Could Sci Fi Be Based On Real Technology?

originally posted by: nonspecific
Most scifi writers are simply that but that does not mean there are not a few out there that may know more, I can not prove this and you can not disprove it


but I would have a better shot in an all out shoot out ...

Well, really, no, because as the asserter of the statement "Some sci-fi writers know more", with "more" being some secret hidden truth, the burden of proof is on YOU.

I'm not required to prove there's NOT, because that's impossible. Instead, you have to prove there is. Heck, it being gray area, I don't need proof. A fairly decent example of one would do as a start.

Now, if you want to tighten the scope to something more manageable than all time and every work, there have been a few books that fall into the scope of sci-fi where the writer was military or former military, and there was something from "work" in there. Nothing on the scope of SG1 wormholes. But small things. Ralph Peters wrote a book I was almost surprised got published. He gimmicked it up enough, but a number of things in the book are real projects, or you can at least tell what projects he's deriving his macguffins from.

I've seen a couple others that were worse, generally from aerospace guys. But by the time they were crusted up with novel trappings, it wouldn't have caught your eye if you didn't know what project they were co-opting for their plot line.

In each case I think it was "Hey, I'm working on this thing, what if instead of being from Lockheed we say the Incas invented it, and then its discovered by some guy who does THIS with it?" rather than someone receiving an order to drop weird hints into their next book.

Personally, I always wanted to make a movie that was nothing but easter eggs and oblique project and old mission references wrapped up in enough plot and decorations to make it entertaining, but so godawful a leak that you'd have everyone running in circles when the thing hit the theaters and too f'n late to get it back.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

When you write Sci Fi, you try and make your plot devices logically consistent, even if the technology is a bit "out there".

Not all Sci Fi devices become technology (where are our TriCorders and medical sensor beds?).

Not all technologies are predicted in Sci Fi (I mean, prior to DARPA's networking efforts, who proposed something like the Internet?)

If there is a need and a buck to be made, we will give it a shot and try to build the technology.

Let's take computers as an example. We found many uses for them but they were big and took up rooms. So we could easily imagine that one day, they would be smaller, perhaps the size of a suitcase or washing machine. Remember the size of the computer in early Star Trek was still big and non portable. Yes they had data tablets and communicators but they were dumber devices than we have today.

I'd say Sci Fi has very little input into the creation of new tech. They just happen to be parallel processes, simply synchronicity.

a reply to: chr0naut

synchronicity is excatly what a covery group would use to steer the minds of the masses but not without coincidences

really i see that being discreet and unknown is the best means of control that any group with mind bending tech could use.

that is like how they killed off the buffalo herds. they would shoot the lingerers so not to upset the herd

originally posted by: deadeyedick

that is like how they killed off the buffalo herds. they would shoot the lingerers so not to upset the herd

How do you know there WAS any herd? Maybe the tales of buffalo herds in the past are there to fool you...

OK so we have the Matrix movies telling us this is a generated reality, then we have real scientists finding real self repairing computer codes in the very fabric of our reality? WTF?

No matter what the self repairing binary computer codes are in our reality no getting around that, so we may actually be in some sort of simulation of a sort.

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
OK so we have the Matrix movies telling us this is a generated reality, then we have real scientists finding real self repairing computer codes in the very fabric of our reality? WTF?

No matter what the self repairing binary computer codes are in our reality no getting around that, so we may actually be in some sort of simulation of a sort.

Well, there's not really. Sort of like there really isn't any "solid light" or "liquid light".

What Gates is on about is that a graphical form of higher order algebra, called "adinkras", in one particular case has an appearance that's similar to a Hamming tree. That's a far cry from "self repairing computer code embedded in reality". But you have to understand what a Hamming code is, and how it's not magical, and what a Gell-Mann diagram is, and why THAT was interesting, and a little graph theory.

