Discussion:
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
(too old to reply)
Lynn McGuire
2018-05-06 01:20:48 UTC
Permalink
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/

Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.

Lynn
m***@sky.com
2018-05-06 04:23:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Lynn
I think we are still in what Heinlein called "the crazy years" and I think the opening up of space as a frontier was supposed to pull us out of them, by selecting for groups that have ways that are sane enough to survive and prosper in space. I'd love for us to have a sea change drastic enough to allow us to look back on our various insanities with the eyes of strangers, but alas the obvious contendors are not improvements (socialism with chinese characteristics or an islamic state).

There's maybe an outside chance of some completely new way of organising society coming out of mass participation computer games and being proved there. If you are trying to find a way of running your massive multiplayer game that makes people feel their contribution to this fake society is useful and appreciated you might be a social revolutionary by mistake, which just trying to make an honest dollar entertaining people.
J. Clarke
2018-05-06 06:13:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@sky.com
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Lynn
I think we are still in what Heinlein called "the crazy years" and I think the opening up of space as a frontier was supposed to pull us out of them, by selecting for groups that have ways that are sane enough to survive and prosper in space. I'd love for us to have a sea change drastic enough to allow us to look back on our various insanities with the eyes of strangers, but alas the obvious contendors are not improvements (socialism with chinese characteristics or an islamic state).
The "Crazy Years" are just starting. The public has shown it wants a
Man On A White Horse, but so far it's gotten a Clown With a Dead Cat
On His Head. May take a while for Nehemiah Scudder or a reasonable
facsimile thereof to come to prominence in the political arena.
Post by m***@sky.com
There's maybe an outside chance of some completely new way of organising society coming out of mass participation computer games and being proved there. If you are trying to find a way of running your massive multiplayer game that makes people feel their contribution to this fake society is useful and appreciated you might be a social revolutionary by mistake, which just trying to make an honest dollar entertaining people.
I think that the role of computer games as a forum for ideation is
still in its infancy.
m***@sky.com
2018-05-06 06:40:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Lynn
I think we are still in what Heinlein called "the crazy years" and I think the opening up of space as a frontier was supposed to pull us out of them, by selecting for groups that have ways that are sane enough to survive and prosper in space. I'd love for us to have a sea change drastic enough to allow us to look back on our various insanities with the eyes of strangers, but alas the obvious contendors are not improvements (socialism with chinese characteristics or an islamic state).
The "Crazy Years" are just starting. The public has shown it wants a
Man On A White Horse, but so far it's gotten a Clown With a Dead Cat
On His Head. May take a while for Nehemiah Scudder or a reasonable
facsimile thereof to come to prominence in the political arena.
Post by m***@sky.com
There's maybe an outside chance of some completely new way of organising society coming out of mass participation computer games and being proved there. If you are trying to find a way of running your massive multiplayer game that makes people feel their contribution to this fake society is useful and appreciated you might be a social revolutionary by mistake, which just trying to make an honest dollar entertaining people.
I think that the role of computer games as a forum for ideation is
still in its infancy.
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional economists are being paid to look at video game economies: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
Dimensional Traveler
2018-05-06 06:43:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by J. Clarke
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Lynn
I think we are still in what Heinlein called "the crazy years" and I think the opening up of space as a frontier was supposed to pull us out of them, by selecting for groups that have ways that are sane enough to survive and prosper in space. I'd love for us to have a sea change drastic enough to allow us to look back on our various insanities with the eyes of strangers, but alas the obvious contendors are not improvements (socialism with chinese characteristics or an islamic state).
The "Crazy Years" are just starting. The public has shown it wants a
Man On A White Horse, but so far it's gotten a Clown With a Dead Cat
On His Head. May take a while for Nehemiah Scudder or a reasonable
facsimile thereof to come to prominence in the political arena.
Post by m***@sky.com
There's maybe an outside chance of some completely new way of organising society coming out of mass participation computer games and being proved there. If you are trying to find a way of running your massive multiplayer game that makes people feel their contribution to this fake society is useful and appreciated you might be a social revolutionary by mistake, which just trying to make an honest dollar entertaining people.
I think that the role of computer games as a forum for ideation is
still in its infancy.
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional economists are being paid to look at video game economies: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
Its been professional for a few years in that people are earning money
playing video games in competition.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Juho Julkunen
2018-05-06 13:06:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by J. Clarke
Post by m***@sky.com
?Heinlein Was an Optimist? by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Lynn
I think we are still in what Heinlein called "the crazy years" and I think the opening up of space as a frontier was supposed to pull us out of them, by selecting for groups that have ways that are sane enough to survive and prosper in space. I'd love for us to have a sea change drastic enough to allow us to look back on our various insanities with the eyes of strangers, but alas the obvious contendors are not improvements (socialism with chinese characteristics or
an islamic state).
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by J. Clarke
The "Crazy Years" are just starting. The public has shown it wants a
Man On A White Horse, but so far it's gotten a Clown With a Dead Cat
On His Head. May take a while for Nehemiah Scudder or a reasonable
facsimile thereof to come to prominence in the political arena.
Post by m***@sky.com
There's maybe an outside chance of some completely new way of organising society coming out of mass participation computer games and being proved there. If you are trying to find a way of running your massive multiplayer game that makes people feel their contribution to this fake society is useful and appreciated you might be a social revolutionary by mistake, which just trying to make an honest dollar entertaining people.
I think that the role of computer games as a forum for ideation is
still in its infancy.
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional economists are being paid to look at video game economies: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
Its been professional for a few years in that people are earning money
playing video games in competition.
It's been professional for a few years in that people are earning money
playing video games for entertainment, or running an in-game
organisation (though that one might be just EVE Online).
--
Juho Julkunen
J. Clarke
2018-05-06 16:44:04 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 6 May 2018 16:06:59 +0300, Juho Julkunen
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by J. Clarke
Post by m***@sky.com
?Heinlein Was an Optimist? by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Lynn
I think we are still in what Heinlein called "the crazy years" and I think the opening up of space as a frontier was supposed to pull us out of them, by selecting for groups that have ways that are sane enough to survive and prosper in space. I'd love for us to have a sea change drastic enough to allow us to look back on our various insanities with the eyes of strangers, but alas the obvious contendors are not improvements (socialism with chinese characteristics or
an islamic state).
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by J. Clarke
The "Crazy Years" are just starting. The public has shown it wants a
Man On A White Horse, but so far it's gotten a Clown With a Dead Cat
On His Head. May take a while for Nehemiah Scudder or a reasonable
facsimile thereof to come to prominence in the political arena.
Post by m***@sky.com
There's maybe an outside chance of some completely new way of organising society coming out of mass participation computer games and being proved there. If you are trying to find a way of running your massive multiplayer game that makes people feel their contribution to this fake society is useful and appreciated you might be a social revolutionary by mistake, which just trying to make an honest dollar entertaining people.
I think that the role of computer games as a forum for ideation is
still in its infancy.
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional economists are being paid to look at video game economies: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
Its been professional for a few years in that people are earning money
playing video games in competition.
It's been professional for a few years in that people are earning money
playing video games for entertainment, or running an in-game
organisation (though that one might be just EVE Online).
The games have been professional. That doesn't mean that their use as
a platform for ideation is professional.
Paul Colquhoun
2018-05-07 01:05:03 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 6 May 2018 16:06:59 +0300, Juho Julkunen <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
| In article <pcm86t$si2$***@dont-email.me>, ***@sonic.net says...

|> > It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional
|> > economists are being paid to look at video game economies:
|> > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
|> >
|> Its been professional for a few years in that people are earning money
|> playing video games in competition.
|
| It's been professional for a few years in that people are earning money
| playing video games for entertainment, or running an in-game
| organisation (though that one might be just EVE Online).


