• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

7 Questionable, Yet Widely Accepted Devices in SciFi

and dont forget we can now teleport light a short distance and tractor beams are close to being understood....
 
and dont forget we can now teleport light a short distance and tractor beams are close to being understood....
 
Certainly there's no reason to think that we'll ever have the ability to travel faster than light.

Some of the others on the list are odd choices - the sonic screwdriver is more of a running joke on Doctor Who than an actual gadget with a well-defined purpose.

The blog itself is written in barely competent English.
 
How about a list of underused tech & future developments for a change of pace?

-Humans being depicted in the future without the cybernetic and genetic "improvements" they no doubt will have.

-Language being basically understandable with a few technobabbly words thrown in. The language really should also evolve in another way, not just jargonny neologisms. It will adapt common words to new meanings that will be incomprehensible to anyone who doesn't understand the metaphor.

-The general lack of depicting technological changes that will occur in clothing and accessories. Starfleet shouldn't be going into battle wearing pajamas, unless those pajamas can protect the wearer from extremes in temperature, unbreathable atmospheres, phaser blasts and bat'leths. And long before the 23rd C, we'll be wearing our iPods/Pads/Prongs/Paddles/Probosci. We'll be walking iPorcupines.

-And speaking of Apple's coming domination (and perhaps alteration) of all known reality, I expect capitalism to continue into the indefinite future. Philip K. Dick is one of the few sci fi writers I can think of who did a good job integrating the consumer society into sci fi.
 
Universal translators (and variants).

That's mostly a necessary plot conceit. Magic artificial gravity is the same way (with Babylon 5 doing it right, iirc, but that's it).

FTL travel and cloaking devices are the big two in Star Trek, imo.
 
Transporters too, particularly in the way they're described as working. "Quantum entanglement" doesn't begin to justify this shit. ;)
 
Transporters don't strike me as being so theoretically impossible as some of the others, just extremely unlikely. Although the Heisenberg uncertainty principle probably means I'm wrong here.
 
Neither of those experiments have anything to do with teleportation or "tractor beams" as they're used in Star Trek and other popular science fiction - the "teleportation" is good ol' quantum entanglement again.

Throwing around inappropriate skiffy terms seems to be as good a gag as any to try to get people to read a popular science article online.
 
Throwing around inappropriate skiffy terms seems to be as good a gag as any to try to get people to read a popular science article online.
Seems just retribution for science fiction's habit of inappropriately throwing around science terms.

-Humans being depicted in the future without the cybernetic and genetic "improvements" they no doubt will have.

That's true. Star Trek's more then happy to suggest blind people may get optical enhancements, but balks at the idea of regular people following the hint. Generally when it comes to improvements like that pop sci-fi is most comfortable with it when it's replacing a loss - like Luke Skywalker getting a cybernetic hand to replace his missing hand. Trading in our human parts for something better or wiring our brains to computers is just a little harder of a sell... but I'm not entirely sure it's that underused. Doesn't like every other cyberpunk title toy with this?

-Language being basically understandable with a few technobabbly words thrown in. The language really should also evolve in another way, not just jargonny neologisms. It will adapt common words to new meanings that will be incomprehensible to anyone who doesn't understand the metaphor.
Take English the 18th century, and then have a look at it now. Language two or three hundred years hence would be similarly quite different. And that'd be assuming people still widely speak English or something we'd basically recognize as English.

It's hard to try and feasibly predict what kind of changes we'll see in language, though (I think Firefly's half-hearted nod to Mandarin is about as good as it gets), and it's basically a lot of work geared towards making you harder to understand. It almost seems counterproductive for entertainmnet.

Sure, I'd watch a show where everyone speaks a made-up language and it's all subtitled, but I'm not exactly a representative member of any audience.

-The general lack of depicting technological changes that will occur in clothing and accessories.

On this point I'd say... the little things. Sci-fi is often so busy with the spaceships and the warp drives and the humanoid robots you suddenly notice people are still using phones with cords on them or having notebooks with pen and paper. If we have interdimensional travel, surely we've moved beyond VHS?

I expect capitalism to continue into the indefinite future. Philip K. Dick is one of the few sci fi writers I can think of who did a good job integrating the consumer society into sci fi.
I'd give Pohl and Kornbluth little credit here, too. Granted, The Space Merchants is a little unsubtle in its CAPITALISM BASICALLY RUNS EVERYTHING NOW dystopia, but it's a damn fun read.
 
