Non-Trek Technobabble

[Bry_Sinclair]

I'm just throwing this question out there to see if there is any sort of consensus on the subject.

Trek is not hard-science sci-fi, with a lot of technobabble and that thrown in to make things sound plausible within its own universe, but personally I prefer the 'fiction' element to sci-fi as opposed to the 'science'. Though the Trek universe is established as has its own rules for what it lives by.

What about other sci-fi stories?

I'm looking at dabbling with a non-Trek sci-fi story and am wondering how much is too much with regards to the ship's technology, especially when it comes to the basics, such as propulsion. Would most people accept that the ship in question utilised a form of 'hyperdrive' for crossing vast differences. It's a staple of the genre, with everyone knowing that it provides faster-than-light travel, or would there be a demand for knowing just what fueled the drive, the power it generated, the nuts and bolts of how it worked?

Thoughts, comments, questions?

 

[Sgt_G]

Well, without some Babble-Science, Sci-Fi becomes just Fi. But, yeah, too much B.S. means not enough fiction = story plot. You need to find a good a balance.

 

[TheLoneRedshirt]

Star Wars has done quite well without explaining the technology behind the "hyperdrive motivator," aside from the fact that said technology seems less than reliable.

At the other end of the spectrum is the Sy Fi channel's "The Expanse." I was very impressed with season one. The sci fi seems to focus on plausible technology (no transporters, having to deal with zero gee with thrust and braking, etc.). No FTL drive though they fudge a bit with the Epstein Drive - a fusion drive that is highly efficient and pushes spacecraft at a fair percentage of the speed of light.

 

[Count Zero]

Some stories are more about the science or the tech, others are about the story/themes being explored and both can work pretty well. I guess it depends on what kind of story you want to tell. Generally, going into "manual mode" is off-putting.

 

[Timewalker]

I'm just throwing this question out there to see if there is any sort of consensus on the subject.

Trek is not hard-science sci-fi, with a lot of technobabble and that thrown in to make things sound plausible within its own universe, but personally I prefer the 'fiction' element to sci-fi as opposed to the 'science'. Though the Trek universe is established as has its own rules for what it lives by.

What about other sci-fi stories?

I'm looking at dabbling with a non-Trek sci-fi story and am wondering how much is too much with regards to the ship's technology, especially when it comes to the basics, such as propulsion. Would most people accept that the ship in question utilised a form of 'hyperdrive' for crossing vast differences. It's a staple of the genre, with everyone knowing that it provides faster-than-light travel, or would there be a demand for knowing just what fueled the drive, the power it generated, the nuts and bolts of how it worked?

Thoughts, comments, questions?

Classic Doctor Who's most well-known technobabble phrase is "reverse the polarity of the neutron flow."

I much prefer it to the childish "wibbley-wobbley-timey-wimey stuff" babytalk of nuWho.

Technobabble should, of course, be internally consistent with whatever setting you're writing in. I'm currently dissecting F.M. Busby's Hulzein novels for a fanfic project, and discovered that even though he made a valiant effort at creating an in-story universe where it was possible to have an interstellar economy using STL ships, he still messed up his calculations regarding when people left one world, arrived on another, how much time had passed, and so on. It's not the sort of thing I noticed my first or second time through the series (I've read it many times during the last 30 years), but after the 4th or 6th time, I started noticing details that resulted in a "waitaminute, this doesn't add up right..." reaction.

So if you're going to make STL and relativity an important part of the plot with regard to peoples' relative ages, both on a ship and how it compares to people left behind on planets, you need to be very careful with your calculations.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

So if you're going to make STL and relativity an important part of the plot with regard to peoples' relative ages, both on a ship and how it compares to people left behind on planets, you need to be very careful with your calculations.

Relativity makes my head hurt so whenever I do get my finger out and get writing then I'm not going hard-science as, in my mind anyway, it makes space travel and a life away from Earth a very bleak and depressing idea as characters will never return "home" (they may get back to Earth but it won't be the one they left). I would be drawing more upon the FTL concepts seen in other sci-fi shows/films (such as Trek, Gate, Wars, B5, FarScape, BSG), but I still need to work out just what that will be and the mechanics behind it.

 

[psCargile]

If the technology resolves the plot, then it needs to be explained. Otherwise, good descriptions of how technology is used will suffice. Don't try to impress readers with your gizmo, impress them with how it's used.

 

[sojourner]

It depends on the function of the technology in the story. In non-scifi an example would be something akin to "Jack, got in the car, put it in 'drive', and drove to the opera". You don't need to describe how the gasoline engine works to turn the wheels and propel it down the road. Now, if that same car broke down requiring him to repair it or miss his date with his love to be, yeah, it would be important to describe enough of how it works to know what has gone wrong. Or, if, to take it to an extreme, he encounters a bridge that is too narrow for the car, you would have to describe enough of the car to get across the nature of the problem.

The only real issue is to make the use of said technology consistent. If you can only go 10 light years in a month in one chapter, yet cross the galaxy in a week in the next you'd better have a good reason why.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

I'll need to work out the rules of my technology and will definitely keep them consistent, one of the things that drive me nuts in Trek is the lack of it at times--though I would be the only one there.

@sojourner I now feel really bad now...all those Bothans! Noooooooooo!

 

[sojourner]

You want to go "nuts" over inconsistency? Try watching Legends of Tomorrow. The writers can't keep their time travel rules consistent from scene to scene, nevermind for an entire episode.

 

[Sgt_G]

That why I fall back on Star Fleet Battles a lot to keep technology working the same start to finish.