I love old sci-fi
-
If there is anything about the 90s that I always found fun is just how everyone and everything anticipated the year 2000.
The night is 2000. I am walking around central london with my dad and his friends, drinking champagne from a bottle despite being underage. We are not near the place we are meant to be to see the fireworks display. The sky fills with coloured lights as giant fireworks are being let off and illuminating the entire heavens with one artificial colour at a time.
-
Nuclear rockets could have easily made space relatively cheap. The tech was actively tested by NASA, and it worked pretty well. Nixon canceled that program and saddled NASA with a mandate for a Shuttle without the proper funding.
The USSR's manned program, OTOH, was built mostly to hit a number of firsts (first dog in space, first man in space, first woman in space, first space walk, etc.), but do it as quickly as possible. This resulted in a series of "get it done right the fuck now" decisions. NASA did it the slow way, with each technical advancement building on the last, which is better in the long run (if you fund it, mind you). Russia did enough to build Soyuz and then ran that for decades.
The tech did not hit physical limits. The two major approaches to space flight hit different bureaucratic limits first.
I think repeatedly hitting the moon would have had the world shrugging, none of the sci fi was 'hey we made it to the moon and... stayed there'.
A mission to the moon was a little under 2 weeks, a similar mission to mars would be well over two years. Sure, we could, but even the most adventurous human adventures in history have been measured in months, we've never displayed the will to commit to years for what would be a token mission.
Yes, the tech could be improved with more investment, but the sci-fi results of even settling mars is just unreasonably far out.
-
It is. It's about people fighting a war in space. Saying that it happened "long time ago" in a different galaxy or in alternative reality doesn't make it a historical drama.
dude i specifically said "technically does not belong" as a wink for people who know and you took it so seriously that i regret that i replied at all. i even said star wars is supposed to be a long time ago and you still kept going
-
The night is 2000. I am walking around central london with my dad and his friends, drinking champagne from a bottle despite being underage. We are not near the place we are meant to be to see the fireworks display. The sky fills with coloured lights as giant fireworks are being let off and illuminating the entire heavens with one artificial colour at a time.
wrote last edited by [email protected]this reads like the beginning of neuromancer
-
this reads like the beginning of neuromancer
high praise, thank you.
-
I think repeatedly hitting the moon would have had the world shrugging, none of the sci fi was 'hey we made it to the moon and... stayed there'.
A mission to the moon was a little under 2 weeks, a similar mission to mars would be well over two years. Sure, we could, but even the most adventurous human adventures in history have been measured in months, we've never displayed the will to commit to years for what would be a token mission.
Yes, the tech could be improved with more investment, but the sci-fi results of even settling mars is just unreasonably far out.
Not with nuclear thermal propulsion, it wouldn't. Time to Mars is estimated at 45 days with them.
-
I don’t think that’s what they’re saying, that we’d already be exploring Andromeda or something by now. We haven’t even sent a crewed mission to the Moon, let alone Mars.
There has been no investment in space travel or any attempt to establish a research outpost on the moon. Nor a research station above the atmosphere on Venus. Nothing.
Well, we haven't sent a crewed mission to the moon in a while, because we don't really have any particular benefit from it, and even if that had continued, that wouldn't have fit with the scifi vision of how things should be. A Mars trip is theoretically possible, but that's a multi-year mission for a single trip. That's a lot for what would mostly a vanity project of a manned mission compared to sending probes.
On the concept of a Venusian research station, the question would be... why? Staff would be in practical terms in no better position to study Venus than they would from Earth. All they could do would be supervise instruments in ways that could be done remotely.
The point is while advancements are possible, none that would even tickle the more tame sci-fi visions of expansion within the solar system. The larger impediments to a Mars mission are just "why" not technical impediments, unless a technical improvement could cut that trip down by 10-fold, but nothing even vaguely hints at that being a possibility.
-
Plenty of things could have been done with proper investment even before going to Mars. Reusable rockets, cheaper launch systems, more flights to the moon, moon bases, space stations. Yes, Mars is difficult but it would be easier with well established presence in the orbit and on the moon. All of this happened way too late (or never) because no one wanted to invest in it.
