Interstellar empires and the pre-1850(ish) European experience in Africa

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

The devastation wrought by smallpox on the native populations is something Europeans had in many cases witnessed with their own eyes. Not in every case—the disease sometimes outran the explorers—but in many cases. So even if people in Wells' time didn't grasp the full extent of what had happened, it seems wrong to say they were entirely unaware of it.

This may be a case of "quantity has a quality all its own."

I certainly agree that Europeans in Wells's time were aware that indigenous Americans had poor resistance to smallpox and other European diseases. But I think they thought of it in retail rather than wholesale terms: they thought of individuals being at grave peril, but not necessarily of entire populations being wiped out. Europe had had the experience of the Black Death, which killed a third of its people; I don't recall ever seeing it suggested that European diseases had killed so many indigenous Americans, let alone the 90% or so that they are now thought to have killed off. Nor did the population estimates I used to see suggest that there had been about ten times as many inhabitants a while before the Europeans got there, before the virgin field epidemics preceded them.

The ecological impact also seems not to have been considered; in particular, I've read that the virgin forests that settlers described had not been there until the original inhabitants were too few in numbers to repeatedly clear the land with fire.

I haven't done anything like a comprehensive study of this topic. But it's my impression that the sheer magnitude of the catastrophe was not appreciated until well after I was out of college.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

O I would add at least 2 to the Complexity of AIs beyond what Ultra-Tech suggests on pp. 25-28. Maybe add as much as 7

I once put forth the opinion that Computer IQ (in terms of dealing with the physical world) should be no higher than Complexity/2. Malloyd thought maybe Complexity/3.

If you pursue this issue vigorously you could easily find yourself completely re-doing the rules from the ground up. If you don't you may find out that the brain of my new tablet computer should be adequate for running a robot dog when real world experince might find it barely adequate for a robot bumblebee.

[Michael Thayne]

Thinking about tech assumptions, you might do something like this:

• Armor is TL 9
• Complexity of all AI programs is 3 levels higher relative to what Ultra-Tech p. 25 would suggest.
• Biotechnology uses TL10 methods but comparative study of the native life of countless planets, plus aeons of trial-and-error, produces results that are TL11-12 in many respects.
• In all other respects technology is TL10 exactly as described in Ultra-Tech.

For superscience, I might lean heavily on Psi-Tech, including Christopher Rice's generalization of the psychotronic generator rules into "metatronic generators" from Pyramid #3/46 and #4/3. Metatronic generators wouldn't be for generic superpowers so much as technology based on hyperspace, weird energies, etc. This would create an incentive to build BIG spaceships.

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by whswhs

I don't think anyone in Wells's time was aware of the epidemiological aspects of the Columbian exchange.

I have Wells' Outline of History here (revised edition, 1951). In his account of the Spanish in the Americas he notes slaughter, robbery, enslavement, and baptism, attacks on and plunder and destruction of Mexico and Peru. He repeats uncritically the Spanish assertions of widespread cannibalism. He shows himself ignorant of agriculture north of Mexico. He says nothing about smallpox or any epidemic disease.

I haven't done anything like a comprehensive study of this topic. But it's my impression that the sheer magnitude of the catastrophe was not appreciated until well after I was out of college.

According to Charles C. Mann in 1491 (which I recommend, by the way), the Kuhnian paradigm shift over the depopulation of the Americas was still going on when he wrote that book, in 2004.

As for a quantitative estimate of the magnitude of the disaster, the best I have is still Koch et al. [2019] "Earth system impacts of the European arrival and Great Dying in the Americas after 1492", in Quaternary Science Reviews Volume 207, 1 March 2019, Pages 13-36

[Michael Thayne]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

I once put forth the opinion that Computer IQ (in terms of dealing with the physical world) should be no higher than Complexity/2. Malloyd thought maybe Complexity/3.

If you pursue this issue vigorously you could easily find yourself completely re-doing the rules from the ground up. If you don't you may find out that the brain of my new tablet computer should be adequate for running a robot dog when real world experince might find it barely adequate for a robot bumblebee.

One issue here is it seems unlikely that GURPS IQ has much to do with brain complexity. The human brain isn't 100 times more complicated than a chimpanzee brain, in spite of what the Complexity = IQ/2 + C model would have you believe. At least for purposes of ghost mind emulations, tat's a one-level difference in complexity at best. On the other hand the rule in Ultra-Tech probably undersells the vast gulf that exists between the chimpanzee and the most complicated insect brains.

[Michael Thayne]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Thinking about tech assumptions, you might do something like this:

• Armor is TL 9
• Complexity of all AI programs is 3 levels higher relative to what Ultra-Tech p. 25 would suggest.
• Biotechnology uses TL10 methods but comparative study of the native life of countless planets, plus aeons of trial-and-error, produces results that are TL11-12 in many respects.
• In all other respects technology is TL10 exactly as described in Ultra-Tech.

