General Discussions

Mandel Production art & the One System/ Many Systems debate

POSTED BY: LupinAddams
UPDATED: Thursday, July 15, 2004 12:04
VIEWED: 6790
PAGE 2 of 2

Thursday, July 15, 2004 5:53 AM

I'm not 100% sure about this, but in that episode with the reavers Mal says something about them living in the edge of something, and I think it was the galaxy.. Cause living on the edge of the system doesn't sound very much.. Crazy?..
And anyway, if it's just one system, what stops the alliance from taking a buncha ships and mowing everything down? I mean, it has limits..
The whole one system idea doesn't make sense.. It just makes you think you're very smart figuring it out.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Thursday, July 15, 2004 6:13 AM

how it looks to me )and I have no idea if this works scientifically) is that it is multiple systems that are in orbit of one really gigantic star. If our solar system orbits the center of the galaxy I guess it's semi plausible that multiple star systems could orbit a giant star. it just has an extra wheel within the wheel so to speak

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Thursday, July 15, 2004 8:58 AM

I continue to support the multiple-star system/star cluster theory, which this supports. Doesn't support it exclusively, mind you, since this is pretty open to interpretation, but does support it.

Kozure, I fully agree with you about the science of Firefly. Other than gravity control, which you basically need to make a TV show set in space, the science is all quite within the realm of the possible. The habitable zone issue is exactly why I started thinking about multiple stars... but faster than light travel doesn't seem any better, does it?

Thus, I'm pretty convinced that the evidence indicates a number of stars in close proximity to one another-- close enough to be considered part of a single, multi-star system, but far enough apart that they don't muck with the orbits of each other's planets.

Horrid, as I understand it a multiple star system could include any number of stars in all sorts of configurations. However, I have no idea if any star is big enough for other mid-range stars to orbit like that, and such a star would be a poor choice to colonize near in any case.

As I look at it, that's a lot of stars for one system. Whether a system or a cluster, though, I think it very unlikely that Serenity travels faster than light.

____________________________
"You're mean. Firefly's making me reconsider my lifelong devotion to Star Trek." --My mother

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kozure:
I've always liked the fact that Firefly treats science further to the "hard" science side of sci-fi (where 2001 might get a 9 out of 10, for example) rather than the Star Warsy loud space explosions and light sabre school of "soft" science.

Not that I have anything against "soft" science sci-fi, but it was nice to have a show where things like oxygen, momentum and vaccuum played important roles in the plot from time to time.



Great Point....in fact, it was the fact that there was NO sound on the space scenes that really won my husband and I over to the series ("At last! A show that respects intelligence!")

"We gotta go to that crappy town where I'M a hero..."

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Thursday, July 15, 2004 12:04 PM

Don't know if anyones mentioned the 'lines' linking the planets and such like.

Now do those indicate majour trade routes? alliance patrols or, possibly, some sort of jumpgate/point tech?

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME