Commercial Space Redux: Asteroid Mining
We have seen in the last couple years the expansion of space exploration outside the realm of state projects, beginning with the space tourism business which has been (or will be) taking off at some point.
Now, led by two Google execs, a group of billionaires have formed Planetary Resources, a company that will send ships into space to mine asteroids, bringing precious resources back to Earth. However, the question arises: Whose property is the asteroid and everything in it?
View from one end of Eros across the gouge on its side towards the opposite end.(greyscale) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
The most relevant law is the Outer Space Treaty (1967), which established that no nation could claim sovereignty over any part of space, or essentially anything off Earth. However, this Cold-War era agreement is not relevant today; it is clear that the it’s purpose was to not allow the United States or Soviet Union full hegemony over the realm of space while the rest of the world just watched. It is meant to pertain to states themselves, not corporations. The treaty permits commercial or business use.
However, the other end of the spectrum involves a 2001 court case. The year before, an American man named Gergory Nemitz had registered a claim to the asteroid Eros, despite never having been there himself to see it. When NASA sent a satellite, he wrote a letter demanding “parking fees,” but was declined. It wasn’t without a laugh, though, I’m sure.
According to NASA, the Outer Space Treaty includes states and all their nationals, meaning that Nemitz fell under the terms of the treaty his country signed, and thus could not claim the asteroid. By this token, anything that Planetary Resources could bring back would be the property of humankind, not the company.
The difference being, of course, that Nemitz had not actually been to Eros, and thus had no claim to it. Human history is full of examples of individuals or corporations claiming lands or resources, but at each time they went and found them themselves. Columbus claimed Hispaniola for Spain when he got there, and not before. Just because we know something exists doesn’t mean that anyone can claim it as their property. If this corporation spends the money to build a spacecraft and gets to Eros, they should be able to claim it, and try to make whatever money they can from it. Probably not much in the way of resources, but in publicity, they will make a killing.
Related articles
- Consortium investigates mining nearby asteroids for rare materials (seeker401.wordpress.com)
- Planetary Resources Confirms Plan To Mine Asteroids (science.slashdot.org)
- Private firm plans to initiate ‘multibillion dollar’ asteroid mining industry (rawstory.com)
- Planetary Resources Asteroid Mining Video (nextbigfuture.com)
- Planetary Resources will have Personal space Telescopes that are ten to 100 times cheaper by 2014 and then asteroid mining by 2017 (nextbigfuture.com)
- Property rights in space? It’s debatable (cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com)
JOHN CARTER and Edgar Rice Burroughs
Walt Disney Pictures‘ film John Carter, due out March 9, marks the 100th anniversary of the first appearance of the character in a story by famed author Edgar Rice Burroughs.
The film is based on Burroughs’ A Princess of Mars (1917) and stars Taylor Kitsch, Lynn Collins, Willem Dafoe and Thomas Haden Church, and directed by Andrew Stanton.
Burroughs, especially known for his character Tarzan, wrote 11 novels of the Barsoom series, the name for Mars in the novels. His vision of Mars was based on incorrect scientific notions of the time, mostly that of Percival Lowell. Lowell and Rice’s Mars is a dying planet, formerly like Earth but in a rapid state of decline. The scarce water is distributed by canals, the existence of which is based on astronomical visions of canals running across the red planet’s surface.
Burroughs’ technology, especially for a traditionally non-science fiction writer, is fairly extraordinary. He described technology similar to televisions, radios, fax machines, radiation-based weapons, genetic manipulation, and terraforming. He also described aerial battles between fleets of aircraft not 30 years after the Wright brothers‘ famous flight, as well as a plant which manufactures new atmosphere to replace that which is being lost on the planet.
It is only the best science fiction which can be read throughout time and even when many of it’s ideas are outdated. It takes even better science fiction to make movies out of, even one hundred years later. I’ll be looking forward to seeing the new film of one of the classics of science fiction.
Related articles
- ‘John Carter’ Featurette: An Introduction to the Classic Sci-Fi Franchise (screenrant.com)
- ‘John Carter’ Clip: Taylor Kitsch Evades Barbarians, Jumps Off A Clip (VIDEO) (news.moviefone.com)
- 7 New Images from JOHN CARTER (collider.com)
Heinlein’s TIME ENOUGH FOR LOVE
Finished Time Enough For Love (1973) a while ago, so I’ve owed you my review. Warning: I have not held back much as far as spoilers go, so if you haven’t read the book and don’t want to hear the ending, don’t read past the marked point.
