Sounds in space, how do you feel about it?

[j d worthington]

However, the engine noises in Star Wars were specifically mentioned. I see no reason why the recording microphone could not have been in the cockpit of the X-Wing or Tie-fighter.

Yes, but that's been addressed in earlier posts. As I recall, the original question had to do not with such sounds being transmitted via some mechanical apparatus or even through the atmosphere within/structure of a ship, but in space itself -- between the vehicles, not even within a space suit, but in the objective environment... in which case, the answer is a simple: No, for all practical purposes, the use of sound in space is a tremendously notable blooper....

Incidentally... it's highly unlikely that a writer would include such sounds in a screenplay (unless they have such a reputation that no one is going to mess with their words) -- that's the sort of thing that comes in via the sound people, director, producers, etc. Writers are, with rare exceptions, seen as chattel in the movie business, and if you've read much in the way of screenplays, you'll see that very few bother with more than minimal stage direction, concentrating almost exclusively on setting up a scene enough to act as an aid (not a specific direction) and otherwise concentrating on dialogue. A few writers do more, yes; but in most cases even they are ignored....

 

[Zubi-Ondo]

... and otherwise concentrating on dialogue. A few writers do more, yes; but in most cases even they are ignored....

In which case, if we have two "actors" in space suits out in the vaccumm of space, and a laser ray flies past them, the dialogue should not say "Did you hear that?"

Incidently - I remember reading somewhere that one type of laser sound in Star Wars was made by touching a microphone to a very taut metal cable, and "twanging" it with a metal rod.

-Z.

 

[Anthony G Williams]

In which case, if we have two "actors" in space suits out in the vaccumm of space, and a laser ray flies past them, the dialogue should not say "Did you hear that?"

They should not only not hear it, they shouldn't see it either - it only becomes visible when it hits something (like their space suits, by which time it might be a little late).

 

[Zubi-Ondo]

They should not only not hear it, they shouldn't see it either - it only becomes visible when it hits something...

It depends on the wavelength. Laser stands for 'Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation' which means it is in the visible light portion of the wavelength spectrum. We know that when we are in orbit over the Earth we can still see the Sun (besides the fact that it travels through a vacuum to get to our atmosphere), which also happens to emit light in the visible portion of the electro-magnetic spectrum along with just about every other frequency you can imagine. There could most certainly be weapons that use another part of the spectrum (i.e. gamma, beta proton guns, etc.) but I was referring to the laser.

- Z.

 

[Ursa major]

Oddly enough, we see the photons that have travelled from the sun to our eye (either directly or having been reflected off another object). If we could see light travelling through a vacuum, I suspect that the night sky would be somewhat brighter (as we would be able to see the photons passing through space above our heads). The wavelength is irrelevant.

So AGW was correct.

 

[Dave]

I thought what Anthony meant was that, just like the torchlights mentioned earlier, you would not see the laser beam when looking at it from any other angle because there would be nothing to deflect the beam; you would merely see a spot of light when it hit a solid object. If it was a so-called, semi-fictional 'Star Wars' weapon system laser, then the first thing you would notice would be a hole in spacesuit, spacecraft or said object or explosion of ICBM. This applies even to lasers in the atmosphere; you can only see them in discotheques displays with the use of smoke machines.

 

[Zubi-Ondo]

Okay, I'll concede that point, assuming you have a perfect vacuum. Most of the space near us has various bits and pieces of dust here and there, so you might still see some trace of it. I'm used to seeing laser experiments where the beam is quite visible inside the cylinder in which it is being produced, but yes, once it exits the cylinder it is more or less invisible until it hits something which would be true of the sun itself if it were directed as such. But its so much more fun when you can see the cheesy fake rays flying every which way in Star Wars.

- Z.

 

[TheEndIsNigh]

Sorry I've been away, I see things have moved along.

OK Lets get realistic then.

In space no one hears you scream. Mainly because the concept of being there to hear it is a complete nonsense. Firing zillion mega watt laser cannon from massive intergalactic space ships with population the size of a small US town. It's all cods-wallop.

The reality of space travel is in itself a nonsense thats why it figures so much in SF. We allow ourselves to accept the impossible as thats what it's all about. If we criticise every little detail of ANY SF novel/film/play/ then we would be forced to say:- It's all c**p.