As Gates says himself, although all the OMG!!MatriX!!11!!! CTers conveniently omit it - " If that sounds crazy to you – well, you could be right. It is certainly possible to overstate mathematical links between different systems: as the physicist Eugene Wigner pointed out in 1960, just because a piece of mathematics is ubiquitous and appears in the description of several distinct systems does not necessarily mean that those systems are related to each other. The number pi, after all, occurs in the measurement of circles as well as in the measurement of population distributions. This does not mean that populations are related to circles."

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

OK so we have the Matrix movies telling us this is a generated reality, then we have real scientists finding real self repairing computer codes in the very fabric of our reality? WTF?



No matter what the self repairing binary computer codes are in our reality no getting around that, so we may actually be in some sort of simulation of a sort.

Well, there's not really. Sort of like there really isn't any "solid light" or "liquid light".



What Gates is on about is that a graphical form of higher order algebra, called "adinkras", in one particular case has an appearance that's similar to a Hamming tree. That's a far cry from "self repairing computer code embedded in reality". But you have to understand what a Hamming code is, and how it's not magical, and what a Gell-Mann diagram is, and why THAT was interesting, and a little graph theory.



As Gates says himself, although all the OMG!!MatriX!!11!!! CTers conveniently omit it - " If that sounds crazy to you – well, you could be right. It is certainly possible to overstate mathematical links between different systems: as the physicist Eugene Wigner pointed out in 1960, just because a piece of mathematics is ubiquitous and appears in the description of several distinct systems does not necessarily mean that those systems are related to each other. The number pi, after all, occurs in the measurement of circles as well as in the measurement of population distributions. This does not mean that populations are related to circles."

Not only is it self repairing but its Claude Shannon's own creation, "Doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code," first invented by Claude Shannon in the 1940's, has been discovered embedded within the equations of superstring theory!



The code may even be something like a broadcast over our entire reality which we see in the movie, "THEY LIVE"

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

Not only is it self repairing but its Claude Shannon's own creation, "Doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code," first invented by Claude Shannon in the 1940's, has been discovered embedded within the equations of superstring theory!

You know how I can tell you don't understand error correction codes, or physics in general?

No, no it's not "embedded in the equations of superstring theory". You DO know you can read Gates' own ruminations on this and not have to depend on youtubers or CT sites to mangle it even worse, don't you?

hint: you can't "beam out" Hamming trees at reality to correct it. (facepalm)

So here are 5 basic things we hae that are in sci fi movies. Interesting to say the least perhaps its the tip of the iceberg!

Here they talk a little about 3d printers, not exactly a replicator but its better than nothing.

Something tells me that the "REPLICATORS" are extreamly possible!

Here is some fun sci fi video on how Star Trek's technology has influenced today's technology.

Forgive me for not being able to cite the reference (I will try to find it) but I read what was alleged to be a document from MJ12 if memory serves me correctly. After a lengthy dissertation it finally suggested that: "...evidence of aliens and alien technology should only be released following a lengthy period of conditioning using the popular media of the time to prevent widespread panic."

Science fiction and science fact usually walk the same path, one just slightly ahead of the other.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
Forgive me for not being able to cite the reference (I will try to find it) but I read what was alleged to be a document from MJ12 if memory serves me correctly. After a lengthy dissertation it finally suggested that: "...evidence of aliens and alien technology should only be released following a lengthy period of conditioning using the popular media of the time to prevent widespread panic."



Science fiction and science fact usually walk the same path, one just slightly ahead of the other.