Time Enough For Love is Heinlein‘s longest work, and probably his most epic. It is essentially written as part of the biography of Lazarus Long, a recurring character throughout Heinlein’s Future History novels (Methuselah’s Children and To Sail Beyond the Sunset, as well as a series of short stories). Long is the oldest living human being at over two thousand years old, the product of both genetic engineering in the 20th century and rejuvenation technology thereafter. The story is based around Long’s lying on his deathbed and one of his important descendants wishes that his entire life story be recorded (or at least the important parts). They wish to record it because he is “the Senior” and as the oldest living human being is considered the wisest. So Long begins, telling of his life, in no particular chronological order.
SPOILERS!!!
Image via Wikipedia
Now when we get into the themes and details is where it gets interesting. Free love, nudism, etc, are common themes for Heinlein, but in Time Enough For Love he takes it to another level, making today’s nudists look like Republicans and Oedipus Rex look like the average suburban husband. The summary on the back of my copy states that “it is the story of a man so in love with Life that he refused to stop living it; and so in love with Time that he became his own ancestor.” However, this statement is not backed up by anything in the book, sadly. The final part of the novel involves his going back in time to his childhood to meet his family, and in the process falls in love with his mother, but at this period he is already a child and meets himself, making it impossible that he should have become his own ancestor as the summary says.
Not that Heinlein should have needed to make the book more strange and slightly awkward by today’s moral standards. At one point he explains scientifically how twin brother and sister born of the same father and mother could be genetically unrelated, and then proceeds to have them marry, have children, and live long happy lives as if nothing were the matter with that. To Heinlein, of course, there isn’t. As well, the last section of the book, which is set around the time-travel sequence, features Lazarus helping to start a colony and joining a family of all the primary characters, three each of men and women and an unknown number of children, practicing free love. Also included in this family are a pair of female twins who just happen to be female clones of Lazarus himself, who eventually he makes love to as well, writing it off as a form of masturbation.
This may have come off much harsher than it is meant to be. Heinlein is one of the best, and most of his ideas are awesome. But this, even to a much larger extent than The Moon is a Harsh Mistress or Stranger in a Strange Land, some of his social themes are strange and not particularly acceptable even by today’s loose standards, much less that of the Seventies.
Related articles
- What I’m Reading: Robert Heinlein’s TIME ENOUGH FOR LOVE (expandingconsciousness.wordpress.com)
- The Wisdom Of Lazarus Long (fountainabbey.wordpress.com)
- How Heinlein plotted (boingboing.net)
Watching the Big Bang
A story published a couple days ago made me think about how we view time and space. The story was about a new galaxy that had been discovered which had a mass equal to two quadrillion suns. For context, that is:
2,000,000,000,000,000 suns.
Image via Wikipedia
What it made me think about is that the story pointed out that what we see of this galaxy is only about half of the current age of the universe. This is, of course, because the galaxy, nicknamed “El Gordo,” is nearly 7-billion light-years from Earth. The universe is about 13.7 billion years old, and the light from this galaxy has taken 7 billion years to get here, so what we are seeing is from when the universe was about half the age it is now.
So, given that the farther away from the Earth we look we are also looking farther back into the past, what happens when we see a galaxy that is 13.7 billion light-years away? Will we see the birth of the Universe?
This probably proves Einstein’s theory that time is a function of light, as well as proving the Big Bang Theory when we finally see something 14 billion light-years away. It would also give us a good mark on how old the Universe is, as well.
This also could prove the existence of Douglas Adams Restaurant at the End of the Universe. The restaurant, of course, is not at the physical end but the life-end of the Universe. The after-dinner entertainment at the restaurant features the final explosion and destruction of the Universe, viewed by an audience from throughout time, since, of course, everyone has to travel through time to get to the restaurant.
The logic applies, that if we can see into the past by looking at the stars, we could also see as far back as the birth of the Universe and possibly into the future.
Related articles
- Massive galaxy cluster found (cbc.ca)
- NASA’s Chandra Finds Largest Galaxy Cluster in Early Universe (spacefellowship.com)
- Hubble Survey Finds Galaxies Far, Far Away (newswatch.nationalgeographic.com)
DNA Decoding
Life Technologies Corp. of Carlsbad, Calif. announced yesterday that it had developed a machine that can decode the DNA of an individual in under 24 hours for the very affordable price of $1000. DNA sequencers have been around for a few years, but the costs and time involved to decode and analyze the data in one person’s DNA have kept the technology from widespread use. However, with these new machines, the ability to check a patient’s DNA for susceptibility to disease and to mold treatment has become much easier for every doctor.
