Subject:
|
Re: Space Stations... (and Space Relations)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Fri, 16 Jun 2000 18:59:03 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
wubwub@wildlink.com!saynotospam!
|
Viewed:
|
566 times
|
| |
|
|
"Tom McDonald" <radiotitan@yanospamhoo.com> wrote:
> In lugnet.space, Mark Nelson writes:
> > Well, I'm thinking that it is just in orbit around a planet, so it doesn't
> > need propulsion, and that it does have gravity. And how far in the future? Why
> > does it matter? :) As I said, this is Lego, it doesn't have to be realistic!
>
> In the smallest of ways the year could matter, but it shouldn't stand in the
> way of building. Personally I think it's a very small issue and I pretty much
> don't care. It's something that could be discussed later.
>
> And probly the only reason it could matter is if the planet that it orbits is,
> of course, Earth itself. With Earth comes certain expectations of the future.
> We have a technology base now in 2000 that we expect to be MUCH greater and
> more fantastic in 3000. But also design philosophy plays a strong part in
> this. For example, in the year 3000, we might expect artificial gravity in
> just about every space station (via rotation or otherwise). But it doesn't
> hafta have it if certain conditions are required.
>
> The other reason I bring it up is that many stories pretty much start with a
> year or at least a century so that the setting can be built in a reader's
> mind, which means someone else might be curious (and you'd perhaps hafta
> explain all this again :-)
...When I write stuff, I try not to even mention Earth, and never mention a date or even
locations in earth relative terms (usually something like CY 79 for Colony Year 79). This
has a couple handy effects: 1 - I'm never wrong! don't you love seeing old Star Trek shows
where they refer to things that happened in the last 90s? :-) and 2 - I'm much more free
to make up tech and the like. I have one universe where electricity was never discovered
and/or its impossible to harness... makes for fun tech.
...I like writing about places using strange years and location codes as if they were
perfectly normal. It makes the reader stop trying to fit it into his view of the future so
he can better fit into mine.
...but YMMV....
...you can go back to ignoring me now...
wubwub
stephen f roberts
wamalug guy (http://wamalug.org)
Jain's Guide (http://wildlink.com/lego/jain)
Visit the wildlink (http://wildlink.com)
lugnet #160
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Space Stations... (and Space Relations)
|
| (...) date or even (...) Year 79). This (...) Star Trek shows (...) Yeah.. where is Khan anyway? :-) (...) discovered (...) they were (...) the future so (...) I like your idea, so maybe we'll share some mileage. You've expressed yourself quite (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jun-00, to lugnet.space)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Space Stations... (and Space Relations)
|
| (...) In the smallest of ways the year could matter, but it shouldn't stand in the way of building. Personally I think it's a very small issue and I pretty much don't care. It's something that could be discussed later. And probly the only reason it (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jun-00, to lugnet.space)
|
41 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