I just don't see any of that leading to a 'scifi' image. None of those steps would change the sheer time it takes to get to Mars in a practical way, and that's just a deal breaker for manned flight.
On the flip side, we have had great advances in technology that makes unmanned science better, which in a way even more reduces the chances of scifi vision of 'manned' space flight to far places, because it just doesn't make sense.
-
Foundation is also a sort of techno feudal society.
Parts of it. Towards the end it was more of an egalitarian society.
-
This post did not contain any content.
We went from the first flight, to the first spaceflight in 58 years. 8 years after that, we put humans on the moon. I don't think it was unreasonable for scifi writers in the 70s and early 80s to have glorious ideas about what we would accomplish in another 20-30 years.
-
I just don't see any of that leading to a 'scifi' image. None of those steps would change the sheer time it takes to get to Mars in a practical way, and that's just a deal breaker for manned flight.
On the flip side, we have had great advances in technology that makes unmanned science better, which in a way even more reduces the chances of scifi vision of 'manned' space flight to far places, because it just doesn't make sense.
Depends what SciFi we're talking about. "2001: A Space Odyssey" plays like a total fairly tale now but I would say it was technically achievable to have lunar base in 2001 (but not going to Jupiter if I remember the plot correctly). Mars trilogy by Robinson starts in 2035 if I remember correctly and initial mission was based on cheap launch system to orbit. I think this was also feasible with sustained investment. A lot of other SciFi is based on FTL travel, AI or hibernation which we cannot place on some tech roadmap so we cannot say what does and doesn't "lead" to it.
-
I think repeatedly hitting the moon would have had the world shrugging, none of the sci fi was 'hey we made it to the moon and... stayed there'.
A mission to the moon was a little under 2 weeks, a similar mission to mars would be well over two years. Sure, we could, but even the most adventurous human adventures in history have been measured in months, we've never displayed the will to commit to years for what would be a token mission.
Yes, the tech could be improved with more investment, but the sci-fi results of even settling mars is just unreasonably far out.
-
Old sci-fi assumed progress in the physical world, of endless progress in speed or materials.
Instead we got near endless progress in the processing of information while we live in houses made of trees, drive cars on rubber tires, and eat animals. Much like before. Sure, we have jets, but even they work pretty much the same way as 50 years ago. Incremental progress, sure, but no warp drive, eh?
I wish our houses were made of trees, our tires made of rubber, our food made out of living things. Instead our houses and tires release micro plastics and our food is increasingly synthetic.
We've had amazing advances in material sciences that in hindsight have been harmful.
-
The year is 2025
And humanity is once again trying to reinvent the wheel -
Meanwhile, Asimov: We'll have robots that will help us accomplish crazy shit but stupid zealots will keep whining about it and holding them back
This is in no way relevant to anything that's happening today.
... That's what you got from Asimov?
-
Well, we have lots of building-sized computers out there right now.
For tasks your phone and 50 MB/s would be totally sufficient for.
-
high praise, thank you.
I might have to steal it for a novel.
-
... That's what you got from Asimov?
I mostly picked up on the incest, but I was like 12 when I read that series
-
Cyberpunk like Blade Runner was a direct response to the optimism of the golden age of SF. They said there wasn't enough sin in those stories. So they had protagonists who were heavy drug users taking out assassination contracts on big corpo CEOs and banging a prostitute in a back alley after they're done. They have high technology compared to the time it was written, but it doesn't help the common people make their lives any better. The Earth is a polluted wasteland, and the cities are stuffed full of people with trash all over the place.
Guess which approach is closer to what actually happened?
Don't worry, they're banning the sins of the poor and cracking down on the dregs of society, just in time for you to be part of that
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
In fairness to the Sci-Fi writers, we've launched so many probes into deep space since then.
We've sent satellites to Jupiter and diving bells below the clouds of Venus. We've retrieved soil from Mars and sent signals from beyond the Ort Cloud. We've recorded Gravity Waves and captured light off the edge of Black Holes and recorded the touch of Neutrinos.
We don't have six guys drinking coffee and staring out a window overlooking the moon of Titan. But that is largely because our signaling and robotics has made automated exploration more practical than manned missions.
And also because SciFi writers of the 1950s didn't understand how much radiation humans would need to shield themselves against once they left the Earth's magnetosphere.