Image via Wikipedia
What this means is that the medical revolution we have seen in science fiction such as Robert Heinlein‘s Future History is becoming closer and much more possible. It will allow us to increase our lifespans, treat disease and sickness better, and eliminate deficiencies in DNA before our children are born.
However, this also could bring up some interesting other things. What happens when all the bad parts of some people’s DNA are eliminated and the diversity of the human race is cut down? And by the same token, what happens when future parents are given their unborn child’s DNA and find out that it has Down syndrome? What do you think some people would do about that?
This, like every other major scientific advancement, can make things better but also cause more problems and give people more choices to make bad decisions. It is only if we can control this and use it for the good will it benefit us in the long run.
Related articles
- Company announces low-cost DNA decoding machine (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
- A DNA Tower of Babel (technologyreview.in)
- Will knowing your DNA motivate you to lose weight? (vitals.msnbc.msn.com)
- Sequencing leaders want industry standards to govern decoded DNA (fiercebiotechresearch.com)
WOLVERINE and the Dissolution of Physics
I watched most of X-Men Origins: Wolverine last night and noticed something extremely discouraging about the way the special effects were handled: it seemed as if the entire film was taking place on some other planet, because the laws of physics were being thrown out the window.
Don’t get me wrong, I really enjoy the X-Men franchise, and I really liked the story in Wolverine, but I believe the special effects people who worked on this film went entirely overboard. It is understandable that some things that the mutants do are extraordinary, and the audience must suspend disbelief because of their supposed “mutations,” but many of the stunts in the film were completely ridiculous.
X-Men Origins - Wolverine (Image via RottenTomatoes.com)
For example, multiple times we see Wolverine cutting through objects seemingly effortlessly, and with very exaggerated results. In his battle with Zero and the helicopter, this happens multiple times. Wolverine is on his motorcycle (which he rode out of a building that was exploding) and rides right by a Hummer, reaching out and slicing it with his claws. It’s not only that the claws slice right through the side of the vehicle, seemingly without any reaction from Wolverine (including any backward movement from his arm, per the Newtonian Laws of Physics), but also that this cut, which goes through the length of the Hummer, including the tires, causes the vehicle to fly up into the air and make the helicopter swerve out of the way. Then, to top that, Wolverine climbs on top of another Hummer, which is shot at by the helicopter, and as the vehicle explodes he is able to propel himself up to the helicopter. He not only slices the blades of the chopper but also lands on it. Zero watches him in slow motion to the side of the helicopter, reaching up to cut the blades, and then somehow Logan is able to alter his trajectory in mid-air and land on the helicopter as it is crashing to the ground. Then as he is walking away from the crash (he jumps off just in time) he slashes into some gasoline on the ground, causing a fire which burns its way to the helicopter and makes it explode.
Another example, possibly even more extraordinary: In his fight scene with Gambit on Bourbon Street, Logan is looking up at Gambit on a fire escape. He decides to slice at the bottom of the fire escape support with his claws, making it begin to fall. However, instead of just letting it fall off the side of the building, the stairway suddenly comes off of the building right next to Logan and stays straight up in the air as he quickly slashes over and over again, cutting off a few feet of the bottom of the stairwell each time. Gambit stays on top of the fire escape as it hangs in midair, straight up, defying gravity, until he gets to the bottom with Logan.
One more example: In the final scene, when Logan cuts off Deadpool‘s head and both parts of him fall into the middle of the reactor, his head, still emitting lasers, supposedly spins around as it slowly falls, making a perfect helix of the circular reactor. This seems like just lazy CGI; it would take nothing to put a simple perfect helix into a computer and tell it to animate that. In reality, the laser would be spinning every which way, pointing up, down into the ground, and would fall at 9.8 meters/per second, not the 30 seconds it took to fall to the bottom of an 80-foot reactor. Those are exaggerations, but the math was certainly not there.
You may be able to see some of these examples in this trailer.
It’s almost like the producers of this film forgot to hire a science adviser; I saw these inconsistencies the very first time I saw the movie in the theater. This is certainly why I like my science fiction to be written by scientists, and the best have been: Asimov, Heinlein, and Clarke were all scientists in one form or another first, and then used that knowledge to write science fiction.
One lesson to be learned from the ridiculousness of this film and the best science fiction writers of the present and the past: Even though it’s called science fiction, the very best is based in science fact.
Chinese in Space
Image via Wikipedia
It has been announced recently that China, who traditionally has not been particularly active in the space race, will make a strong push in the next five years to become a power in space. It seems, as did the United States and the Soviet Union in the 1960’s and 70’s, that economic domination fuels space exploration, more than a bit obviously. As both of the two Cold War powers scale back their space exploration due to budgeting, the Chinese are beginning to use their newfound worldwide wealth to build up their space industry. By the end of 2016 it plans to launch space laboratories, manned spaceships, and be technologically prepared to build space stations.
