me. Personally, I would like a copy to understand the q-drive physics some more. Also, down the road when a Web page is put up for this, it'll help in either being used or being the draft for a more finished approach to the q-drive. >Can you cite some sources, I could work these into my model. The whole >issue of population pressure is just damned inconvenient, as I picture any >world with more than 20-50 billion or so as being a lot like larry niven's >earth in the known space stories - i.e. lottery tickets to see who has the >right to reproduce, capital punishment for minor crimes, etc. I would hate >for every core world to be such a world. Unless the core world's population acts like India or China, they will sooner or later slow down without "absurd" laws. What you must understand, besides births, deaths also occur. Most industrialized nations populations have only grown in a small rate. Of course, if spread over a couple hundred years their populations will increase a lot. However, we do not know whether population will naturally slow down close to a halt or whether it can explode or increase rapidly. >Well, like a said in an earlier letter, well just use what we have for >detailed information on near stars, and fill in the rest with randomly >rolled stuff. Lets first make a hard search for as much data as we need. What all of us must understand is the data (currently misplaced, but can be found on the Net) I've seen is for somewhere within 50 (?) lys and there are a lot of systems just within that! Of course, we will want to go further and fill in gaps. The problem is, do we want to let GMs worry about statistics and information for the systems, or are we going to provide. My feeling is that sure, numbers, etc. are great, but we should try as much as possible to offer in depth information concerning the star systems. Each system will have its quirks. This will be a lot of work - actually, most of it! >Nothing too original today, guys, A) I'm tired B) Giving everyone else a >shot at the center stage. A) I know how you feel. B) It is up to them (us) to take a shot at center stage. If you want it, you have to jump in and try to take it. Don't feel you have to step aside. That's all for now... James -- maelstrom@csnet.net Return-Path: Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 10:39:41 -0700 X-Sender: hwkwnd@johnny.poky.srv.net To: maelstrom@csnet.net From: hwkwnd@poky.srv.net (Alan D Kohler) Subject: Re: NET SF: Ground work [960229-1] >After reading the last digest, I have refined my theory of how the >Q-drive was received. First, I meant to say that the wreck was around >Pluto or Neptune. I'm still sort of fond of the idea of a STL ship encountering the derilict around another star. Then mankind develops a Q-drive from the derelict, travels a little furhter, and eventually encounters the chlorine breathers on a Chlorine-atmosphere colony - but this doesn't slow down expansion, as we are interested in different worlds than they are, and the inhabited space of man is likely to overlap with the chlorine breathers. >>There are plenty enough stars about that using real ones isn't going to >>be restrictive. The only real problem will be getting data on star systems >>over a large area. I've got a list of coordinates, spectral types etc for >>starts out to 50ly (about 750 star systems). I haven't been able to find >>anything on regions larger than this. > >Well, like a said in an earlier letter, well just use what we have for >detailed information on near stars, and fill in the rest with randomly >rolled stuff. More on this line, I've done a little fishing on the sci.astro newsgroup, and got an email referring me to the ftp site at: ftp://adc.gsfc.nasa.gov/pub/adc/archives/catalogs/ More on that as I poke around there, others are invited to poke there too. >First off, the chlorine breathers do not necessarily have to be our allies, >nor do oxygen breathers our enemies. True. Perhaps "ally" is a strong word - "peaceful coexistence" is one likelyhood, another possibility is that the chlorine breathers are manipulating us into a conflict with other oxygen breathers - if that happens or not may be the subject of an adventure... >This could prove to be a good campaign setting. Humans somehow get the >ability to use a q-drive. They expand where they can (not too much) and >realize to expand any further they must enter into conflict. However, who do >you go into conflict with? Who should be your allies, if any? Do you trust >your allies? So on and so forth. > >It would be fun Yep >however, it is straying away from what we've been >discussing. Gotta start somewhere.. >>BTW, I've been contemplating using AutoCAD LT and works to make a descritive >>essay on Q-drive physics. Anyone with MS Works would be able to view or >>print it. It is possible to convert these files, but the AutoCAD pictures >>would have to be in separate image files vice imbedded in the