I think there are/were people earning their living in Second Life.
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, ULC. http://andor.dropbear.id.au/
Asking for technical help in newsgroups? Read this first:
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#intro
Juho Julkunen
2018-05-07 20:16:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Colquhoun
|> > It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional
|> > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
|> >
|> Its been professional for a few years in that people are earning money
|> playing video games in competition.
|
| It's been professional for a few years in that people are earning money
| playing video games for entertainment, or running an in-game
| organisation (though that one might be just EVE Online).
I think there are/were people earning their living in Second Life.
There are people earning, well, money at least, if not a living, in
many games. (Gold farming is apparently a viable alternative to
printing license plates for inmates in China.) I'm not sure there are
that many where you can do it while never actually logging into the
game (because you are too busy with spreadheets and phone calls and
meetings).

Every once in a while something reminds me that Second Life is still
around, and it always surprises me. I was also surprised to find out
that the cyberspace in _Snow Crash_ is basically Second Life.
--
Juho Julkunen
Greg Goss
2018-05-06 15:02:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@sky.com
Post by J. Clarke
I think that the role of computer games as a forum for ideation is
still in its infancy.
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional economists are being paid to look at video game economies: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
I think that at one point, the real-workd exchanges, projected back
into the game implied that the plat economy was bigger than the ruble
economy. Was it Everquest that used plat(inum) as a currency?
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
Gene Wirchenko
2018-05-06 23:54:53 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 5 May 2018 23:40:18 -0700 (PDT), ***@sky.com wrote:

[snip]
Post by m***@sky.com
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional
economists are being paid to look at video game economies:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games

It would be nice if one would take a look at the economics of
Dungeons & Dragons.

There are commodities which can be traded at face value. This
does not allow for the costs of transportation. We have cobbled
something together since my character has a background as a merchant.

I need the money. It is quite expensive to develop a wizard
character. A fighter can find a magical sword and be able to use it
immediately. Find a spellbook? A wizard has to study it and spend
money to be able to write it into his own spellbook before he can use
it.

In yesterday's session, the party agreed that my character should
get two shares of party treasure, one for being a party member and one
for developing my spellbook. I have been spending practically all of
my money (treasure plus merchant profits) on writing spells into my
spellbook. If I lost my spellbook, I would be stuck. I need to have
a backup which I can not afford. A fighter can easily have two
swords.

Escape into a fantasy world? Not the way we do it.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
Ninapenda Jibini
2018-05-07 00:31:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
Post by m***@sky.com
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that
professional
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-econom
ics-of-video-games
It would be nice if one would take a look at the economics of
Dungeons & Dragons.
It's been done. A Google search for "economics of dungeons and
dragonS" produces about 2 million results.
--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Dimensional Traveler
2018-05-07 00:47:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
Post by m***@sky.com
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
It would be nice if one would take a look at the economics of
Dungeons & Dragons.
There are commodities which can be traded at face value. This
does not allow for the costs of transportation. We have cobbled
something together since my character has a background as a merchant.
I need the money. It is quite expensive to develop a wizard
character. A fighter can find a magical sword and be able to use it
immediately. Find a spellbook? A wizard has to study it and spend
money to be able to write it into his own spellbook before he can use
it.
In yesterday's session, the party agreed that my character should
get two shares of party treasure, one for being a party member and one
for developing my spellbook. I have been spending practically all of
my money (treasure plus merchant profits) on writing spells into my
spellbook. If I lost my spellbook, I would be stuck. I need to have
a backup which I can not afford. A fighter can easily have two
swords.
Escape into a fantasy world? Not the way we do it.
That would be a pretty good argument that you are doing it wrong then. ;)
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Gene Wirchenko
2018-05-07 02:44:09 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 6 May 2018 17:47:27 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
Post by m***@sky.com
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
It would be nice if one would take a look at the economics of
Dungeons & Dragons.
There are commodities which can be traded at face value. This
does not allow for the costs of transportation. We have cobbled
something together since my character has a background as a merchant.
I need the money. It is quite expensive to develop a wizard
character. A fighter can find a magical sword and be able to use it
immediately. Find a spellbook? A wizard has to study it and spend
money to be able to write it into his own spellbook before he can use
it.
In yesterday's session, the party agreed that my character should
get two shares of party treasure, one for being a party member and one
for developing my spellbook. I have been spending practically all of
my money (treasure plus merchant profits) on writing spells into my
spellbook. If I lost my spellbook, I would be stuck. I need to have
a backup which I can not afford. A fighter can easily have two
swords.
Escape into a fantasy world? Not the way we do it.
That would be a pretty good argument that you are doing it wrong then. ;)
The sacrifices I make for WSOD.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
Robert Carnegie
2018-05-07 14:40:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gene Wirchenko
On Sun, 6 May 2018 17:47:27 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
Post by m***@sky.com
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
It would be nice if one would take a look at the economics of
Dungeons & Dragons.
There are commodities which can be traded at face value. This
does not allow for the costs of transportation. We have cobbled
something together since my character has a background as a merchant.
I need the money. It is quite expensive to develop a wizard
character. A fighter can find a magical sword and be able to use it
immediately. Find a spellbook? A wizard has to study it and spend
money to be able to write it into his own spellbook before he can use
it.
In yesterday's session, the party agreed that my character should
get two shares of party treasure, one for being a party member and one
for developing my spellbook. I have been spending practically all of
my money (treasure plus merchant profits) on writing spells into my
spellbook. If I lost my spellbook, I would be stuck. I need to have
a backup which I can not afford. A fighter can easily have two
swords.
Escape into a fantasy world? Not the way we do it.
That would be a pretty good argument that you are doing it wrong then. ;)
The sacrifices I make for WSOD.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
"In my dreams I fly."
-- Samaritan, Kurt Busiek's Astro City #1

He in fact can fly like Superman does, but as a
superhero he only gets to fly to emergencies, at
top speed, which isn't enjoyable.