Conventionally (and especially in my favorite era), science fiction writers have extrapolated one of three scenarios for the exploration/colonization of space: either a two-country, Cold-War era race between the successor states to the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. or a worldwide effort, by a cooperative effort by many states (as inspired by the International Space Station) or by a future one-state world.
Now, with the rise of this Chinese effort (along with the addition of space efforts by other countries such as Japan, the European Union, and India, as well as efforts by private companies) we must examine the possibility that space could be explored by many separate entities, with different technologies, goals, and ideals. It could change much about the way diplomacy works: dealing with states occupying different planets, the distances between them, and the way war would work in space (which has certainly been thought about in many different ways).
This Chinese effort has certainly made me think about the changes to the way state-building and diplomacy in space would happen. This, along with future development, should mark a shift in reaction for science-fiction as a whole.
Related articles
- China Reveals Space Plans Through 2016 (foxnews.com)
- China Space Stations: Program Gains Momentum (huffingtonpost.com)
- China unveils ambitious plan for space exploration – CNN International (edition.cnn.com)
- China is Planning Manned Moon Mission (manolith.com)
Science Fiction and the Search for New Earths
Science fiction, when viewing the expansion of the human race to new galaxies and worlds, generally has ignored much of the science and technicality of living on other planets. Probability tells us that there must be other planets somewhere that exhibit extremely similar qualities to our own Earth, but we have not found any yet which are particularly close.
Image via Wikipedia
It seems that every other week the Kepler or Hubble telescopes find new planets that are rotating in the “habitable zone” around their stars, the distance at which it is possible to support water. Yet so far, none are confirmed to have any.
Many science fiction authors talk of “terraforming,” or molding planets to be inhabitable. However, much like any future technology, it is easy to simply say it is done and not explain or even think about how it would work. Would water have to be transported by spaceship to the planet? What protection would have to be built to keep the temperature at a habitable level? For that matter, how far would we have to travel to find a planet to inhabit?
The first barrier to the colonization of new planets is the speed of space travel. At the current rate, it took the Apollo astronauts three days just to get to the Moon, which is a trifling distance in the scope of things. Right now it would take 165,000 years just to get to Alpha Centauri, the nearest star to us at 4.27 light years. The moon is only 1.27 light-seconds from the Earth.
Once we get there, the problems have only just begun.
Related articles
- Nasa discovers ‘Star Wars’ planet (telegraph.co.uk)
- Kepler’s mission: Find planets like Earth (mercurynews.com)
- Planet like Earth found in star’s habitable zone (sfgate.com)
- Not just science fiction: Planet orbits 2 suns (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
- The obsession with a ‘twin Earth’ (bbc.co.uk)
- Two new Earths and the search for life (cnn.com)
- Discoveries in search for twin Earths (ft.com)
John W. Campbell, Jr.
One of the most important people in the history of science fiction was John W. Campbell, Jr. (1910-1971). Campbell was the editor of Astounding Science Fiction from 1937 to 1971, and through this editorship influenced many of the most famous writers in what is considered the Golden Age of Science Fiction.
Campbell published Lester del Rey‘s first story in 1938 and, in 1939 alone, published an early story of Isaac Asimov‘s (“Trends”), A.E. van Vogt‘s first story (“Black Destroyer”), Robert Heinlein‘s first story (“Life-Line,” famously published on his first attempt), and Theodore Sturgeon‘s first story (“Ether Breather”).
The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction wrote, of Campbell, “More than any other individual, he helped to shape modern sci-fi.” Asimov said that Campbell was “the most powerful force in science fiction ever, and for the first ten years of his editorship he dominated the field completely.”
Campbell has two awards named in his honor: “The John W. Campbell Memorial Award for Best Science Fiction Novel” and the “John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer.” He was inducted into the Science Fiction and Fantasy Hall of Fame in 1996.
The Legacy of the Space Shuttle Program
Image via Wikipedia
The final launch of the U.S. Space Shuttle Program will come this week, barring inclement weather at the Kennedy Space Center. Here are some final looks at the thirty-year program:
Reuters looks at the Space Shuttle Program by the numbers. The story points out that the entire thirty years of the program only cost just under $200 billion, pocket change compared to some recent government spending. This story points out that Medicare spent just as much in a five-month span in 2010.
However, not everyone is looking at the positives when it comes to cost.