text. >No, I do not own MS Works or AutoCAD LT. If there is some way you could make >a PCX, BMP, GIF, JPG, or PNG Like I said it's possible, but until I get the time to do it, it's a moot point (BTW, you don't need AutoCAD LT, just MS Works to display the file with embedded pictures - I understand MS Works is standard on alot of new PCs - but for those who don't have it, you'll have to settle for separate text files and image files). I should have lots of time to finish it on spring break >>Can you cite some sources, I could work these into my model. The whole >>issue of population pressure is just damned inconvenient, (Snip) >Unless the core world's population acts like India or China, they will >sooner or later slow down without "absurd" laws. What you must understand, >besides births, deaths also occur. True, but advances in medical technology tend to make the death rate dwindle as time goes on... > Most industrialized nations populations >have only grown in a small rate. Of course, if spread over a couple hundred >years their populations will increase a lot. I'll have to make some gross assumptions about "population growth saturation", something not too scientifically founded, but something we can work with. I'll assume that a good measure of this is social changes (whether "Absurd laws", social values or mores is relatively irrelevant, generally if the latter does not occur, the former does). >Lets first make a hard search for as much data as we need. See my comments on this earlier... (Snip) >have its quirks. This will be a lot of work - actually, most of it! True, but as many traveller refs can testify, there's a certain charm to making a star system that's realistic and beleivable. That's all for now - maybe more sunday or so from me... Alan D. Kohler Alan D Kohler AKA Hawkwind hwkwnd@poky.srv.net "Asps. Very dangerous. You go first." Sala to Indy in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" "As I got hit by a car there was a message for me; As I went through the windshield, I noticed something; Subliminal" They Might Be Giants "Subliminal" ---- Return-Path: To: maelstrom@csnet.net From: Samuel Penn Subject: Re: NET SF: Ground work [960229-1] Reply-To: sam@bifrost.demon.co.uk References: <9603010138.AA23514@mhv.net> Date: Sat, 02 Mar 1996 16:29:04 GMT Organization: Somewhere in Aldershot > Return-Path: > Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 18:12:31 -0700 > X-Sender: hwkwnd@johnny.poky.srv.net > To: maelstrom@csnet.net > From: hwkwnd@poky.srv.net (Alan D Kohler) > Subject: Re: NET SF: Ground work [960227-2] > > BTW, I've been contemplating using AutoCAD LT and works to make a descritive > essay on Q-drive physics. Anyone with MS Works would be able to view or > print it. It is possible to convert these files, but the AutoCAD pictures > would have to be in separate image files vice imbedded in the text. Me not have MS Works... It might be an idea to HTMLise it, since HTML is readable across many platforms. It doesn't have to be on a web site, it's possible to download the files and view them locally as long as you have a suitable viewer. > >Last note, we need Earth around if we are going to be hard sci-fi, IMHO. > >Yes, this puts some restraints on us, but it also gives us a solid > >framework to use. Yes, keep Earth. It gives us a background to work from, at the very least. -- Be seeing you, Sam. ---- Return-Path: To: maelstrom@csnet.net From: Samuel Penn Subject: Re: NET SF: Ground work [960227-2] Reply-To: sam@bifrost.demon.co.uk References: <9602280226.AB28622@mhv.net> Date: Sat, 02 Mar 1996 21:30:05 GMT Organization: Somewhere in Aldershot > Return-Path: > Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 15:43:16 -0600 (CST) > From: Thorne Aaron W > Subject: NET SF: some more thoughts... > To: maelstrom@csnet.net > > Alan mentioned something else that I hadn't thought about with his > discussion of the depletion of resources being a major force behind > interstellar exploration. It is true that most people don't like change, > and trying to just ship a bunch of people out to Alpha Centaure to form a > colony "just to see if it works" isn't going to appeal to most people. > So a good reason will be needed to start colonization. What's 'most' people? 