Rationalizing a Firefly - Serenity type setting

[pfharlock]

Originally Posted by cptbutton

Two of the things I am trying to justify or explain away here.

The rest of the godlike technology has been suppressed because it is too scary.

And the Core worlds are intentionally not making stuff the fringe needs. In the vain hope that the fringers will come back, or start behaving properly. And if they won't, to hold back their technology level.

But the Core worlds can't get too blatant about it, because they have to maintain the fiction they are trying to help the fringers, not suppress them. And of there isn't total agreement on what to do and not do. Plus of course human corruption.

So the fringe has to make it themselves, or adapt stuff the Core worlds make for themselves, when they can get it smuggled out, with the extra cost of smuggling.

So first of all, Love your idea for an explanation for a firefly like setting. I would totally play in it.

To reconcile the conundrum of the core having TL 10 but also being scared by it, I think at some point you'll have to invent what the original disaster was. Nano-tech might be a good candidate. They may have gotten to the point (in the original society) where they had universal matter de-constructors/re-constructors and were using them in daily life. All it would take is some crazy hacker to re-program them to initiate a grey goo scenario and you have the death of a civilization.

The other good thing about doing it this way is, you can have a workable tl10 society without nanotech, but the matter deconstructing nanotech would've been terribly useful for initial terraforming when they didn't have allot of raw materials available. Once they had a reasonable industrial base formed, they wouldn't need it anymore and could dismantle it/lock it away.

edit: it would also conveniently explain why the alliance is sooooo committed to multiple research projects. Their original technology path relied on matter deconstructing nano tech. They're having to re-invent some of that technology path to achieve the same ends without using that tech.

re-edit again: it also explains things like why food shortages and other supply problems on the fringe are so common, under their old tech path, that wouldn't have been an issue.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by mindstalk

No, Joss has made it clear he doesn't see the Alliance as all bad guys, or even all that bad overall. He's said so outright, and the first aired pilot involved an Alliance delivery of medicine. Classic "good works".

They weren't doing that out of generosity or even a quest for good PR. They were doing that because if the mine workers died then the mine would stop producing. Shipping them the medicine they needed on a regular basis was no different from shipping them the food they need to eat.

[Astromancer]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

They weren't doing that out of generosity or even a quest for good PR. They were doing that because if the mine workers died then the mine would stop producing. Shipping them the medicine they needed on a regular basis was no different from shipping them the food they need to eat.

Of course in game you can go with your own view/ideas. A group that sees themselves as good and following a goal that is worthy, but unaware that their plans are flawed and causing others pain, loss, and misery, is simply good drama. Heck, make the goal worthy and necessary, that makes the conflicts more dramatic.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Astromancer

Of course in game you can go with your own view/ideas. A group that sees themselves as good and following a goal that is worthy, but unaware that their plans are flawed and causing others pain, loss, and misery, is simply good drama. Heck, make the goal worthy and necessary, that makes the conflicts more dramatic.

Hero: Soylent Green is <spoiler>!
Extra: Okay. What do you suggest we eat?

[Gadget]

Seen this article and thought of this Firefly Thread

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...l#.U4rIZyj0CIp

[ak_aramis]

Most of the "worlds" in the Firefly setting are moons of gas giants; some are "worlds" orbiting brown dwarfs (one of which is in a hab zone, and has a GG orbiting it).

Given that several of the real-world observed systems discovered in the last 10 years have shown the extant planetary formation theories to (at best) be woefully incomplete... We can't say for certain it's not happening. We can say that the hill spheres clear each other based upon TVIN.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by ak_aramis

Most of the "worlds" in the Firefly setting are moons of gas giants; some are "worlds" orbiting brown dwarfs (one of which is in a hab zone, and has a GG orbiting it).

Given that several of the real-world observed systems discovered in the last 10 years have shown the extant planetary formation theories to (at best) be woefully incomplete... We can't say for certain it's not happening. We can say that the hill spheres clear each other based upon TVIN.

Yes, we most certainly can. There can't be that much Earth-sized stuff stuffed into habitable zones. It's impossible. That has nothing to do with planetary formation but just orbital dynamics and thermodynamics. Nor is it possible without without divine intervention to suddenly transform lifeless little rocks into worlds with full ecosystems, shirtsleeve environments, and earth-normal gravity.

[Flyndaran]

Gas giant moons may have life, but earth like isn't what I would call them if they have low gravity, viciously hot/cold day/night because of their long long planetary orbits, etc.

Planetology is simply Star Wars/Trek BS where every rock ball is earth's clone, and screw grade school science.
Trying to make such a genre piece even remotely realistic is going to induce nerd rage and just create different mistakes.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

It's impossible. That has nothing to do with planetary formation but just orbital dynamics and thermodynamics.

See Gadget's link in post 45. Designed by an astronomer, a system containing 60 worlds in the habitable zone stable over billion-year timescales. The orbital dynamics are possible. We'll have to retreat to planetary formation to claim that it can't happen without purposeful design.

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Yes, we most certainly can. There can't be that much Earth-sized stuff stuffed into habitable zones. It's impossible. That has nothing to do with planetary formation but just orbital dynamics and thermodynamics. Nor is it possible without without divine intervention to suddenly transform lifeless little rocks into worlds with full ecosystems, shirtsleeve environments, and earth-normal gravity.

Given that they've found strong evidence for inner system gas giants in positions where "there can't be enough mass" for them to have formed there, again, your denial of its possibility lacks credibility.

The math says it's possible for them to be stable there if the primaries are high mass (in order to reduce the hill spheres of the bodies in orbit). Nature shows that things exist in places where conventional wisdom says they cannot have formed; ipso facto, either they formed elsewhere and moved, or they formed by a process other than that presumed in conventional wisdom.

"My own suspicion is that the universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose." - J.B.S. Haldane.

Jack seems to be less bent than Joss...