Haters of Star Trek: Discovery - wtf?
- Thread starter SpaceLama
- Start date
I don't know anyone that thinks The Expanse is any more of a fantasy than Star Trek.
Try watching it, it's a nonsense fantasy show.
I do watch it. I've seen the entire first season and the first two episodes of the second (the rest are on my DVR). The universe building is first rate and far more "science" than Star Trek on its best day.
I love Star Trek, it introduced me to sci-fi. But, there are many things out there that have surpassed its "science".
That is the right way to do things.
How charming.
That sort of thing would certainly never provoke me into trying to break his nose. You know, by accident.
Indeed. It may not be 100% scientifically accurate, but it certainly feels more real than Star Trek ever did.
Star Trek is fun and entertaining, but I certainly didn't watch it for the science.
I shouldn't have to, since it's beyond obvious. With the hundreds of conceptual studies on asteroid mining conducted over the last four decades and the actual multi-million dollar corporations that have commenced preparations for asteroid mining years ago, not one study demonstrated even a most basic need for any in-situ human involvement in the process. The asteroids are going to be captured and processed by automated factories in space, printing out structures, devices, processed fuels of any and all sorts - again - without a single human being ever having to be in any proximity to the Asteroid Belt. Deep Space Industries (deepspaceindustries.com) and Planetary Resources (planetaryresources.com) are real life manifestations of these studies that have existed for many years now, in the early 21 century. To suggest that we will have actual human miners doing the work centuries from now, when the Solar System has been colonized, is preposterous and laughable. Especially since these stories have been written at the time when thousands of engineers have already solved these problems. The most outrageous technobabble premise in the Trek universe is more believable than the fantasy premise of The Expanse. I expect any serious Sci Fi writers to at the very least conduct a 10 minute google search before embarking on such a premise, clearly the writers of The Expanse had failed to put any effort into the realism of their premise.
The Rick and Morty show is more realistic than The Expanse. I'd cut it some slack if it was written in the 1920's, but the first novel came out in 2011! No excuses, whatsoever.
Last edited:
My five minute Google search produced thre articles, one from Forbes, one from Tor and one from "The Wired" and all spoke positively about the science of the Expanse, and the fact that the show runner has a Ph.D in physics, and the show was featured on the cover of "Physics Today" as the first science fiction piece since the '70s. In addition, it was cited that the show depicted Ceres, an asteroid, quite accurately. THe main question was a matter of terraforming tech, rather than mining tech.
Tor.com said:
Some one should let the Expanse know how unrealistic they are.
Sources:
"The Wired."
"Forbes"
"Tor"
Last edited:
Where is the rebuttal to using human miners for asteroid mining hundreds of years in the future, or ever, for that matter?
It doesn't take much ingenuity to accurately depict the dwarf planet after it's been recently explored, a child can do it after reading a Wikipedia article. It does, however, take incredible stupidity to imagine human miners there in the distant future. I concede that Star Trek also had some miners here and there, but it wasn't the premise of the show nor was there much focus on this idiocy.
By the way, seems like your googling skills leave much to be desired, I've provided the two relevant links for the said companies in the post you quoted, should you wish to acquaint yourself with the prospects of asteroid mining in the near future. You can also find articles and talks with Peter H. Diamandis on the subject.
It doesn't take much ingenuity to accurately depict the dwarf planet after it's been recently explored, a child can do it after reading a Wikipedia article. It does, however, take incredible stupidity to imagine human miners there in the distant future. I concede that Star Trek also had some miners here and there, but it wasn't the premise of the show nor was there much focus on this idiocy.
By the way, seems like your googling skills leave much to be desired, I've provided the two relevant links for the said companies in the post you quoted, should you wish to acquaint yourself with the prospects of asteroid mining in the near future. You can also find articles and talks with Peter H. Diamandis on the subject.
Last edited:
I find it far more realistic in presentation AND content than any Star Trek, ever.
You find it realistic that in the distant future, after we've colonized the Solar System, we'll go back to using manpower for mining operations in the Asteroid Belt? Sort of going back to 1950s for kicks and fun.
I think I will regret responding to this... but to be fair, the "colonization" encompasses Mars and the Asteroid Belt.
In addition, humans are smarter, cheaper, and easier to create than any robot, a fact that I doubt will change much in the next century or so.
So, yeah, I can see them being used as miners. If that's the big hold up, may I remind you that in Star Trek, they also depicted sentient beings as miners (on several occasions).
The reason why emerging asteroid mining companies today are not planning on using humans is because there is absolutely no need for them and to use them would actually dramatically increase the costs of these operations, requiring the maintenance of life support systems. The people who have invested billions into these companies did their research, unlike the writers of this fantasy show.
That's a nice factoid, but as I mentioned both The Expanse and Star Trek feature human/sentient mining, so if that is a qualifier in your mind, they both fail.
It is a TV show. Humans are there for the drama they provide. Much like they are on Star Trek.
True, but Star Trek only features miners in a few isolated episodes, it's not the premise of the entire show.
Indeed, but it makes every episode of that show preposterously unrealistic. At least with Star Trek there is a good quantity of episodes that explore ideas that could be manifested in some form in the future.
Similar threads
- Poll