Also apparently he wants to fly naked!
Dimensional Traveler
2018-05-07 17:50:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Gene Wirchenko
On Sun, 6 May 2018 17:47:27 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
Post by m***@sky.com
It's been professional for a few years, in the sense that professional
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/28/the-economics-of-video-games
It would be nice if one would take a look at the economics of
Dungeons & Dragons.
There are commodities which can be traded at face value. This
does not allow for the costs of transportation. We have cobbled
something together since my character has a background as a merchant.
I need the money. It is quite expensive to develop a wizard
character. A fighter can find a magical sword and be able to use it
immediately. Find a spellbook? A wizard has to study it and spend
money to be able to write it into his own spellbook before he can use
it.
In yesterday's session, the party agreed that my character should
get two shares of party treasure, one for being a party member and one
for developing my spellbook. I have been spending practically all of
my money (treasure plus merchant profits) on writing spells into my
spellbook. If I lost my spellbook, I would be stuck. I need to have
a backup which I can not afford. A fighter can easily have two
swords.
Escape into a fantasy world? Not the way we do it.
That would be a pretty good argument that you are doing it wrong then. ;)
The sacrifices I make for WSOD.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
"In my dreams I fly."
-- Samaritan, Kurt Busiek's Astro City #1
He in fact can fly like Superman does, but as a
superhero he only gets to fly to emergencies, at
top speed, which isn't enjoyable.
Also apparently he wants to fly naked!
How many people would look up to notice a man flying naked overhead?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Jack Bohn
2018-05-07 18:33:59 UTC
Permalink
"In my dreams I fly." 
-- Samaritan, Kurt Busiek's Astro City #1 
 
He in fact can fly like Superman does, but as a 
superhero he only gets to fly to emergencies, at 
top speed, which isn't enjoyable. 
 
Also apparently he wants to fly naked! 
How many people would look up to notice a man flying naked overhead? 
A wish to "fly like a bird" is a reference to flapping your arms, but to the ability to poop on anything you want.
--
-Jack
m***@gmail.com
2018-06-22 07:49:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
The "Crazy Years" are just starting. The public has shown it wants a
Man On A White Horse, but so far it's gotten a Clown With a Dead Cat
On His Head. May take a while for Nehemiah Scudder or a reasonable
facsimile thereof to come to prominence in the political arena.
I'd say we've jumped over Scudder and gone straight to Bork Vanning

Mike Stone, Peterborough, England

Always drink upriver from the herd.

Default User
2018-05-06 17:40:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?


Brian
David Johnston
2018-05-06 20:49:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Default User
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Science fiction writers aren't in the business of "extrapolating" boring
futures That being said, Isaac Asimov did write the End of Eternity,
where humanity goes through repeated cycles of getting interested in
space flight...then giving it up. And he wrote The Martian Way in which
the space colonies are nearly abandoned because of a political shift on
Earth that makes Earth reluctant to continue to subsidize them so they
must become self-sufficient.
Kevrob
2018-05-06 20:54:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Default User
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Science fiction writers aren't in the business of "extrapolating" boring
futures That being said, Isaac Asimov did write the End of Eternity,
where humanity goes through repeated cycles of getting interested in
space flight...then giving it up. And he wrote The Martian Way in which
the space colonies are nearly abandoned because of a political shift on
Earth that makes Earth reluctant to continue to subsidize them so they
must become self-sufficient.
Heinlein had a space flight "hiatus" under the Scudder dictatorship.

Were countries other than the US launching during that part
of the "Future History?"

Kevin R
David Johnston
2018-05-06 21:29:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by David Johnston
Post by Default User
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Science fiction writers aren't in the business of "extrapolating" boring
futures That being said, Isaac Asimov did write the End of Eternity,
where humanity goes through repeated cycles of getting interested in
space flight...then giving it up. And he wrote The Martian Way in which
the space colonies are nearly abandoned because of a political shift on
Earth that makes Earth reluctant to continue to subsidize them so they
must become self-sufficient.
Heinlein had a space flight "hiatus" under the Scudder dictatorship.
i considered that but it was just an artifact of trying to string
together stories that were originally stand-alone.
Post by Kevrob
Were countries other than the US launching during that part
of the "Future History?"
Kevin R
Johnny1A
2018-05-17 04:57:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Default User
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.

Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary flight.

One reason for that was the visible difficulty of the task, the energies necessary and the difficulties of it were visible.

Project Apollo caught the SF world by surprise, nobody guessed that the peculiar, particular politics of the time would lead to such a thing, and they saw manned Lunar flight coming way earlier than anticipated. This converted a lot of formerly cautious people into optimists, since what they had foreseen in the middle-distance arrived so soon. So they started thinking the follow-up would come fairly soon, too.

But of course Apollo was the result of a very peculiar and somewhat improbable confluence of political factors, some of them the geopolitics of the Cold War, some of them the personal political needs of President John F. Kennedy. Politically, America was looking for a PR win, and Kennedy was smarting from the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs fiasco, too, and needed something to rally the public and take attention away from that Charlie Foxtrot.

That combination enabled a nearly war-level mobilization of money, resources, and effort in a rather Rube Golderg-esque Lunar project that worked...but worked in a way that wasn't really sustainable. As soon as those political factors no longer lined up, it ended.

The original assumptions of the SF writers back in the day had been more nearly right than the mid-century optimism, Apollo was a success, but one that was 'ahead of its time' on several levels. More Leif Ericson than Columhus, in a sense.

(Arthur Clarke has commented on this quite a bit.)
Robert Carnegie
2018-05-17 07:58:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary flight.
One reason for that was the visible difficulty of the task, the energies necessary and the difficulties of it were visible.
Project Apollo caught the SF world by surprise, nobody guessed that the peculiar, particular politics of the time would lead to such a thing, and they saw manned Lunar flight coming way earlier than anticipated. This converted a lot of formerly cautious people into optimists, since what they had foreseen in the middle-distance arrived so soon. So they started thinking the follow-up would come fairly soon, too.
But of course Apollo was the result of a very peculiar and somewhat improbable confluence of political factors, some of them the geopolitics of the Cold War, some of them the personal political needs of President John F. Kennedy. Politically, America was looking for a PR win, and Kennedy was smarting from the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs fiasco, too, and needed something to rally the public and take attention away from that Charlie Foxtrot.
That combination enabled a nearly war-level mobilization of money, resources, and effort in a rather Rube Golderg-esque Lunar project that worked...but worked in a way that wasn't really sustainable. As soon as those political factors no longer lined up, it ended.
The original assumptions of the SF writers back in the day had been more nearly right than the mid-century optimism, Apollo was a success, but one that was 'ahead of its time' on several levels. More Leif Ericson than Columhus, in a sense.
(Arthur Clarke has commented on this quite a bit.)
Although _The First Men in the Moon_ by H. G. Wells
was published starting in 1900 and evidently is told
after the first trip to the moon - which therefore
took place in the 19th century. (1900 is 19th century.)