For superscience, I might lean heavily on Psi-Tech, including Christopher Rice's generalization of the psychotronic generator rules into "metatronic generators" from Pyramid #3/46 and #4/3. Metatronic generators wouldn't be for generic superpowers so much as technology based on hyperspace, weird energies, etc. This would create an incentive to build BIG spaceships.

Actually, to really convey that these guys have focused on the big fancy space ships over ground forces, I might make personal equipment TL9, with armor further nerfed somewhat by consistently making it with the rules in Pyramid #3/85. A form of battlesuit might exist, but would be based on adding normal armor to the TL9 exoskeletons described in Ultra-Tech.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

One issue here is it seems unlikely that GURPS IQ has much to do with brain complexity. The human brain isn't 100 times more complicated than a chimpanzee brain, in spite of what the Complexity = IQ/2 + C model would have you believe. At least for purposes of ghost mind emulations, tat's a one-level difference in complexity at best. On the other hand the rule in Ultra-Tech probably undersells the vast gulf that exists between the chimpanzee and the most complicated insect brains.

When I looked at this for GURPS High-Tech: Electricity and Electronics, I found that a 2007 supercomputer (which I estimated to be Complexity 9) was able to simulate a single cortical column of a rat brain at the molecular level. Human cortical columns are about six times as complicated as rat brain cortical columns, and the human brain has about a million of them; that got me up to Complexity 16.

(Of course, if you don't want to emulate the actual physics and chemistry of the brain, but just the data processing, you might be able to lose a level or two of that complexity, though it seems as if what you'd be running then wouldn't be a human mind but a gamable approximation.)

Wikipedia says that the human cortex has about 16 billion neurons; the octopus has about half a billion, and the honeybee has about 100,000. That suggests that you need Complexity 15 to simulate an octopus, and Complexity 11 to simulate a honeybee. I agree that this doesn't map well to GURPS racial IQ. If you did Complexity = 10 + IQ/2 rounding up), the honeybee would take Complexity 11, the octopus maybe Complexity 12, and the human Complexity 15. I suppose what it comes down to is that GURPS IQ is a simplified approximation, and if you want to do the hard SF of neural systems you're going to want to adopt a different approach.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

There are several standard ways to handle interactions between multiple sapient species in star-spanning sci-fi settings. Sometimes, they're all assumed to be at roughly the same level of technological development, allowing them to interact on the same terms as real-world great powers. This can be rationalized in various ways—maybe every sapient race that surpasses a certain level of technological development inevitably shoves off to a higher plane of existence—but it seems rather improbable. Other times, there will be one vastly technologically superior species that has easily conquered all the others, the way Europeans conquered the Americas. And when vast technological superiority fails to result in conquering everyone else, this is often presented as a deliberate subversion of the Conquistador scenario, often involving the seemingly "primitive" species having a mystical edge of some sort (hi James Cameron).

For the "Everyone is mysteriously at the same TL" bit, there's a decent option I've seen used a few times - there's an established alliance/federation/whatever whose members share technology and knowledge, and that brings new species into the fold. Some may have certain requirements before accepting new members - typically the ability to achieve FTL. You may end up with regional differences in technology, but most will be at a similar level of effectiveness - because if the Foo make better Bar than everyone else, everyone will generally favor using Foo-made Bar. Each species may have some technologies that they actually do have access to better options than the others, because the cutting edge isn't always available on the galactic market.

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

It would also be interesting to carefully select their technology such that it isn't quite as decisive on the battlefield as one might initially expect—much like the muzzle-loading longarm. This might require carefully going through Ultra-Tech to pick things out. Curious if anyone has tried to do something like that, or have other ideas for leveling the playing field between humans and invading aliens.

In The Deathworlders, most of the species other than humans are fairly frail (having not evolved on a Deathworld like, say, Earth), and are reliant on Kinetic Pulse weaponry, roughly comparable to the grav beamers from UT. A typical KP pistol delivers about as much force as a human slap - lethal force against most species, but nearly useless against humans (rifles are more akin to a human punch). Their so-called anti-tank weapons (named on account of their performance against force fields rather than against armored vehicles, but given their version of "armored vehicle" is a frail box surrounded by force fields, it's not entirely inaccurate) are markedly more powerful - roughly comparable to a kick from a horse. They do have the advantage of not needing ammunition or much if any maintenance.