99%? That still leaves 50 million odd people who do. If there were places for colonists on a new world, you'd have difficulty restricting numbers, rather than making them up. Given the choice, I'd be quite happy to leave my comfortable life on Earth to be part of the exploration of a totally new, alien world. Even if it meant risking death. However expensive q-drive ships are, within a hundred years it will become economical to ship out millions of colonists to distant stars. Remember, if we're having a hard SF universe, then we need to obey a few simple technological rules. Namely, technology doesn't stand still. As soon as the first q-drive has been built, people will be spending a _lot_ of time and money into building cheaper and better ones. It would make commercial, military and scientific sense to do so, especially if alien civilisations are discovered. -- Be seeing you, Sam. ---- Return-Path: To: maelstrom@csnet.net From: Samuel Penn Subject: Re: NET SF: Ground work [960229-1] Reply-To: sam@bifrost.demon.co.uk References: <9603010138.AA23514@mhv.net> Date: Sat, 02 Mar 1996 16:06:31 GMT Organization: Somewhere in Aldershot > >Besides creating roadways between stars, this system has game advantage > >of forcing some non-ftl travel on systems to move to real destination. This > >is good from point of view of any space battles/piracy/encounters. > > True, which is something we will have to think about. The "Hard SF" half of > me wants to stick with reaction drives - which means very low accelerations > (.1 G over an extended period would be very fast), but on the other hand, a > reaction drive is less realistc, but more suitable for a gaming type > universe. Any thoughts? There's always my favourite form of space drive - Orion! Basically, take a big metal plate, and explode nukes behind it. The thrust on the plate caues acceleration, and the delicate parts of the space craft, on the other side of the plate, are protected. Apparantly, sustained 1g accelerations would be possible with such a drive, though I haven't a clue on how to work out the physics of the thing. NASA have done some feasability studies of such a design (with chemical explosives I believe), and it looked promising, until some stupid world leaders went and signed various SALT agreements which prevented the use of nuclear weapons in space, for _any_ reason. For those interested, the novel "Footfall" by Niven and Pournelle explores the use of an Orion ship in one of the best space battle scenes I've read. There are also anti-matter drives (anti-matter will be cheaply available in the time periods we seem to be using. More expensive than fusion or solar, but a high energy density will be critical for fast space drives. A few solar powered anti-matter production facilities close to the sun should do the trick...) > >Recent population studies have suggested that it is not that likely > >that Earth's population will ever double again. Given sufficient > >technological and social 'advances', there is no reason why population > >will _force_ us to go to the stars. > > Can you cite some sources, I could work these into my model. The whole > issue of population pressure is just damned inconvenient, as I picture any > world with more than 20-50 billion or so as being a lot like larry niven's > earth in the known space stories - i.e. lottery tickets to see who has the > right to reproduce, capital punishment for minor crimes, etc. I would hate > for every core world to be such a world. Taken from "New Scientist", 17th February 1996: [with lots of editing to cut it down to a reasonable length - most of what is missing is how they reached these figures, and the effects on the ecology] The world's population withh probably never double again, according to the latest projections of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Vienna. And for the first time ever, the IIASA figures reveal that fertility rates appear to have declined in every region of the world last year. Unlike most previous population estimates, the IIASA's new numbers consider not only the effect of future changes in the number of children per family, but also the possibility that death rates may change in the future because of changes in the rates of starvation or disease and in the quality of medical care. The institute's best estimate is now that the world's population will grow from its present 5.75 billion to 10 billion by 2050, reach a peak of around 11 billion by 2075, and remain almost level or decline slightly towards 2100. There is a 95 percent probability that the population will be between 6 and 17 billion in 2100. And there is a 64 percent chance that the global population will never reach double its present level. -- Be seeing you, Sam. ---- Return-Path: Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 10:43:45 -0600 (CST) From: Thorne Aaron W Subject: NET SF: Reply To: maelstrom@csnet.net On the idea of non-ftl travel: I agree with Alan that reaction drives are probably the way to go. The upside of this is that everyone accepts reaction drives. The downside is that everyone uses them. On the idea of governments: Having more than one human government is very logical. Probably the space around Earth (core worlds, for lack of a better term) is controlled by the main corporate/guild structure, while some of the outer areas are in loose confederacies or totally independent. A lot of this would be determined by when the primary governmental structure was established. If it happened hundreds of years ago, then any "reunification wars" or such will have happened long ago. If the