This doesn't spoil how it ends... which is with
radio telegraph messages between Moon and Earth.
How Mr. Wells was to be paid for his work when
unable to return to Earth was his problem!
Johnny1A
2018-05-18 02:37:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary flight.
One reason for that was the visible difficulty of the task, the energies necessary and the difficulties of it were visible.
Project Apollo caught the SF world by surprise, nobody guessed that the peculiar, particular politics of the time would lead to such a thing, and they saw manned Lunar flight coming way earlier than anticipated. This converted a lot of formerly cautious people into optimists, since what they had foreseen in the middle-distance arrived so soon. So they started thinking the follow-up would come fairly soon, too.
But of course Apollo was the result of a very peculiar and somewhat improbable confluence of political factors, some of them the geopolitics of the Cold War, some of them the personal political needs of President John F. Kennedy. Politically, America was looking for a PR win, and Kennedy was smarting from the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs fiasco, too, and needed something to rally the public and take attention away from that Charlie Foxtrot.
That combination enabled a nearly war-level mobilization of money, resources, and effort in a rather Rube Golderg-esque Lunar project that worked...but worked in a way that wasn't really sustainable. As soon as those political factors no longer lined up, it ended.
The original assumptions of the SF writers back in the day had been more nearly right than the mid-century optimism, Apollo was a success, but one that was 'ahead of its time' on several levels. More Leif Ericson than Columhus, in a sense.
(Arthur Clarke has commented on this quite a bit.)
Although _The First Men in the Moon_ by H. G. Wells
was published starting in 1900 and evidently is told
after the first trip to the moon - which therefore
took place in the 19th century. (1900 is 19th century.)
This doesn't spoil how it ends... which is with
radio telegraph messages between Moon and Earth.
How Mr. Wells was to be paid for his work when
unable to return to Earth was his problem!
But that's also an example of what I'm talking about, too.

The early SF writers foresaw many of the difficulties of space flight, and they often posited a physics breakthrough of some sort to overcome them, esp. if they wanted space flight in the relatively near future. Cavorite would certainly fall into the category of 'major physics development'. In fact, as described it would turn physics inside out, worse than FTL or possibly even time travel.

Heinlein, BTW, was optimistic, but not a totally cockeyed optimist. In his classic story _The Man Who Sold The Moon_, he has D.D. Harriman forced to try to reach the Moon with a chemical-fuel rocket, and the classic problems of mass and staging are integral parts of the story. RAH had in a previous story make an effective nuclear rocket available, and had to take it away again to make the story work for tMWStM.
Michael F. Stemper
2018-05-19 12:49:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Although _The First Men in the Moon_ by H. G. Wells
was published starting in 1900 and evidently is told
after the first trip to the moon - which therefore
took place in the 19th century. (1900 is 19th century.)
What was the first SF to use a rocket for space travel? Early space
travel stories with which I'm familiar include:

_From the Earth to the Moon_ by Jules Verne. In this one, it's a
"cannonball run", which would really have been tough on the passengers.

_The First Men in the Moon_, by H. G. Wells. Cavorite is used to
selectively shield the ship from gravity. The only way to fly!

_The Skylark of Space_, by E. E. "Doc" Smith. The ship is propelled by
firing a magical energy beam. (If you squint, this looks like a rocket,
but since there's no reaction mass, it's out.)

Looking over the list, all of these were written before Goddard's
experiments in rocketry. Did any authors anticipate his work, or did
they all, like the _New York Times_[1] think that rockets needed air to
"push against"?

[1]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_H._Goddard#New_York_Times_editorial>
--
Michael F. Stemper
Galatians 3:28
Greg Goss
2018-05-20 01:00:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by Robert Carnegie
Although _The First Men in the Moon_ by H. G. Wells
was published starting in 1900 and evidently is told
after the first trip to the moon - which therefore
took place in the 19th century. (1900 is 19th century.)
What was the first SF to use a rocket for space travel? Early space
_From the Earth to the Moon_ by Jules Verne. In this one, it's a
"cannonball run", which would really have been tough on the passengers.
_The First Men in the Moon_, by H. G. Wells. Cavorite is used to
selectively shield the ship from gravity. The only way to fly!
_The Skylark of Space_, by E. E. "Doc" Smith. The ship is propelled by
firing a magical energy beam. (If you squint, this looks like a rocket,
but since there's no reaction mass, it's out.)
Looking over the list, all of these were written before Goddard's
experiments in rocketry. Did any authors anticipate his work, or did
they all, like the _New York Times_[1] think that rockets needed air to
"push against"?
[1]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_H._Goddard#New_York_Times_editorial>
I seem to recall a story by Tsiolkovsky that featured an orbital shot,
and assembling algae tanks to provide oxygen. I don't recall any of
the plog and a quick google doesn't seem to provide anything.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
Kevrob
2018-05-20 02:34:53 UTC
Permalink
I don't recall any of the plog......
I know you mean "plot," but when I read "plog"
my thoughts went to "plodding blog."

I may keep that one.
and a quick google doesn't seem to provide anything.
Seems "plog" could mean "photo blog."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plog


Kevin R
J. Clarke
2018-05-20 04:42:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
I don't recall any of the plog......
I know you mean "plot," but when I read "plog"
my thoughts went to "plodding blog."
I may keep that one.
and a quick google doesn't seem to provide anything.
Seems "plog" could mean "photo blog."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plog
I found myself wondering what British cops had to do with anything,
but that's "plod".
Post by Kevrob
Kevin R
Michael F. Stemper
2018-05-20 22:12:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg Goss
Post by Michael F. Stemper
What was the first SF to use a rocket for space travel? Early space
Looking over the list, all of these were written before Goddard's
experiments in rocketry. Did any authors anticipate his work, or did
they all, like the _New York Times_[1] think that rockets needed air to
"push against"?
I seem to recall a story by Tsiolkovsky that featured an orbital shot,
and assembling algae tanks to provide oxygen. I don't recall any of
the plog and a quick google doesn't seem to provide anything.
Well, he does show up in the ISFDB:
<http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?117143>
--
Michael F. Stemper
Psalm 94:3-6
Greg Goss
2018-05-21 15:38:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by Greg Goss
Post by Michael F. Stemper
What was the first SF to use a rocket for space travel? Early space
Looking over the list, all of these were written before Goddard's
experiments in rocketry. Did any authors anticipate his work, or did
they all, like the _New York Times_[1] think that rockets needed air to
"push against"?
I seem to recall a story by Tsiolkovsky that featured an orbital shot,
and assembling algae tanks to provide oxygen. I don't recall any of
the plog and a quick google doesn't seem to provide anything.
<http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ea.cgi?117143>
Yes, that's it. "Beyond Planet Earth" in some translation or other.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
James Nicoll
2018-05-17 12:48:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space
flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C
was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman
kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite
examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the
intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the
twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary
flight.
Technically, FB's prologue is compatable with our history thus far:

In the final decade of the 21st century, men and women in rocket ships
landed on the moon. By 2200 AD they had reached the other planets of our
solar system. Almost at once there followed the discovery of hyperdrive
through which the speed of light was first attained and later greatly
surpassed. And so at last mankind began the conquest and colonization
of deep space.