This last flight aboard Atlantis will be the program’s 135, and only a cargo shipping mission. The final flight will be the first since 1983 to only take four astronauts because of the lack of another shuttle if Atlantis is damaged in flight. If that happens, the U.S. would have to requisition the Russian Soyuz, which would be very expensive and could only bring two of them home at a time.
Related articles
- 30 Years of the Space Shuttle Program (history.com)
- NASA invites Twitter followers to last Space Shuttle launch (geek.com)
- The Inside of a Space Shuttle Flight Deck, The End of an Era (amoebamike.wordpress.com)
- Filmmakers Use Social Media to Record Legacy of the Space Program, Invite the Public to Share Their Memories (pr.com)
The Nebula Award
The Nebula Award is one of the most prestigious awards in science fiction and fantasy, and has been giving awards since 1965, with Frank Herbert‘s Dune winning the first Nebula for Best Novel. Other categories include Best Novella, Best Novelette, Best Short Story, and Best Script.
Of my favorite authors, Isaac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke have won three each, and Orson Scott Card has won twice.
The Nebula Award
Robert A. Heinlein was the first recipient of the award in 1975, possibly compensating for the fact that Heinlein never won a Nebula Award for any specific novel. L. Sprague de Camp received it in 1979, Clarke in 1986, Asimov in 1987, Ray Bradbury in 1989, Lester del Rey in 1991, Hal Clement in 1999, and Harlan Ellison in 2006. The SWFA has done a pretty good job of awarding these to older contributors before they die, getting to many of it’s recipients often only a few years before their deaths. This lifetime achievement award is one of the highest honors a science fiction or fantasy author can receive, and I can only dream about receiving this award at the end of my career.
My Top Five Science Fiction Authors #1: Isaac Asimov
Cover of Isaac Asimov
If you have read much of my blog, you will be able to tell that this selection was not hard for me at all.
Isaac Asimov (1920-1992) was easily the most prolific science fiction writer of all time, in my opinion. He was one of the Big Three science fiction writers (with Heinlein and Clarke) and was named a Grand Master of Science Fiction and has lent his name to more things in science fiction than any other author.
At official count, Asimov’s bibliography numbers at more than 500 books and his books have been published in every category of the Dewey Decimal System except for Philosophy (and it could be argued much of his fiction is philosophical).
His most famous works are the Foundation Series, which was combined with his Galactic Empire and Robot series‘ to create one entire fictional universe of nearly all his science fiction stories. His works have been the basis for two big-budget films, the first being Bicentennial Man, starring Robin Williams, which is based on his story of the same name. The second is I, Robot, starring Will Smith, which is not based on a story of Asimov’s but incorporates characters and themes from Asimov’s work, including the Three Laws.
As far as science is concerned, Asimov had a Doctorate in Biochemistry from Colombia University, and was on the faculty at Boston University from the mid-1950’s until his death in 1992. His personal papers are archived at the university, filling up 464 boxes and 71 meters of library shelf space.
Asimov coined the term “robotics” in 1941 in his short story “Liar.” He thought it was already in use, being a derivative of the word “robot,” but the Oxford Dictionary credits him with it’s creation.
Asimov did not only write science and science fiction: Beginning in the ’60’s he wrote 14 history books, as well as Asimov’s Guide to the Bible in two volumes, Asimov’s Guide to Shakespeare, Asimov’s Annotated Paradise Lost, and Asimov’s Annotated Gulliver’s Travels. He also wrote books on humor (as well as books of jokes), books of limericks, and mystery stories.
Bearing his namesake are various things, including an asteroid, a crater on Mars, a science fiction magazine, a literary award, and an elementary school in Brooklyn.
My Top Five Science Fiction Authors #2: Orson Scott Card
Image via Wikipedia
Orson Scott Card (b. 1951) is the only author of the five on my list that is still living, and compared to the other four is very new to the scene, despite being 51 and being active since the late 1970’s. Card’s most famous novel is, by far, Ender’s Game, now a staple of the modern science fiction genre.
Ender’s Game is a novel about the preparation of children from a young age to lead soldiers into battles in space, against aliens called “buggers.” The book won the Nebula Award for Best Novel in 1985 and the Hugo Award in 1986, and is currently under development in Hollywood, with Card attached to write a new script himself.
Card’s most well-known books, for the most part, are attached to Ender’s Game as sequels or spin-offs, including the sequels Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide, and Children of the Mind, the spin-off Ender’s Shadow, it’s sequels Shadow of the Hegemon, Shadow Puppets, and Shadow of the Giant, among many other novels and short stories.