primary government has been formed recently, then they will still be attempting to assert control over the others on a regular basis. On the alien idea: Someone said that the chlorine breathers do not have to be our allies. I totally agree. I just made them our allies in the model because someone (I don't remember who) said that they liked that idea. The point about finding the wreck in our system naturally leading to alien control of surrounding space is well taken, but if the wreck is not in our system, and we don't have FTL travel yet, then how are we supposed to ever find it? I do like the idea of giving humans a limited amount of space to explore before bumping up against alien-controlled space. Or, mayble aliens control space to one direction, but space in the other direction is empty (or so we think...) and ripe for colonization. - Aaron Thorne ---- -- maelstrom@csnet.net >Like I said it's possible, but until I get the time to do it, it's a moot >point (BTW, you don't need AutoCAD LT, just MS Works to display the file >with embedded pictures - I understand MS Works is standard on alot of new >PCs - but for those who don't have it, you'll have to settle for separate >text files and image files). Well, I don't own MS Works. I don't know about everybody else. That's why I asked about the text files and image files. >I should have lots of time to finish it on spring break Don't rush. We got LOTS of time. We're not on a time limit. :) >True, but as many traveller refs can testify, there's a certain charm to >making a star system that's realistic and beleivable. True! What I meant is WE should work most of the main systems out. Relatively unexplored or systems yet reached, et cetera can be worked on by the refs. >> BTW, I've been contemplating using AutoCAD LT and works to make a descritive >> essay on Q-drive physics. Anyone with MS Works would be able to view or >> print it. It is possible to convert these files, but the AutoCAD pictures >> would have to be in separate image files vice imbedded in the text. > >Me not have MS Works... It might be an idea to HTMLise it, since HTML >is readable across many platforms. It doesn't have to be on a web site, >it's possible to download the files and view them locally as long as >you have a suitable viewer. Yes, HTML is definitely another way to go about it instead of MS works. Another thing, later (much later) when (and if) we decide to make this project available to the public, a cheap means of distribution is a web page. The cost of publishing is much lower, especially if done "in-house". >What's 'most' people? 99%? That still leaves 50 million odd people who >do. If there were places for colonists on a new world, you'd have >difficulty restricting numbers, rather than making them up. Given the >choice, I'd be quite happy to leave my comfortable life on Earth to >be part of the exploration of a totally new, alien world. Even if it >meant risking death. Me too! I guess we're among the 1% and not among the "most". :) There could be multiple reasons - over-population, resource depletion, corporation expansion, religious reasons, adventure, scientific, military, governmental, trade, etc. >However expensive q-drive ships are, within a hundred years it will >become economical to ship out millions of colonists to distant stars. >Remember, if we're having a hard SF universe, then we need to obey a >few simple technological rules. Namely, technology doesn't stand still. >As soon as the first q-drive has been built, people will be spending a >_lot_ of time and money into building cheaper and better ones. It would >make commercial, military and scientific sense to do so, especially if >alien civilisations are discovered. Agreed. >I agree with Alan that reaction drives are probably the way to go. The >upside of this is that everyone accepts reaction drives. The downside is >that everyone uses them. Any other alternates? (Orion and Ant-matter are two...) >Someone said that the chlorine breathers do not have to be our allies. I >totally agree. I just made them our allies in the model because someone >(I don't remember who) said that they liked that idea. The point about >finding the wreck in our system naturally leading to alien control of >surrounding space is well taken, but if the wreck is not in our system, >and we don't have FTL travel yet, then how are we supposed to ever find it? We could have found it in another star system that was reached by STL like Alan (?) said. Obviously, STL is slow to get to the nearest star systems, but I think in the beginning, us Earthlings are going to travel STL at first. It's a logical step. Plus, it aleast gives humans more time to develop vessels for space travel and then they would just have to figure the rest of the logistics on coming across a Q-driven vessel. That's all for now... Also, sorry that I got these digests out late. I was sick over the weekend. James -- maelstrom@csnet.net