Thus far no women have been to the Moon.

FB is also notable for how slow the ftl is, less than 20 C.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Johnny1A
2018-05-18 02:30:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space
flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C
was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman
kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite
examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the
intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the
twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary
flight.
In the final decade of the 21st century, men and women in rocket ships
landed on the moon. By 2200 AD they had reached the other planets of our
solar system. Almost at once there followed the discovery of hyperdrive
through which the speed of light was first attained and later greatly
surpassed. And so at last mankind began the conquest and colonization
of deep space.
Thus far no women have been to the Moon.
Yeah, you could technically make it fit, but it's not what they meant.
Post by James Nicoll
FB is also notable for how slow the ftl is, less than 20 C.
My impression of the movie was that star flight was still relatively new, they've had it for a few decades, but no more. They've got FTL communications, too, but it's really clumsy and difficult to use, they have to dismantle part of their drive to construct the communicator, and it takes a lot of the energy from the ship's power plant to run it. It all looks like a relatively new tech.

It's interesting what they foresaw accurately, though. There's a scene, for ex, where the captain (played by a serious Leslie Neilson) and his XO first visit Dr. Morbius, and the XO uses a little handheld IT device to review the passenger manifest of the first starship to visit Altair IV. They also have video capacity on their personal communicators, they can transmit images back to their ship, which Kirk could not.
Robert Carnegie
2018-05-18 03:14:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johnny1A
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space
flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C
was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman
kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite
examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the
intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the
twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary
flight.
In the final decade of the 21st century, men and women in rocket ships
landed on the moon. By 2200 AD they had reached the other planets of our
solar system. Almost at once there followed the discovery of hyperdrive
through which the speed of light was first attained and later greatly
surpassed. And so at last mankind began the conquest and colonization
of deep space.
Thus far no women have been to the Moon.
Yeah, you could technically make it fit, but it's not what they meant.
Post by James Nicoll
FB is also notable for how slow the ftl is, less than 20 C.
My impression of the movie was that star flight was still relatively new, they've had it for a few decades, but no more. They've got FTL communications, too, but it's really clumsy and difficult to use, they have to dismantle part of their drive to construct the communicator, and it takes a lot of the energy from the ship's power plant to run it. It all looks like a relatively new tech.
It's interesting what they foresaw accurately, though. There's a scene, for ex, where the captain (played by a serious Leslie Neilson) and his XO first visit Dr. Morbius, and the XO uses a little handheld IT device to review the passenger manifest of the first starship to visit Altair IV. They also have video capacity on their personal communicators, they can transmit images back to their ship, which Kirk could not.
It's while since I've seen it, but, interstellar
communication still represents a challenge today.