Card is unique among science-fiction writers in that he is very religious, having been a lifelong practicing member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and he is the great-great-grandson of Brigham Young.
Thankfully I still have at least one of my favorite science fiction authors in Orson Scott Card, since Asimov, Heinlein, Clarke, and Wells aren’t writing too much anymore. Hopefully Card keeps writing for years to come, so I don’t run out of things to read.
My Top Five Science Fiction Authors #3: Arthur C. Clarke
Image via Wikipedia
Arthur C. Clarke, CBE (1917-2008), one of the “Big Three” science fiction authors (with Asimov and Heinlein), is most famous for his 2001: A Space Odyssey, written in conjunction with the Stanley Kubrick film. Clarke, probably moreso than Asimov or Heinlein, contributed to science through papers as well as his fiction, and in the long run this may be the majority of his legacy.
2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the most important science fiction works of all time; many consider the film to be the best science fiction film ever made. However, what is not widely known is that both the book and the screenplay were co-written between Clarke and Kubrick; Kubrick had a much larger hand in the book than is thought, but the idea is essentially Clarke’s.
Other of Clarke’s most famous novels are Rendezvous with Rama (1972), Childhood’s End (1953), and The Light of Other Days (2000).
As a predictor of the future, Clarke is seemingly unmatched among his colleagues. While the idea of the geostationary satellite is not his, Clarke popularized the idea that they could be good communications relays. He also published a book in 1962 called Profiles of the Future, which included a series of essays for various magazines in which he attempted to predict the near future as it pertained to science and scientific discovery. While he, of course, got many things wrong, he was also correct in a good many areas, and the book has been updated and reprinted multiple times.
Clarke was named a Grand Master by the Science Fiction Writers of America in 1986 and in 1989 was made a Commander of the Order of the British Empire for his work in Sri Lanka, where he lived for the latter half of his life.
My Top Five Science Fiction Authors #4: Robert Heinlein
Image via Wikipedia
Robert A. Heinlein (1907-1988), called “the dean of science fiction‘ and one of the “Big Three” science fiction writers (along with Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov) was one of the most influential science-fiction authors of the modern era. He is especially known for his novels Starship Troopers, Stranger in a Strange Land, and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.
He was the primary initiator of the trend toward “social science fiction,” the addition of politics and sexuality to the traditional science fiction, and led the movement toward including more literary themes.
Heinlein, the scientist he was, also predicted some things in his work, but not as authors such as Wells or Asimov might. Heinlein’s specialty was simply seeing the much wider effects of advances in technology or other changes to the current state of society. On a more logistical note, he did foresee international nuclear stalemate (the Cold War), nuclear power dangers, and interstate highways. Inventions foreseen include mobile phones, waterbeds, screen savers, teleconferencing, and hand dryers.
Robert Heinlein was the realist of the major science fiction authors. While he exhibited many characteristics of the other writers, he had a much more worldly style, showing much more of the grittier, dirtier side of science fiction. He very much complemented other authors such as Asimov and Clarke.
Top Five Hard Science Fiction Authors #5: H.G. Wells
Image via Wikipedia
H.G. Wells (1866-1946), considered one of the fathers of science fiction, was most famous for his novels The Time Machine, The Invisible Man, The War of the Worlds, and The Island of Dr. Moreau. Wells may have been the first science fiction writer to be successful in “predicting the future,” per se; in 1901 he correctly predicted that trains and cars would disperse the population to suburbs, saw the decline of moral and sexual restrictions, the defeat of German militarism, and the creation of a European Union, though he was slightly off in predicting a lack of successful aircraft before 1950. He also saw (in his novel (Tono-Bungay) the use of radioactive decay as an explosive device, and reportedly influenced Leo Szilard toward the nuclear chain reaction. He also predicted (in 1933) that another World War would begin in January 1940; he was only four months off, World War II having started in September of 1939.
One of Wells’ most important contributions (and maybe his most frequent) was in the field of politics. Wells was an avid socialist (as many science-fiction authors are), and wrote many utopian (A Modern Utopia) and dystopian (The Sleeper Awakes, The Time Machine) works that have an impact today, a hundred years later, as governments around the world evolve. The Time Machine, especially, shows his socialist leanings. It tells the story of a man who travels to the distant future and finds a society of two species which have widened from today’s basic social classes, “Capitalist and Labourer.”
H.G. Wells, I believe, was the first modern science fiction writer; Today’s science fiction deals with worldly problems and very scientific solutions. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein may have been the first science fiction novel, but Wells defined modern science fiction.
My Top Five Hard Science Fiction Authors
My personal Top Five Science Fiction Authors, subject to change. Profiles of each of these authors will be coming soon.