Oh yeah I remember reading something like that on some MJ 12 papers back on alienshift good stuff.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

i also love sci fi, esp if it is mixed with fantasy...
laser gun and mecha meets swords and magics, for example...
steam punk also not bad

sometimes i imagine that in some realms (maybe in the other side of universe or parallel reality), beings can 'defy' gravity like superman....
or maybe the reason we have 'heavy form' because of too much gravity press applied by celestial beings like planets.

maybe in the ancient times, we had 'lighter bodies' (so light that it cannot be perceived by eyes from material dimension) and we could fly or did whatever we like, maybe because there was no moon or maybe this planet only have smaller moons. if it was true maybe that is why we cannot find the traces of mankind from jurassic era, because 'light' bodies dont fosilize...
anyway...

back to the topic...
i believe all the imaginations or ideas comes from 'the source', i sometimes perceive it like a boundless canvas
maybe all ideas are just collection of memories/experiences we all shared throughout many life experience (call it reincarnation).
when i watched star wars, i did not find beam rifles or laser blades to be awesome... even teleportation from star trek did not surprise me... maybe it is because our 'past experience', that we feel some familiarity with those technologies.

peace

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

i like 'rage against heavens' stories, and i find them quite interesting.
for some unknown reason many JRPGs have gods and goddesses as the main villains lol and the most popular antagonistic celebrity is OT god.
if you like such stories, jap vid games will offer more variations.

peace

a reply to: ignorant_ape

but sometimes
those imaginations are just retelling of another stories/myths in different formats that can be accepted by sci-fi audience.
for example: piloting x-wings instead of riding dragons.
or maybe death star instead of vimana.

peace

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Could Sci Fi Be Based On Real Technology?

Not real technology but real science.

I'm not really talking about what's called 'sci-fi' nowadays, though. I'm talking about real science fiction — mostly books and magazine stories, not movies and TV shows. 'Hard' science fiction stories are usually based on a scientifically valid premise. It could be something as exotic as the effects of time dilation,[1] as mundane as the caste structure of an ant colony,[2] or as obscure as the mechanical effects of liquid surface tension on the lives of microscopic organisms.[3] The writer then creates a setting and plot in which this known fact of science has unexpected consequences for the characters involved. There is an entire school of science-fiction consisting of stories like these.

Some science-fiction writers, the ones who write about the near future, do often include experimental or even purely conceptual technologies in their stories. Arthur C. Clarke was famous for this and William Gibson is. Neal Stephenson does it quite a lot in his novel Anathem. But this isn't about disclosure, it's about visualizing the future, and maybe inspiring some researcher or inventor to make it happen.

Finally, it should be noted that there is a strong connexion between hard science-fiction writers and the 'military-industrial complex'. Writers like Robert Heinlein and Jerry Pournelle were active advocates for Lt. Gen. Daniel O. Graham's 'high frontier' concept, which gave rise to Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (aka 'Star Wars'), while Pournelle and his occasional co-writing partner Larry Niven were, IIRC, advisors on the SDI programme itself. Arthur Clarke, despite heavy pressure from Heinlein, Pournelle and others, refused to endorse SDI, a stance that estranged him from many of his former friends in the American SF community and defence establishment. More on this.

I have a friend who works for a large microprocessor firm. His job is to predict what technologies people will be using in twenty years' time so that his design people can start working on processors that will deliver the required functionality. He regularly talks to science-fiction writers and other 'thought leaders' to gain insight into possible technological futures.

As for the OP's speculation, I imagine new technologies are concept-tested on TV and in movies from time to time to gauge their acceptability to the public. But that would be done with an eye to future marketing opportunities — nothing especially sinister about it.

References

1. Poul Anderson, Tau Zero
   
   
2. Ed Bryant, GiANTS
   
   
3. James Blish, Surface Tension

I think this movie could be an interesting technology idea, just take the villiany and computer haters out of the plot make it into a black project and whaaalaa a whole new ball game.

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Many more chose to pursue careers in aerospace after Gene Roddenberry brought us Star Trek. Many of these creative people may have also added their own ideas to what's really "out there".

(raises hand) I always wanted to be Scotty.

So, there's part of what happened in my case.

"The best diplomat I know is a fully-activated phaser bank." - Montgomery Scott (TOS: "A Taste of Armageddon")

Back when I was a kid I wanted to be Spock. As a man, Kirk has his appeal....

i.kinja-img.com...

BTW, are there any "diplomatic negotiations" with little Vladimir or ""L'Il"" Kim these days?