Gravity?

POSTED BY: Quill
UPDATED: Thursday, October 24, 2002 19:59
VIEWED: 8609
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE

QUILL

Friday, October 18, 2002 11:05 AM

D'you think they'll explain how Serenity generates a gravity field? I don't remember the Star Trek shows ever explaining that one, though I by no means saw all of 'em.

Inside every cynic there's an idealist desperately yearning to be let out, and when they are let out they're usually a real pain and cause all sorts of trouble. --Chris Boucher

SHUGGIE

Friday, October 18, 2002 11:30 AM

I think it's a mistake to try to explain technology that doesn't exist yet.

Shug

KALIMAC

Friday, October 18, 2002 2:48 PM

I think Star Trek mumbled some lines about "graviton generators" (gravitons being the theoretical and somewhat imaginary particles responsible for carrying the gravitic field).

I don't really require much more explanation than that. Just give me a line about "Heisenberg compensators" and I'm all set!

Keep Flying

UFO

Sunday, October 20, 2002 3:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Quill:
D'you think they'll explain how Serenity generates a gravity field?

Nope. This show is so far removed from the definition of "science fiction" that there would be no point. It's a Fox show, thus...turn off brain, and watch.

RINGWRAITH

Sunday, October 20, 2002 4:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by UFO:
Quote:
Originally posted by Quill:
D'you think they'll explain how Serenity generates a gravity field?
Nope. This show is so far removed from the definition of "science fiction" that there would be no point. It's a Fox show, thus...turn off brain, and watch.

Since I've been on a J. Michael Straczynski trip the past few weeks (getting all geared up for the release of Babylon 5 on DVD) I found a quote of his that most people (especially here and at some USENET groups) should pay heed to:

"I've said it elsewhere, but I'll say it here: I've never bought into the
strict definitions of what SF is. If it happens in the future, on a space
station, involving starships, it's SF."

and again

"Also, I've always considered B5 speculative fiction, which isn't as
narrow as hard-core/technobabble science fiction (or, more properly, some
aspects of that area, since there has been a goodly amount of hard SF that
I've enjoyed and continue to enjoy). To me, SF (either way) isn't about the
hardware, isn't about reversing the polarity on the tachyon emitter to reflux
the framitz. It's looking to the future, and positing social and political
and religious questions. How will society change by the year 2258? How will
the government work? How will we handle the development of telepaths? How
will we get along with other life forms? What will commerce be like? That
is an *absolutely* valid definition of SF that has been showcased in some of
the best stories written in the SF genre. I'd point you to "A Canticle for
Liebowitz" as just one example of one of the most famous books in SF, without
a *lick* of hardware/tech in it."

I know some completely dislike The Great Maker but his points are very valid. Firefly is as much sci-fi as Star Trek, Lexx, Battlestar: Gallactica and Space: 1999. So if Joss Whedon doesn't want to explain how everything works (or why) I'm all for it. As long as the episodes are well-written (and so far they are, IMO) then I'm satisfied. I mean really, is there any TRUE definition of what science fiction actually is?

************************************************
"How will this end?"
"In fire."
--Babylon 5, 'The Coming of Shadows'
************************************************

TECHBOY

Sunday, October 20, 2002 5:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ringwraith:
... So if Joss Whedon doesn't want to explain how everything works (or why) I'm all for it. As long as the episodes are well-written (and so far they are, IMO) then I'm satisfied. I mean really, is there any TRUE definition of what science fiction actually is?

We could go to an extreme and let the gadgets be the stars, like "Lost in Space" or "Land of the Giants".

I do believe that I did see a spinning section in the center of Serenity once. Maybe that is what generates the gravity.

================================================
Today, as I was having lunch, I was watching the birds in the trees and wondered what it would be like if birds knew that people didn't like being shat on. As I was thinking this, a bird shat on my sandwich. Perhaps I knew too much...

-Simon Travaglia
If you like that, check this out.[url= http://bofh.ntk.net/]

QUILL

Monday, October 21, 2002 11:38 AM

If you're thinking of the ring generating gravity by spinning (is that centrifugal or centripital? I can never remember), it would only generate gravity for the ring itself. If it's powering the gravity generator, then anything's possible.

Frankly, it doesn't matter to me whether they explain it or not. I would like to hear the explanation, but I can certainly live without it. I was curious as to what other people thought.

Inside every cynic there's an idealist desperately yearning to be let out, and when they are let out they're usually a real pain and cause all sorts of trouble. --Chris Boucher

TECHBOY

Monday, October 21, 2002 1:32 PM

Quote:

Quill wrote:

...Frankly, it doesn't matter to me whether they explain it or not. I would like to hear the explanation, but I can certainly live without it. I was curious as to what other people thought.

I couldn't agree more. As I stated in another post, unlike "Lost in Space", it's not about the gadgets.

JMS seemd to do the best about the science, and again it wasn't a central theme. In fact, I remeber a scene in an episode of B5 where we're following along with a couple of techs, and one is moving a glowing floor buffer around. They start debating the reason why they have to do that, and sounded a lot like the arguments the geek trio had last season on Buffy.

================================================
Today, as I was having lunch, I was watching the birds in the trees and wondered what it would be like if birds knew that people didn't like being shat on. As I was thinking this, a bird shat on my sandwich. Perhaps I knew too much...

-Simon Travaglia
If you like that, check this out.[url= http://bofh.ntk.net/]

BUGDOG

Tuesday, October 22, 2002 1:40 AM

It's magic. Like the internet and TV.

~bugdog
alt.sex.fetish.domination.help-desk
"Get on your knees and right click NOW!"

LOONYTOON

Tuesday, October 22, 2002 4:51 AM

Perhaps this is to simple an explanation for all the people that want to debate the techie crap, but wash could put the ship in a slow barrel roll(not snap roll) that if timed right would create an artificial gravity.

1 2 NEXT PAGE