In the developed galaxy containing James White's
"Sector General" space hospital, you didn't have to
take a ship's hyperspace drive apart to send signals,
but you did have the lights dimming noticeably on board
while they did it. An audio signal typically had
interference and missing words which a reasonable
redundant digital encoding system would avoid, and
in emergency, a beacon signal would advertise the
fact and the location of a shipwreck but no more.
I'm not sure but I think that normal communication
involved ejecting the beacon from a ship so that
transmission didn't zap the other onboard electrical
systems. Maybe that was why the lights went funny...
This all meant, of course, that missions often
proceeded in a context of exciting mystery and
limited information, if frustrating to the people
involved.
J. Clarke
2018-05-18 03:27:31 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 17 May 2018 20:14:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Johnny1A
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space
flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C
was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman
kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite
examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the
intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the
twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary
flight.
In the final decade of the 21st century, men and women in rocket ships
landed on the moon. By 2200 AD they had reached the other planets of our
solar system. Almost at once there followed the discovery of hyperdrive
through which the speed of light was first attained and later greatly
surpassed. And so at last mankind began the conquest and colonization
of deep space.
Thus far no women have been to the Moon.
Yeah, you could technically make it fit, but it's not what they meant.
Post by James Nicoll
FB is also notable for how slow the ftl is, less than 20 C.
My impression of the movie was that star flight was still relatively new, they've had it for a few decades, but no more. They've got FTL communications, too, but it's really clumsy and difficult to use, they have to dismantle part of their drive to construct the communicator, and it takes a lot of the energy from the ship's power plant to run it. It all looks like a relatively new tech.
It's interesting what they foresaw accurately, though. There's a scene, for ex, where the captain (played by a serious Leslie Neilson) and his XO first visit Dr. Morbius, and the XO uses a little handheld IT device to review the passenger manifest of the first starship to visit Altair IV. They also have video capacity on their personal communicators, they can transmit images back to their ship, which Kirk could not.
It's while since I've seen it, but, interstellar
communication still represents a challenge today.
Since we have not identified anyone at interstellar distance with whom
to communicate, that it might be a "challenge" is somewhat irrelevant.
Post by Robert Carnegie
In the developed galaxy containing James White's
"Sector General" space hospital, you didn't have to
take a ship's hyperspace drive apart to send signals,
but you did have the lights dimming noticeably on board
while they did it. An audio signal typically had
interference and missing words which a reasonable
redundant digital encoding system would avoid, and
in emergency, a beacon signal would advertise the
fact and the location of a shipwreck but no more.
I'm not sure but I think that normal communication
involved ejecting the beacon from a ship so that
transmission didn't zap the other onboard electrical
systems. Maybe that was why the lights went funny...
This all meant, of course, that missions often
proceeded in a context of exciting mystery and
limited information, if frustrating to the people
involved.
That doesn't have anything to do with "today", that has to do with
what the author wanted in his story. Ender didn't have any trouble
controlling a fleet of starships at interstellar distances.
Robert Carnegie
2018-05-18 12:33:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 17 May 2018 20:14:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Johnny1A
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space
flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C
was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman
kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite
examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the
intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the
twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary
flight.
In the final decade of the 21st century, men and women in rocket ships
landed on the moon. By 2200 AD they had reached the other planets of our
solar system. Almost at once there followed the discovery of hyperdrive
through which the speed of light was first attained and later greatly
surpassed. And so at last mankind began the conquest and colonization
of deep space.
Thus far no women have been to the Moon.
Yeah, you could technically make it fit, but it's not what they meant.
Post by James Nicoll
FB is also notable for how slow the ftl is, less than 20 C.
My impression of the movie was that star flight was still relatively new, they've had it for a few decades, but no more. They've got FTL communications, too, but it's really clumsy and difficult to use, they have to dismantle part of their drive to construct the communicator, and it takes a lot of the energy from the ship's power plant to run it. It all looks like a relatively new tech.
It's interesting what they foresaw accurately, though. There's a scene, for ex, where the captain (played by a serious Leslie Neilson) and his XO first visit Dr. Morbius, and the XO uses a little handheld IT device to review the passenger manifest of the first starship to visit Altair IV. They also have video capacity on their personal communicators, they can transmit images back to their ship, which Kirk could not.
It's while since I've seen it, but, interstellar
communication still represents a challenge today.
Since we have not identified anyone at interstellar distance with whom
to communicate, that it might be a "challenge" is somewhat irrelevant.
The premise, as in _Forbiddn Planet_ I think, is that
you invent a way to travel between stars in reasonably
convenient time, then you want to talk to folks back home.
Without making the trip back, though some settings
require it.
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Carnegie
In the developed galaxy containing James White's
"Sector General" space hospital, you didn't have to
take a ship's hyperspace drive apart to send signals,
but you did have the lights dimming noticeably on board
while they did it. An audio signal typically had
interference and missing words which a reasonable
redundant digital encoding system would avoid, and
in emergency, a beacon signal would advertise the
fact and the location of a shipwreck but no more.
I'm not sure but I think that normal communication
involved ejecting the beacon from a ship so that
transmission didn't zap the other onboard electrical
systems. Maybe that was why the lights went funny...
This all meant, of course, that missions often
proceeded in a context of exciting mystery and
limited information, if frustrating to the people
involved.
That doesn't have anything to do with "today", that has to do with
what the author wanted in his story. Ender didn't have any trouble
controlling a fleet of starships at interstellar distances.
Yes, of course the limitations are chosen by the author.
In real life, though, interstellar communication even at c
isn't feasible, yet, except of course by telepathy -which
Heinlein was happy to use.
James Nicoll
2018-05-18 13:52:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Yes, of course the limitations are chosen by the author.
In real life, though, interstellar communication even at c
isn't feasible, yet, except of course by telepathy -which
Heinlein was happy to use.
Not so: basic 1960s radio telescopes can make themselves heard to
other 1960s radio telescopes across a fair fraction of the galaxy.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
J. Clarke
2018-05-19 01:23:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Robert Carnegie
Yes, of course the limitations are chosen by the author.
In real life, though, interstellar communication even at c
isn't feasible, yet, except of course by telepathy -which
Heinlein was happy to use.
Not so: basic 1960s radio telescopes can make themselves heard to
other 1960s radio telescopes across a fair fraction of the galaxy.
Can they? I'd like to see the numbers on that.
Robert Woodward
2018-05-19 04:33:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Robert Carnegie
Yes, of course the limitations are chosen by the author.
In real life, though, interstellar communication even at c
isn't feasible, yet, except of course by telepathy -which
Heinlein was happy to use.
Not so: basic 1960s radio telescopes can make themselves heard to
other 1960s radio telescopes across a fair fraction of the galaxy.
Can they? I'd like to see the numbers on that.
James might be thinking of the Arecibo Message
(<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message>).
--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward ***@drizzle.com
J. Clarke
2018-05-19 11:42:16 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 May 2018 21:33:24 -0700, Robert Woodward
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by J. Clarke
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Robert Carnegie
Yes, of course the limitations are chosen by the author.
In real life, though, interstellar communication even at c
isn't feasible, yet, except of course by telepathy -which
Heinlein was happy to use.
Not so: basic 1960s radio telescopes can make themselves heard to
other 1960s radio telescopes across a fair fraction of the galaxy.
Can they? I'd like to see the numbers on that.
James might be thinking of the Arecibo Message
(<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message>).
Leaves me wondering what the signal strength will be when it arrives
and what the signal-to-noise ratio will be.
James Nicoll
2018-05-19 14:53:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by J. Clarke
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Robert Carnegie
Yes, of course the limitations are chosen by the author.
In real life, though, interstellar communication even at c
isn't feasible, yet, except of course by telepathy -which
Heinlein was happy to use.
Not so: basic 1960s radio telescopes can make themselves heard to
other 1960s radio telescopes across a fair fraction of the galaxy.
Can they? I'd like to see the numbers on that.
James might be thinking of the Arecibo Message
(<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message>).
As well as discussions in various SETI books.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
James Nicoll
2018-05-19 15:00:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Robert Woodward
Post by J. Clarke
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Robert Carnegie
Yes, of course the limitations are chosen by the author.
In real life, though, interstellar communication even at c
isn't feasible, yet, except of course by telepathy -which
Heinlein was happy to use.
Not so: basic 1960s radio telescopes can make themselves heard to
other 1960s radio telescopes across a fair fraction of the galaxy.
Can they? I'd like to see the numbers on that.
James might be thinking of the Arecibo Message
(<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message>).
As well as discussions in various SETI books.
See also these efforts, aimed at comparatively nearby stars. When the
Space Horrors descend to eat our eyelids, we can thank hardworking
people like the ones behind these outreach efforts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_Call
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teen_Age_Message
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_Call
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Message_from_Earth
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
Robert Carnegie
2018-05-19 08:19:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Robert Carnegie
Yes, of course the limitations are chosen by the author.
In real life, though, interstellar communication even at c
isn't feasible, yet, except of course by telepathy -which
Heinlein was happy to use.
Not so: basic 1960s radio telescopes can make themselves heard to
other 1960s radio telescopes across a fair fraction of the galaxy.
Can they? I'd like to see the numbers on that.
Or should we ask, what have you heard...
J. Clarke
2018-05-19 01:22:19 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 May 2018 05:33:06 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
On Thu, 17 May 2018 20:14:49 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Johnny1A
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space
flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C
was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman
kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite
examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the
intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the
twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary
flight.
In the final decade of the 21st century, men and women in rocket ships
landed on the moon. By 2200 AD they had reached the other planets of our
solar system. Almost at once there followed the discovery of hyperdrive
through which the speed of light was first attained and later greatly
surpassed. And so at last mankind began the conquest and colonization
of deep space.
Thus far no women have been to the Moon.
Yeah, you could technically make it fit, but it's not what they meant.
Post by James Nicoll
FB is also notable for how slow the ftl is, less than 20 C.
My impression of the movie was that star flight was still relatively new, they've had it for a few decades, but no more. They've got FTL communications, too, but it's really clumsy and difficult to use, they have to dismantle part of their drive to construct the communicator, and it takes a lot of the energy from the ship's power plant to run it. It all looks like a relatively new tech.
It's interesting what they foresaw accurately, though. There's a scene, for ex, where the captain (played by a serious Leslie Neilson) and his XO first visit Dr. Morbius, and the XO uses a little handheld IT device to review the passenger manifest of the first starship to visit Altair IV. They also have video capacity on their personal communicators, they can transmit images back to their ship, which Kirk could not.
It's while since I've seen it, but, interstellar
communication still represents a challenge today.
Since we have not identified anyone at interstellar distance with whom
to communicate, that it might be a "challenge" is somewhat irrelevant.
The premise, as in _Forbiddn Planet_ I think, is that
you invent a way to travel between stars in reasonably
convenient time, then you want to talk to folks back home.
Without making the trip back, though some settings
require it.
Well, of course, but we have not solved the interstellar travel
problem so the instellar communication problem is secondary. If we
know how to travel faster than light, we may find simple and obvious
ways to communicate faster than light. But right now there's only one
real-world physics approach that looks like it has even a hope of
being viable and that one is an extreme long-shot.
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Robert Carnegie
In the developed galaxy containing James White's
"Sector General" space hospital, you didn't have to
take a ship's hyperspace drive apart to send signals,
but you did have the lights dimming noticeably on board
while they did it. An audio signal typically had
interference and missing words which a reasonable
redundant digital encoding system would avoid, and
in emergency, a beacon signal would advertise the
fact and the location of a shipwreck but no more.
I'm not sure but I think that normal communication
involved ejecting the beacon from a ship so that
transmission didn't zap the other onboard electrical
systems. Maybe that was why the lights went funny...
This all meant, of course, that missions often
proceeded in a context of exciting mystery and
limited information, if frustrating to the people
involved.
That doesn't have anything to do with "today", that has to do with
what the author wanted in his story. Ender didn't have any trouble
controlling a fleet of starships at interstellar distances.
Yes, of course the limitations are chosen by the author.
In real life, though, interstellar communication even at c
isn't feasible, yet, except of course by telepathy -which
Heinlein was happy to use.
In real life nobody has ever made a serious effort to solve the
problem.
Jerry Brown
2018-05-18 17:28:39 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 17 May 2018 19:30:17 -0700 (PDT), Johnny1A
Post by Johnny1A
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space
flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C
was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman
kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite
examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the
intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the
twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary
flight.
In the final decade of the 21st century, men and women in rocket ships
landed on the moon. By 2200 AD they had reached the other planets of our
solar system. Almost at once there followed the discovery of hyperdrive
through which the speed of light was first attained and later greatly
surpassed. And so at last mankind began the conquest and colonization
of deep space.
Thus far no women have been to the Moon.
Yeah, you could technically make it fit, but it's not what they meant.
Post by James Nicoll
FB is also notable for how slow the ftl is, less than 20 C.
My impression of the movie was that star flight was still relatively new, they've had it for a few decades, but no more. They've got FTL communications, too, but it's really clumsy and difficult to use, they have to dismantle part of their drive to construct the communicator, and it takes a lot of the energy from the ship's power plant to run it. It all looks like a relatively new tech.
It's been a while, but I thought that the jury-rigging was necessary
because of the Id creature sabotaging the ship in its earlier, less
lethal, visit.
Post by Johnny1A
It's interesting what they foresaw accurately, though. There's a scene, for ex, where the captain (played by a serious Leslie Neilson) and his XO first visit Dr. Morbius, and the XO uses a little handheld IT device to review the passenger manifest of the first starship to visit Altair IV. They also have video capacity on their personal communicators, they can transmit images back to their ship, which Kirk could not.
--
Jerry Brown