5. H.G. Wells
1. Isaac Asimov
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
A new reboot of the Planet of the Apes franchise called Rise of the Planet of the Apes is set to be released on August 5. The film will be an origin story for a new film series much like the original film did in 1968, and stars James Franco, Freida Pinto, and Andy Serkis as Caesar. As opposed to the earlier films (including Tim Burton‘s 2001 remake) which used actors in monkey suits, Rise uses CGI motion-capture technology to create the apes. Serkis would seem to be the perfect fit for this, as he played the title character in 2005’s King Kong as well as Gollum/Smeagle in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, both of which used similar CGI technology.
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
The original 1968 film, which starred Charleton Heston and Roddy McDowall, did not explain the origin of the Planet of the Apes which the protagonists find themselves on, while the 2001 remake, starring Mark Wahlberg, did. If one was to leave out the newer remake, this new movie will fit in perfectly, much as Batman Begins showed the origin of Batman without damaging the continuity of the earlier films. Rise will simply show the origin that the original franchise never explained, and after this the sequels can be more similar remakes to the original films.
Andy Serkis as Caesar
As hard science fiction films, the Planet of the Apes franchise is pretty good; even the Tim Burton remake had good hard science fiction qualities. The first film, especially, shows Einstein’s theory of time dilation in a vessel traveling nearly the speed of light. The Planet of the Apes franchise is one of my favorite science-fiction film series.
One Step Closer to (Or Farther from) Asimov’s “Bicentennial Man”
A new story outlines the recent advances in bionic prosthetic limbs. How does this relate to Asimov‘s Bicentennial Man, the robot who became a man and in turn made many people part-robot?
One of Asimov’s best short stories is called The Bicentennial Man, and it is about a robot named Andrew who is unique and can create art, typically something robots cannot do. He longs to be human, but cannot because he is effectively immortal, despite having every other human quality. Eventually he creates parts for himself that allow him every physical human facility, including death. Along the way he uses the technology he creates for himself to build robot limbs and organs for people, blurring the line between robot and human. Just before he dies he is declared to be human, allowing him solace in death. The film version of this, which many of you will probably be much more familiar with, sexualizes the story, making his quest for humanity a result of his love for a human woman. I seriously doubt that was Asimov’s intention, but it doesn’t really matter too much; the point remains.
While the idea of a robot becoming human will very likely never happen, undoubtedly not within our lifetimes, the trend of humans becoming more robotic is a very real one. Prosthetic limbs that are connected to the nerve endings and can be controlled through them are already in production, and artificial hearts are also being used all the time, though not for extended periods.
At what point will we be able to create organs that can replace our current organs seamlessly, for babies with bad hearts and middle-aged men with kidney problems? At what point will we be so inundated with artificial organs that we are indistinguishable from robots, except for our brains?
Commercial Space
With NASA’s abandonment of the space shuttle program comes the intervention of capitalism in the space industry. Enter Richard Branson, entertainment tycoon and founder of the Virgin Group, a conglomeration of over 400 international companies all under the Virgin name. Branson’s Virgin Galactic appears to be the frontrunner in the space tourism business and already is well on it’s way to being able to take rich tourists into space, for a relatively low price. Virgin Galactic‘s spacecraft, called SpaceShipTwo (built by Scaled Composites), and it’s carrier aircraft White Knight II, have been in testing since 2004 and the first spaceflight is expected within the year. Branson calls these spacecraft “sexy beasts.” Reportedly over 400 paid customers were signed up to go to space, with the price currently at $200,000 with a $20,000 deposit.
Artist Rendering of Spaceport America
The spacecraft will be launched from Spaceport America in rural New Mexico, a project supported by the state and it’s taxpayers to the tune of $209 million. According to a recent article, the state still supports the project despite setbacks and a gubernatorial change.
Spaceport America under construction
The spaceport is meant to be everything you would expect from a science-fiction author’s imagination, from the wavy roof and the huge glass walls. Eventually every city will have one of these like they have airports now, and in the distant future you will be able to fly into space off your driveway.
More Tornadoes
It’s been a couple weeks since my last post, between finals week and a bit of a vacation.
However, it’s been interesting because tornadoes seem to be following me around. Obviously living in Oklahoma is just asking to be around plenty of tornadoes, but this week has been even worse than usual.