Of course, the technological homogeneity, stagnation, and overall underperformance of that setting is complements of an ancient conspiracy of digital sophonts (or, as Daar likes to call them, sapient malware) to both keep the galaxy stable and ensure plenty of folks using a certain flavor of neural cybernetics. Also, most species eventually get culled out of existence, often in a manner that appears self-imposed (like the OmoAru, who re-engineered themselves to have integral, self-regenerating nanotech cybernetics; at some point that tech put their pleasure centers into near-constant stimulation, basically turning them into a race of permanently-strung-out junkies). Humans getting on the galactic stage shakes things up significantly.

...

As for the topic at hand, you've got some good options already mentioned. An interesting way to have a weapon/armor mismatch might be to give the aliens some peculiar weakness. Maybe they're inflated with air, filled with fluid, or similar, such that a tear/puncture is a serious problem. So, their weapons fire thin armor-piercing needles, and their armor is designed to protect against sharps and punctures with little concern for blunt trauma. So their weapons aren't terribly effective against humans without hitting something vital (they'll go right through our armor, and our bodies, but leave extremely narrow wound channels), but the comparatively-massive bullets we use cause severe blunt trauma, even though they don't do much beyond scuffing the paint of their armor (or maybe said massive bullets will readily shatter their armor - which may be made of force fields or similar - so landing two hits sufficiently close together will take them out). Or they use superscience weapons of some flavor that kill by shutting down their brains, but human brains are wired in such a way that it often just stuns us - again, their armor is designed for use against their own weapons, so it doesn't perform so well against bullets.

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Of course, nothing says you actually have to have ultra-tech armor. Or even allow the aliens to have "advanced body armor", though finally making dragon scale work might be a nice minimal benefit to give the aliens. When making a scifi campaign, you should feel free and even encouraged to tweak what technologies are available.

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Nothing says you _can't_ call it "sci-fi" when it's actually fantasy but it is a courtesy to use words the same way your audience does. Universes where even TL8 body armor is _not_ possible are running on such divergent laws of physics that they probably shouldn't be called "sci-fi".

My argument was more that the "Advanced Body Armor" in UT is unrealistic, and the product its based on mired in controversy. Though now that I compare it with an assault vest with plates, it appears that the unrealistic part is the ability to conceal it.



I don't doubt small advances in armor tech, I mostly doubt the full body suit with better performance than a TL8 concealed vest at TL9. Its possible, but I'm not seeing it come soon.

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Not really. The +50% it assumes is about the increase between TL7 and 8. Sometimes it's smaller.

<shrug>Materials research is a hot field that's key to many things (like space technologies) and very active right now. Body armor might also be the area where we hit TL9 first. It's probably even closer than computer tech.

I'm somewhat disillusioned with materials science right now. We've been getting headlines about amazing new substances for about two decades, but all I've really seen is people paying lots of money for a lighter carbon-fiber bicycles.

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Can you explain a bit more how this works? My knowledge of the relevant astrophysics is pretty minimal. Is the key issue solar flares? (I know nothing about red dwarfs and solar flares.) Or is it something else?

Red dwarfs are by far the most common kind of star. We think that planets that orbit them are usually tidelocked, with one side facing the star all the time and the other facing away, and that reduces the habital area to small strips (we think). So rotating red dwarf planets are rare and precious.



Stars produce most of their light in a specific range, and most of their other light is less powerful than that range. Here is a graph of the sun's spectrum. As you can see, the sun produces ultraviolet light, but not much beyond it.



A red dwarf will produce a lot less ultraviolet light. Also known as the light that causes sunburn and skin cancer.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by ericthered

A red dwarf will produce a lot less ultraviolet light. Also known as the light that causes sunburn and skin cancer.

It'll produce a lot less of the light that drives photosynthesis too. A compound unknown on Earth that does photosythesis with lower energy photons is probably possible but there's just plain less energy involved all the way around.

There also appears to be an issue with red dwarves and flare activity. combines with how close a red dwarf's planets have to be in absolute terms this could be a deal-breaker.

This may be doubly important because of problems with a lack of magnetic fields. Out of the 4 rocky planets in our Solar system only the Earth with good rotation and a molten core produces a significant magnetic field. Mars rotates but has no molten core. Venus and Mercury don't rotate significantly and their molten cores don't apear to be enough to compensate for that.

Besides radiiation protection there appears to be an issue where lack of a magnetic field allows the solar wind to erode any atmosphere. It's thought that this happened to Mars. If you terraformed Mars it'd probably happen again in a million years or so.

There's even a probleem where the oldest red dwarves will be too old i.e. they could have been formed when not enough heavy element producing supernovas had happened yet. Any G2 like our Sun from that long ago has gone of the Main Sequence but it takes something between 100 billion years to 4 trillion years for red dwarves to burn out. That's one reason there are so many red dwarves.

So there are many issues with habitable planets around red dwarves. I won't say there won't be any but they'll probably be so rare that even the great numbers of red dwarves won't make up for it.