this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2023
26 points (100.0% liked)

Science Fiction

154 readers
1 users here now

This magazine is aimed at fans and creators of sci-fi and related media of all kinds. It includes all content related to the sci-fi genre and only content related to the sci-fi genre. The goal is to build a community for everyone who enjoys science fiction and related topics. This includes the obvious books, movies, and TV shows, but also original writing, the discussion of writing SF, futuristic art and designs, and the science and technologies that inspire the sci-fi genre. **Team Top 20**

founded 1 year ago
 

Hello Sci-fi fans and writers, I hope that this here is the correct spot to ask this question regarding a conundrum I have come about during my work on a sci-fi short Story.

Outline

In said Short Story, I have some people (Agents) chasing after some other people (Heroes). The heroes stumbled upon some critical information that could damage the faction (Bad Guy) that employs the chasing party. The information got intercepted in time, but to make sure that the information wouldn't be leaked again, they would need to silence the heroes.

Technology

In space there are two modes of flight: conventional reaction based propulsion and a higher speed propulsion which uses a so-called jump drive which flings the spaceship along a predetermined trajectory at high sub-light speeds (max speeds would be 0.5c). There is near instantaneous communications, but you would need to be in coverage of the network itself, which is flaky at best.

Conundrum

So how would agents be able to intercept / interdict the heroes in a plausible fashion? Would it be reasonable to have a micro wormhole generator or some other way to deploy gravimetric wells, which would destabilize the entire star system? Would it be anticlimactic to just have the agents wait for the heroes to finish their jump, as they would know where they would drop out?

I would love to hear opinions and suggestions from you.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (34 children)

This is the sort of thing I would ask @nyrath about. I don't know if a mention like that can summon him.

I love to think of fanciful physics for astronautics, and I think audiences like it best when the system is self-consistent. It's very hard to design systems that don't lead to contradictions or paradoxes. In a way I think it's like designing a playable game.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@swope

I agree with you, that if a science fiction author cannot keep things strictly scientific, the next best thing is to make it internally self-consistent. Yes, this is a challenge. Larry Niven found that out.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I suppose that inventing a new self-consistent model of physics that is consistent with real-world data is not really that different from what professional theoretical physicists are doing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@swope @DmMacniel

I seem to recall Larry Niven grumbling about his invention, the stasis field. Originally made to solve a minor scientific problem in one story. Turned out to be far too useful. Subsequent stories had to have their problems vetted to ensure they were not trivially solved by the stasis field

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why my biggest gripe with the new star wars was that now relativistic missiles are a thing. Breaks the whole universe. Who needs a death star when you can just point a ship at a planet and blast into it at 0.99c

load more comments (32 replies)