Christ, cyberpunk writers like Gibson went so far beyond writers like Pohl or Dick - admirable though they might have been - in intuiting and portraying a plausible future for consumer culture and capitalism, as well as real technologies in the fields of medicine, information technology and communications (as opposed to fantasy tech of the 1930s like interstellar spaceships and rayguns) that they nearly redefined the genre.
 
Transporters don't strike me as being so theoretically impossible as some of the others, just extremely unlikely. Although the Heisenberg uncertainty principle probably means I'm wrong here.

dude.... like I said a lot earlier... they can already teleport light....

http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspicks/2011/04/tokyo-team-teleports-light-par.html

and give us 2 or 3 hundred years.... people too...

Neither of those experiments have anything to do with teleportation or "tractor beams" as they're used in Star Trek and other popular science fiction - the "teleportation" is good ol' quantum entanglement again.

I'm with you. I'd believe in FTL travel long before I ever believed in teleportation.

And whether it's possible or not, transporter technology is wildly inconsistent with everything else we see in Trek.
 
Phazers
Storm Trooper’s E-11 Blaster Rifles
The Doctor’s Sonic Screwdriver
Exoskeletons
Mouse Droids from Star Wars
Cloaking devices
Warp Drives

from the blog post
7 Questionable, Yet Widely Accepted Devices in SciFi
http://furiousfanboys.com/2011/03/7-questionable-yet-widely-accepted-devices-in-scifi/

interesting list.
Of course Warp Drives, Cloaking Devices, and Phazer being large technology used by Star Trek we just accept it.

Well as for Warp Drive see Alcubierre Drive which is a therotical device similar to ST Warp Drive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
 
Phazers
Storm Trooper’s E-11 Blaster Rifles
The Doctor’s Sonic Screwdriver
Exoskeletons
Mouse Droids from Star Wars
Cloaking devices
Warp Drives

from the blog post
7 Questionable, Yet Widely Accepted Devices in SciFi
http://furiousfanboys.com/2011/03/7-questionable-yet-widely-accepted-devices-in-scifi/

interesting list.
Of course Warp Drives, Cloaking Devices, and Phazer being large technology used by Star Trek we just accept it.

Ummm... exoskeletons (to some extent) are much closer to reality that most people think... there were news releases around the time of Iron Man 2:

Real Life Iron Man Suit for Soldiers (Wired.com)
Raytheon Develops Iron Man-Like Robotic Suit (LA Times)
Time Magazine names XOS2 Exoskeleton "Most Awesomest" Invention of 2010 (Raytheon)


I'd agree with some others that FTL travel and _especially_ universal translators are far more questionable.
 
I'd agree with some others that FTL travel and _especially_ universal translators are far more questionable.

Why the UT?

If a human can speak several languages once learned, why is so to comprehend a computerised device that once programmed can't do the same sort of translation?
 
It's hard to try and feasibly predict what kind of changes we'll see in language, though (I think Firefly's half-hearted nod to Mandarin is about as good as it gets)

I found Firefly's Mandarin to be pretty awkward, but I only threw out the language thing for the sake of argument, since it would be unworkable to invent a whole new futuristic language and expect a TV audience to sit still for it.

I also don't see why exoskeletons are that fantastical. That would go under the category of "futuristic clothing" that I think is very underrepresented in sci fi, in both the protective and physical/brain enhancing aspects of clothing. I see clothing in the future increasingly being an extension of the body.

Clothing might even merge with transportation technology, and also merge with medical enhancements of the body. Maybe people won't get their bodies enhanced so much as they'll have clothing that will put those enhancements into effect. Why do something permanent when you can get the same effect on a temp basis?

As for the UT, I see that as being part of the general topic of AI, since a truly effective UT would need to have at least some of the same the language learning and processing abilities as the human brain. But I wouldn't call AI underrepresented in sci if. If anything, it's too optimistic.

If a human can speak several languages once learned, why is so to comprehend a computerised device that once programmed can't do the same sort of translation?
Don't underestimate the difficulty of a machine copying what the human brain does. That's why sci fi depictions of AI are too optimistic.
 
If a human can speak several languages once learned, why is so to comprehend a computerised device that once programmed can't do the same sort of translation?

But the universal translator can also instantaneously translate a language it's never heard before. I don't see how we could ever create a device that could do that.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top