In Science Fiction the 'Issue of finding scientific faults'

[Maharg67]

When I was much younger, in the late 1970s, I read Larry Niven's novel of the Ringworld about a rigid ringworld structure orbiting a sun. There were those, such as engineering students, who found faults in the concept of a the ringworld in that it 'not being in orbit around the sun' that it would drift and smash into the star.

 

Larry Niven wrote a sequel where the suggested faults were fixed with a rescue quest of some kind.

 

What I have come to doubt that it was neccessary? Given that the advanced aliens had the ability to create such as massive, and sophisticated, structure as the Ringworld in the first place, I find it hard to believe that they would not have percieved such a problem and dealt with it somehow even if that was in a fashion not easily detectable by any characters visiting the Ringworld. Their knowledge, experience, even level of intelligence would need to be far greater than ours to construct the Ringworld. Yet the faults pointed out with the Ringworld were from the perspective of far more limited human knowledge, experience and level of intelligence.

 

It would be like one tribal person getting a vision of a modern skyscraper and other tribal people stating that such a tall structure, being made of wood, would fall down. The skyscraper is made of steel and concrete so does not fall down.

 

The Ringworld caused be based on a greater, more subtle, knowledge of gravity that we have for we are still new to such concepts. It could utilise some manipulation of gravity, given that gravity effects planets orbiting stars at greater distance than the surface of the Ringworld, beyond our current understanding of such forces, to keep itself fixed into a safe, stable, position in relation to the star it is orbiting. Gravity anchors?

 

I would like positive posts in response to my topic. If you do not have any positive responses to give, then please do not bother posting.

 

 

 

 

[JimboUK]

I don't think it matters how intelligent a race is, the laws of physics still apply. I'm not familiar with the book so can't comment on it, however it does sadden me when people attack a work of science fiction over its lack of science fact. Popular sci-fi like Star Trek and Star Wars are full of things that make little sense, does that make them any less enjoyable? not in the slightest. George Lucas was influenced by a 70's TV show called Space 1999, a show in which the science was so bad even non scientific people could see the issues, it didn't stop people suspending their disbelief and enjoying it.

[Vagrant0]

Usually happens because people like over-analyzing things and trying to sound smart in the process. Can also happen because people who actually are smart like to use sciencefiction as a way to kinda think out of the box towards how something might work.

[Lisnpuppy]

Yeah...I don't think the issue is "would it be possible because of aliens" but more than...why can't it be left in the realm of the fantastic by some people? I am just like everyone that will get occasional annoyed about something that I know completely goes against scientific theory and facts...but when I read a science-fiction story...unless it is set in the here and now...I leave it be. Just like I leave be the scanty armor in Skyrim. It is in the realm of the fantastic where anything is possible.

 

That is why it is called science FICTION. Because it is not real or true and doesn't have to be down to the little details. The story is important and if it flows in a logical manner...not if it follows every science law. Though I am always interested in what does get gotten right and how stuff may work in the real world. Scientist that think outside the box make me a happy puppy. :)

[Maharg67]

I don't think it matters how intelligent a race is, the laws of physics still apply. I'm not familiar with the book so can't comment on it, however it does sadden me when people attack a work of science fiction over its lack of science fact. Popular sci-fi like Star Trek and Star Wars are full of things that make little sense, does that make them any less enjoyable? not in the slightest. George Lucas was influenced by a 70's TV show called Space 1999, a show in which the science was so bad even non scientific people could see the issues, it didn't stop people suspending their disbelief and enjoying it.

 

Firstly I would point out that I love science fiction when it is not over analyzed but I just wanted some feedback on the ideas behind this topic. Phasers, time travel, the TARDIS, androids, the whole lot and more could be questioned by so called logic and reason. Some even try to analyze, attack, magic in fantasy stories which I think is kind of strange.

 

I enjoyed all of the replies to the topic. jim_uk the laws of physics still may apply but any 'super alien intelligence' may deal with those law in a more effective manner than we can.

 

Look how humans now can do amazing engineering works that survive despite the laws of physics though in centuries past those very laws stopped people doing the same thing; improved engineering knowledge, more advanced materials, computer modelling and other technological advances allow us to build skyscrapers that no medieval society could.