A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)
Johnny1A
2018-05-19 03:40:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Brown
On Thu, 17 May 2018 19:30:17 -0700 (PDT), Johnny1A
Post by Johnny1A
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
Post by Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space
flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C
was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman
kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite
examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the
intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the
twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary
flight.
In the final decade of the 21st century, men and women in rocket ships
landed on the moon. By 2200 AD they had reached the other planets of our
solar system. Almost at once there followed the discovery of hyperdrive
through which the speed of light was first attained and later greatly
surpassed. And so at last mankind began the conquest and colonization
of deep space.
Thus far no women have been to the Moon.
Yeah, you could technically make it fit, but it's not what they meant.
Post by James Nicoll
FB is also notable for how slow the ftl is, less than 20 C.
My impression of the movie was that star flight was still relatively new, they've had it for a few decades, but no more. They've got FTL communications, too, but it's really clumsy and difficult to use, they have to dismantle part of their drive to construct the communicator, and it takes a lot of the energy from the ship's power plant to run it. It all looks like a relatively new tech.
It's been a while, but I thought that the jury-rigging was necessary
because of the Id creature sabotaging the ship in its earlier, less
lethal, visit.
No, not exactly.

Captain Adams (Nielsen's character) was sent to Altair IV with his ship to see what had happened to a previous ship, the _Bellerophon_, that had gone out there ~20 years earlier and nothing had been heard since.

It takes about a year to get from Sol to Altair in the movie.

Captain Adams discovers some of the weirdness going on on A4, and decides that he needs to get clarifying orders from home. We're informed that they can send instantaneous (or close enough) messages, but to do so they have to build at FTL communicator, apparently it's too big and expensive and power-hungry to be standard equipment. To build it they'll have to take some components out of the ship's drive, and hook the whole thing up to the ship's power plant to run it.

It's a few days work for the crew, a major project, but once they have it running Adams can get instructions from the home government. But the id-creature sabotages the effort because Morbius subconsciously doesn't want interference from home.

