Technobabble for a world build

[Farmer]

I'm building a new time travel game and the world behind it, and specifically the "technobabble physics" to underpin it. If anyone has an interest and the time to read through and provide feedback, I'd be very interested and appreciative. Again, it's technobabble, so deviations from real world physics is to be expected (so no need to point out that something is "wrong"). That said, if there's anything I've created that might be better linked to something real world, I'd be interested because it can help it to sound more realistic or plausible which can make it more fun (hopefully).

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/dr5cq...lvchjderj&dl=0

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Farmer

I' it's technobabble, so deviations from real world physics is to be expected (so no need to point out that something is "wrong").

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/dr5cq...lvchjderj&dl=0

So I'm not saying that it's "wrong" so much as warning you that something as simple as going to to Wikipedia for "quantum tunneling" would blow up your technobabble. If your PCs wouldn't do that you should be ok. It sounds pretty good.

[Farmer]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

So I'm not saying that it's "wrong" so much as warning you that something as simple as going to to Wikipedia for "quantum tunneling" would blow up your technobabble. If your PCs wouldn't do that you should be ok. It sounds pretty good.

Thanks. They will accept it as written, understanding that some words and terms have been appropriated (deliberately or otherwise). I'm open to different / better terms (from them, as well). So it should be fine in that respect, but it's a useful point to raise and I'm thinking further about it.

What I'm hoping is that I've constructed something that's internally consistent, uses reasonable terms and words to sound technical knowing that, of course, it's not real and isn't attempting to be rooted in hard science. It should provide a reasonable basis for the PCs to grasp how it works to an extent that they need to know, plus some flavour.

I could replace it with something like "Quantum Corridor", for example (again, I remain open for better suggestions from anywhere) to keep the "quantum" nomenclature. That's not a real thing, other than being the name of a real corporation. Is it worth fine-tuning all those sorts of terms? If it helps with the immersion, then I guess it is. I might trawl through the list to tweak in that regard.

[johndallman]

I'd drop the "quantum field" terminology, and replace it with some other kind of field, which is new physics, recently (and accidentally) discovered, lacking a theory that unites it with conventional physics.

[Farmer]

OK - so Quantum Tunnelling appears to be the only full/direct clash of terms, so I'll look to change that slightly. Thanks again, Fred - it was a good point and it's been worth reviewing that aspect.

Originally Posted by johndallman

I'd drop the "quantum field" terminology, and replace it with some other kind of field, which is new physics, recently (and accidentally) discovered, lacking a theory that unites it with conventional physics.

I have thought about this, and I may yet do it. The use of quantum was to give it a relatable sound, as opposed to calling it, say, Artron or Aetheric or Chronal or something similar. But, I appreciate you mentioning it as I will review and consider it again.

[Irish Wolf]

Originally Posted by Farmer

The use of quantum was to give it a relatable sound, as opposed to calling it, say, Artron or Aetheric or Chronal or something similar. But, I appreciate you mentioning it as I will review and consider it again.

That does, however, smack slightly of Terry Pratchett's wizards at Unseen University, when confronted with things they don't understand - "Well, it's all down to quantum, innit?"

Perhaps something along the lines of investigations into neutrino interactions that seemed to violate lightspeed limits uncovering the existence of previously-undiscovered basic particles related to time and entropy, which researchers called "chronotons" in honor of Star Trek. Then go all hog with your temporal physics, because who's going to call you out?

[Anthony]

I'm not especially bothered by 'quantum', given that things like the many worlds interpretation of QM do exist.

[Irish Wolf]

Originally Posted by Anthony

I'm not especially bothered by 'quantum', given that things like the many worlds interpretation of QM do exist.

That would still just get you access to alternate timelines, not time travel as such. If you want to change some event in the past, say arresting 19 particular people on Sept 8 of 2001, it doesn't help much to be able to slide sideways into a world where Al Gore won the 2000 Presidential election.

[Anaraxes]

The OP liked the analogy with quantum tunneling. So, you just need to wave your hands over the current assumption that the time coordinate is somehow continuous and perfectly precisely defined, unlike presence at spatial coordinates, and declare that your chronolocation is only mostly likely to be predictable, at least until the boffins get around to monkeying with your wave function to make it more likely that you're back-then than it is that you're right-now.

I'd agree that the adjective "quantum" is getting very tired these days, but it's not like it's a completely unrelated concept -- should anyone ever manage to merge GT and QM. It's technobabble, so it mainly just has to sound good long enough for the game to move along.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Irish Wolf

That would still just get you access to alternate timelines, not time travel as such. If you want to change some event in the past, say arresting 19 particular people on Sept 8 of 2001, it doesn't help much to be able to slide sideways into a world where Al Gore won the 2000 Presidential election.

Sure it does. Just slide sideways into a world where those 19 people were arrested.