 

If we tried to build a 'Ringworld' the laws of physics would be problematic but what about a species that has far more advanced engineering and other experience, skills and knowledge. Indeed their 'laws of physics' may be different in they would have developed far greater knowledge of physics. Just because we humans could not construct a working Ringworld does not mean somebody else is unable to do the same.

[Thor.]

Science fiction is science fact depending on what it is, especially Star Trek and Warp drive, and some of the technology mentioned, Nasa is experimenting with it all, like quantum thrusters and many more.

Edited August 27, 2013 by Thor.

[Vagrant0]

 

Look how humans now can do amazing engineering works that survive despite the laws of physics though in centuries past those very laws stopped people doing the same thing; improved engineering knowledge, more advanced materials, computer modelling and other technological advances allow us to build skyscrapers that no medieval society could.

Erm, the laws of physics still very much apply. The only reason why we can build those things now is because we have access to better materials and manufacturing processes and can have a computer simulate all the load factors related to a structure more quickly than a human could (smaller margin or error or need to overbuild). A more advanced society may have access to better materials, but as long as it is within this universe, those materials are still subject to the same types of physical laws that we are. Reason being that all materials are made up of the same sorts of components (atoms), so are subject to the same sorts of limitations in regards to density, rigidity, and resilience to various forces.

[Maharg67]

 

 

Look how humans now can do amazing engineering works that survive despite the laws of physics though in centuries past those very laws stopped people doing the same thing; improved engineering knowledge, more advanced materials, computer modelling and other technological advances allow us to build skyscrapers that no medieval society could.

Erm, the laws of physics still very much apply. The only reason why we can build those things now is because we have access to better materials and manufacturing processes and can have a computer simulate all the load factors related to a structure more quickly than a human could (smaller margin or error or need to overbuild). A more advanced society may have access to better materials, but as long as it is within this universe, those materials are still subject to the same types of physical laws that we are. Reason being that all materials are made up of the same sorts of components (atoms), so are subject to the same sorts of limitations in regards to density, rigidity, and resilience to various forces.

 

 

I was not just speaking of a more advanced technological species but a more intelligent one. I think such a species will be able to push the limits of the law of physics, as we know them, because we are still working out what we know of the universe and the law of physics while their model of what the law of physics is will be much greater. Such a people could do things that seem magical to us just as a 100 level skyscraper would appear magical to a medieval stonemason. They will have materials that will have abilities beyond anything we have, will be able to work with the components (atoms) with much more effectiveness than we can.

 

Also there is a very good chance they would be more evolved than us and that their technologies, knowledge, would be beyond our very comprehension. It is too easy to impose our limitations of knowledge and intelligence upon another species but they may be to us as we are to chimpanzees. A chimpanzee might sit on an old abandoned car as if it is a rock but will most likely not know that it is something called a car. We may find something like a diskworld and perceive it only as we can within the limits of our evolved intelligence thus failing to see that it is far more than that.

 

We are very new to understanding how the universe, nature, works. What we see as the laws of physics are a fine set of working theories that will be challenged in future and, most likely, replaced by new ones. We are too new to such researches and have collected too little data, considering the vastness of the universe, to even begin to see our theories as solid facts.

 

What we have to work with is our laws of physics but not the universal laws of physics that, I think, we have only begun to discover the truth of.

 

PS: I do not mean to put down our physics or laws of physics etc because I admire them. Also please nobody tell me again that the 'laws of physics' still apply because I know they do and it really is not an answer in itself.

[Aonghus]

All this talk of "The Laws of Physics," brings to mind the question, "Which set of Laws?" Aristotle's Laws? The Newtonian Laws? The Einsteinian Laws? Quantum Mechanics?

 

Too often in history, when we think we've got the Universe figured out, some smart cookie comes along and says "Yeah, but..." The only way this can come about is when someone has the imagination to question "What the best minds know to be true."

 

Take a look at H.G. Wells, some of his writings were based on ideas that have been shown to be false, but many of his works proved to be remarkably prescient.

[Nintii]

The problem of your "world drift" into the sun would be solved by some type of "anti gravitational" device ... something I'm sure the builders of your ringworld would no doubt take into consideration, if they were that advanced to begin to build such a world.

Edited August 31, 2013 by Nintii