I was at my cousin’s wedding in St. Louis over last weekend and drove back with my family on Sunday, driving through Joplin, Missouri mere hours before the largest of these recent tornadoes hit there, killing (at most recent count) 122. Then, on Monday, as I prepared to drive from Enid to Norman, I looked at the weather on T.V. and the vertical dry line was firing violent cells across the I-35 corridor. Needless to say I waited to start driving until much of it had passed, though I still drove under a couple impressive wall clouds near Kingfisher and Hennessey. Then on Tuesday, in Norman, the dry line fired again and I ended up in the basement of the Oklahoma Memorial Union on campus with about a hundred too many other people (it was crowded, in other words).
Tornado in Chickasha, Oklahoma, on Tuesday
The tornadoes here in Oklahoma on Tuesday killed nine, and reports say that at least four will be rated EF-3’s. Towns hit include Chickasha, Piedmont, Cashion, Moore, and Goldsby, towns that I personally drive through on a regular basis. It’s weird.
As far as the Joplin tornado goes, it was the eighth-deadliest tornado in U.S. history, despite doubts that it was even an EF-5. This just goes to show that in the right situation it doesn’t take a huge tornado to cause plenty of damage and take lives.
Interplanetary Terror
Bin Laden is dead, we all know. I’m not going to dwell on the specifics.
But I will say that a science-fiction terrorist is an interesting idea. How about an interplanetary terrorist as opposed to an international one? Would it be like the United States going to Afghanistan to find him, just having to go to another planet entirely?
I believe it would actually be much easier to be an interplanetary terrorist than an international one. The dangers of space, which are well-documented, would make it much less difficult to kill people and wreak havoc on certain space stations and inter-planetary public transportation shuttles.
Lets have a man who is one of the first people to go out and colonize in Space, say on the Moon or Mars, and is one of the foremost astrophysicists in the world. Then an advancement is made (by his own hand, perhaps?) that makes it much easier for regular people to get to space, a sort of space tourism. He does not like this, and becomes a terrorist to keep this from happening. This is good motivation, a Heinlein-like villain that has had a dramatic evolution but is very intelligent and cunning.
A terrorist like this is much different than one such as Osama bin Laden. My terrorist has good motivation, as opposed to simple extreme religious orthodoxy, and can justify anything he does. It is a person like this which can create debates within a society. No one disagrees that bin Laden should have been killed or at least captured; my terrorist would have supporters, at least outside the space industry, and would be a boon for space travel. Controversies will be brought up, debates begun, and one more election issue will be created.
Man vs. Tornadoes
Tornadoes in the Southeast this week have been reported to have killed 72 people so far on Wednesday alone, including 58 in Alabama. One tornado that blew through Tuscaloosa, Alabama had some incredible video; nothing like this has been seen so clearly since the 1999 tornadoes in the Oklahoma City Metro area (which I lived in during) which spawned a rare F5 tornado and one of the deadliest single tornadoes ever, killing 36.
The thing about the OKC tornado was that, by the old Fujita scale that has been obsolete since 2007, it could have been an F6, a theoretical level that has never been recorded before. The only difference between F5 and F6 is wind speed, and a portable Doppler in southern OKC measured wind speeds of 301 mph (and an unofficial 318), only 18 miles per hour short of F6 status. The 301 is the fastest wind speed ever recorded on Earth.
Video of the OKC tornado:
Video of the Tuscaloosa tornado:
Just for kicks, security video inside a building being hit by an F5 tornado:
This whole thing reminds me of not only 1996’s Twister but also Roland Emmerich’s The Day After Tomorrow, which features a scene of huge tornadoes ripping through the Los Angeles metro area.
The special effects are so ridiculously good, but kind of unrealistic. The view wouldn’t be that clear, nor would a reporter be able to (or want to) stand that close to get good video of three twisters surrounding him, as he finds out for himself. As for the guy looking out the window, I have some advice, as an Oklahoman who knows about tornadoes: that’s not such a good idea, opening the window and standing in front of the glass.
Oversimplification of the Universe
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.”
A new theory has come out that envisions the early Universe as a single one-dimensional line. As it grows, it intersects itself and creates two dimensions, weaving through itself again and again, and eventually creating a third and final dimension. According to physicists, this bridges the gap between quantum mechanics and general relativity, two fields which I will not attempt to speculate on (you can read about them if you like, but be warned). It is also said to make sense of the properties of the Higgs boson, or the God-particle, which theoretically gives all particles mass, but is the only particle of the Standard Model that has not been detected.
Theoretical drawing of the Higgs Boson
Why did the line stop at only three dimensions, though? If there was only one dimension to begin with, what stopped it at three? Is this a ridiculous question?
This really seems like something Douglas Adams would write about. He wrote the sentence at the top, and I believe he was thinking of something like this “line theory” when he wrote this:
“There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”
Expanding Consciousness 