The id-monster does sabotage the project, but even without interference they would still have had to dismantle part of the drive and go through all the trouble to build the device.
Jerry Brown
2018-05-19 05:43:25 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 May 2018 20:40:19 -0700 (PDT), Johnny1A
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Jerry Brown
On Thu, 17 May 2018 19:30:17 -0700 (PDT), Johnny1A
Post by Johnny1A
Post by James Nicoll
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Default User
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Would any SF writer from the time extrapolate that we'd send multiple
manned missions to the Moon in the 60s-70s, then just stop and switch
to unmanned only?
Brian
Actually, that's an interest thing.
Back in the Golden Age years, SF writers tended to put manned space
flight fairly well off in the future, on a human scale. Often the 21C
was cited for the early days of it, though RAH has Delos Delano Harriman
kick start it earlier than its natural time. One of my favorite
examples is the old and classic SF film _Forbidden Planet_, which in the
intro puts manned flight to the Moon in the last decade of the
twenty-first century, followed soon after by extensive interplanetary
flight.
In the final decade of the 21st century, men and women in rocket ships
landed on the moon. By 2200 AD they had reached the other planets of our
solar system. Almost at once there followed the discovery of hyperdrive
through which the speed of light was first attained and later greatly
surpassed. And so at last mankind began the conquest and colonization
of deep space.
Thus far no women have been to the Moon.
Yeah, you could technically make it fit, but it's not what they meant.
Post by James Nicoll
FB is also notable for how slow the ftl is, less than 20 C.
My impression of the movie was that star flight was still relatively new, they've had it for a few decades, but no more. They've got FTL communications, too, but it's really clumsy and difficult to use, they have to dismantle part of their drive to construct the communicator, and it takes a lot of the energy from the ship's power plant to run it. It all looks like a relatively new tech.
It's been a while, but I thought that the jury-rigging was necessary
because of the Id creature sabotaging the ship in its earlier, less
lethal, visit.
No, not exactly.
Captain Adams (Nielsen's character) was sent to Altair IV with his ship to see what had happened to a previous ship, the _Bellerophon_, that had gone out there ~20 years earlier and nothing had been heard since.
It takes about a year to get from Sol to Altair in the movie.
Captain Adams discovers some of the weirdness going on on A4, and decides that he needs to get clarifying orders from home. We're informed that they can send instantaneous (or close enough) messages, but to do so they have to build at FTL communicator, apparently it's too big and expensive and power-hungry to be standard equipment. To build it they'll have to take some components out of the ship's drive, and hook the whole thing up to the ship's power plant to run it.
It's a few days work for the crew, a major project, but once they have it running Adams can get instructions from the home government. But the id-creature sabotages the effort because Morbius subconsciously doesn't want interference from home.
The id-monster does sabotage the project, but even without interference they would still have had to dismantle part of the drive and go through all the trouble to build the device.
OK thanks. Guess it's time for a rewatch.
--
Jerry Brown

A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)
Jerry Brown
2018-05-20 07:40:38 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 May 2018 20:40:19 -0700 (PDT), Johnny1A
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Jerry Brown
On Thu, 17 May 2018 19:30:17 -0700 (PDT), Johnny1A
<snip>
Post by Johnny1A
Post by Jerry Brown
Post by Johnny1A
My impression of the movie was that star flight was still relatively new, they've had it for a few decades, but no more. They've got FTL communications, too, but it's really clumsy and difficult to use, they have to dismantle part of their drive to construct the communicator, and it takes a lot of the energy from the ship's power plant to run it. It all looks like a relatively new tech.
It's been a while, but I thought that the jury-rigging was necessary
because of the Id creature sabotaging the ship in its earlier, less
lethal, visit.
No, not exactly.
Captain Adams (Nielsen's character) was sent to Altair IV with his ship to see what had happened to a previous ship, the _Bellerophon_, that had gone out there ~20 years earlier and nothing had been heard since.
It takes about a year to get from Sol to Altair in the movie.
Captain Adams discovers some of the weirdness going on on A4, and decides that he needs to get clarifying orders from home. We're informed that they can send instantaneous (or close enough) messages, but to do so they have to build at FTL communicator, apparently it's too big and expensive and power-hungry to be standard equipment. To build it they'll have to take some components out of the ship's drive, and hook the whole thing up to the ship's power plant to run it.
It's a few days work for the crew, a major project, but once they have it running Adams can get instructions from the home government. But the id-creature sabotages the effort because Morbius subconsciously doesn't want interference from home.
The id-monster does sabotage the project, but even without interference they would still have had to dismantle part of the drive and go through all the trouble to build the device.
I rewatched it yesterday and, as well as confirming your correction
above, was pleased that it still stands up well against the non-stop
action which comprises the majority of today's SF films.

One question that occurred to me was why no-one seems to have
considered purchasing the rights to FP's United Planets setup (perhaps
with less Brylcreme) in order to make their own space
exploration/adventure series without the fear of Paramount coming
after them.

And I strongly suspect the Enterprise's registration number being the
time that the C57D arrives in the Altair system to be what tvtropes
terms a "shout-out".
--
Jerry Brown

A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)
Joe Morris
2018-05-18 14:34:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johnny1A
That combination enabled a nearly war-level mobilization of money, resources, and effort in a rather Rube Golderg-esque Lunar project that worked...but worked in a way that wasn't really sustainable. As soon as those political factors no longer lined up, it ended.
The original assumptions of the SF writers back in the day had been more nearly right than the mid-century optimism, Apollo was a success, but one that was 'ahead of its time' on several levels. More Leif Ericson than Columhus, in a sense.
(Arthur Clarke has commented on this quite a bit.)
Can you point me to one of these comments by Clarke? I'd love to read his take... thanks!

First thought when I saw this thread: "Heinlein Was an Optometrist" but that would be
in soc.history.what-if :)
--
Joe Morris Atlanta history blog
***@gmail.com http://atlhistory.com
Leo Sgouros
2018-05-18 14:44:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Morris
Post by Johnny1A
That combination enabled a nearly war-level mobilization of money, resources, and effort in a rather Rube Golderg-esque Lunar project that worked...but worked in a way that wasn't really sustainable. As soon as those political factors no longer lined up, it ended.
The original assumptions of the SF writers back in the day had been more nearly right than the mid-century optimism, Apollo was a success, but one that was 'ahead of its time' on several levels. More Leif Ericson than Columhus, in a sense.
(Arthur Clarke has commented on this quite a bit.)
Can you point me to one of these comments by Clarke? I'd love to read his take... thanks!
First thought when I saw this thread: "Heinlein Was an Optometrist" but that would be
in soc.history.what-if :)
--
Joe Morris Atlanta history blog
I always wackyparse "Helnwein" for Heinlein

More direct visual quotations began to appear in the 1970s. Gottfried Helnwein's painting Boulevard of Broken Dreams (1984) replaces the three patrons with American pop culture icons Humphrey Bogart, Marilyn Monroe, and James Dean, and the attendant with Elvis Presley.[14] According to Hopper scholar Gail Levin, Helnwein connected the bleak mood of Nighthawks with 1950s American cinema and with "the tragic fate of the decade's best-loved celebrities."[15]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nighthawks
Gene Wirchenko
2018-05-18 17:01:56 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 May 2018 14:34:43 +0000 (UTC), ***@gmail.com (Joe
Morris) wrote:

[snip]
Post by Joe Morris
First thought when I saw this thread: "Heinlein Was an Optometrist" but that would be
in soc.history.what-if :)
Why let it get away? Niven wrote a nice Heinlein what-if.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
Gene Wirchenko
2018-05-16 15:49:56 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 5 May 2018 20:20:48 -0500, Lynn McGuire
“Heinlein Was an Optimist” by Sarah Hoyt
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/05/04/heinlein-was-an-optimist/
Yes, he was. Heinlein thought that we would have regular Lunar
transport service by now.
Let us not confuse possibilities with expectations.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko
Loading...