Well, maybe we should partition the sandbox a little more then...
See, I classify things like Iron Man
and Star Wars
. As such their value pretty much ends when whatever story is being told is over. I'll watch or read Superman
and I'll watch Star Wars
, but that is the absolute limit of the amount of effort I'll extend towards anything that falls into the realm of fantasy
is science fiction
. And while I am happy to pass time enjoying any given dramatic presentation of Star Trek
, I'm also happy to spend years in school and putting myself thousands of dollars into debt studying science based on the inspiration of Star Trek
. And I've been happy to spend hundreds of hours researching aspects of Star Trek
and sharing my findings with others.
I'm interested in Star Trek
as inspirational science fiction
and I'm very happy to find others who are willing to expend the energy in actually thinking about what could be when projecting forward from our understanding of science today. TOS
(more than any other Star Trek
) worked not to trip itself up by introducing fantasy
elements into itself and it lends itself nicely to different interpretations of what was happening even as our understanding of science has evolved in the intervening years since the show first aired.
If you equate Star Trek
with Iron Man
then I'm not sure why you would expend any effort towards technical endeavors. I do because the show holds up exceptionally well to technical scrutiny and that for many people this aspect of Star Trek
inspires them to take other elements a step further in trying to actually make what they see a reality.
In my eyes the only fantasy
aspect of Star Trek
is the alien races. Otherwise, it is the benchmark by which all other science fiction
is measured against. And as I don't watch any other science fiction
) series with any regularity, I'd have to say nothing since Star Trek
has quite measured up to it.
The fact that I'm motivated to work on this project given the vast amounts of real world
mathematics and physics knowledge that I have should speak volumes about how well made Star Trek
is (specially TOS
). And the biggest mistake made by later Star Trek
series (and why my interest in them has fallen off over the years) is their attempt to do exactly the type of fantasy science
that you seem to see in all of Star Trek
. By not trying to over explain everything (or explain many things at all), TOS
left the science of the show open to future interpretation rather than linking it to pseudoscience or dateable technobabble. The more real world
mathematics and physics I learn, the more I'm pushed back towards TOS and away from the other parts of Star Trek
for anything other than a mindless pass time of watching TV.
Now, while I may be using the black box
analogy in place of attempts at applying real science in my plans, I can guarantee that I do think about what might be involved in how those aspects work. And as long as no one expects me to include either my ideas or the ideas of others put forward here, I don't see what there is a problem discussing this stuff. After all, it is understood that other well most likely use what I'm putting forward here on their own projects and I highly doubt that other people will restrict themselves in the same way I am on my project.
So in this sandbox the rules should be considered that what toys you bring are brought to share, and if you don't want to play with someone else's toys you don't have to. But not wanting to play with certain toys is not a good reason to drive them out of the sandbox.
... where the sandbox
in that last paragraph is this thread and the toys
are ideas and concepts of others expressed here (just in case that started to get a little too abstract