The concept of a hand held laser with enough power to penetrate a piece of tissue paper never mind even a current space suit - nonsense. Shields that would prevent even a 10g piece of space flotsam travelling at 10,000 mph penetrating a spaceship - nonsense. Teleportation -complete nonsense. You name it if it's SF it's not possible. That's why it's called SF. the F - Fiction. Now I enjoy SF have done for a long time and will be doing so even though we only have a short time left to do it.

I can still pick up a 50's SF novel that talks about the colony on Venus and still enjoy it for what it is - A damn good tale with a good plot wrapped in fantastic concepts. Sadly with our supposed better understanding of what can and cannot happen nowadays most of the classic SF is still ten times better that most of the rubbish produced today. None of the SF expounded in A E Van Vogt Wizard of Linn is possible - It's still a complex, conceptually challenging and inventive novel.

OK you read a book it says that the time traveller pulled out his splogwandian charge crystal and aimed it at the challenger tank which melted into a pool of liquid steel and then exploded. The explosion was observed on Mars signalling the start of the invasion.

Oh dear no, you say such a small bang couldn't be seen that far away . I mean come on which bit was the more ridiculous

When I read/watch SF I suspend my, I think you'll agree sceptical viewpoint, and enjoy it for what it is. :-

NOT MILLS AND BOON.

 

[Urlik]

OK Lets get realistic then.

In space no one hears you scream. Mainly because the concept of being there to hear it is a complete nonsense.

The reality of space travel is in itself a nonsense thats why it figures so much in SF.

I recently reread Arthur C Clarke's The Other Side of the Sky and in most of the stories, disbelief doesn't even need to be placed on a high shelf, let alone suspended.

a lot of the classic authors used a pretty sound knowledge of the sciences to give their stories a solid basis in fact before they follow the fictional storylines.

true, each of those authors made some mistakes and there were plenty of other authors who dwelt only in the realms of science fantasy, but to generalise and say that it is all complete nonsense diminishes the work of the great and visionary writers.

many of the things we take for granted today were totally unheard of when many of the classics were written, so, although the stories were fictional, the gadgets and gizmos weren't impossible, but the technology needed to create them was temporarily beyond our limit.

 

[chrispenycate]

Can you give me a reason, based on present day physics, for your rejection of the hnd-held terrawatt pulsed laser, systems for diverting or absorbing high energy junk.

The reality of space travel is in itself a nonsense

Which means that all the footage from the Moon, or the international space station, or even the unmanned probes is faked? But that's all right; everyone knows heavier than air flight is impossible, and atoms are indivisible. When write SF, the pysics might not be exactly what weknow now, but it will be consistent, and will not break any of today's physics' fundamental laws. This way, anyone who knows the field better than I do won't find himself getting squeezed out of the story by disbelief.
If I'm writing fantasy, the rules are different, but equivalent.
As I remember it we were able to light a cigarette with a four wall continuous rock and roll laser. In pulsed mode, burning through tissue paper would have been simple. As long as you're not forced to use chemical energy storage, quite high energy concentrations should be possible (although I'd expect space armour to be mirror plated, to be able to work in full sunlight closer to the sun than Earth, and super conducting as shielding against charged particles, so there will be few vunerable rehions to aim for…

 

[TheEndIsNigh]

Chris: The hand held Terra watt laser: If it were possible using today's physics we wouldn't be contaminating the world with little pieces of lead. I didn't say diverting high energy junk with a laser was ridiculous I said the concept of shields that could divert them was (but you couldn't)

If space travel in SF is only to be limited to what's actually feasible now then the moon - possibly mars (though we are trying our best to discourage it) is about as far as your going to get in the next 100 years or so. Which is a bit limiting for a good story involving intergalactic space wars where you may or may not 'hear' a bang.

We won't be needing the mirror plated space suits (for diverting lasers). The chances of 'meeting' another space traveller is astronomical even if they exist in 'our time' .Current physics might get you to a specific point in space calculated 20 years before. Changing your destination based on a knowledge of another 'target' would require the target to remain stationary for those twenty years based on a radar 'ping' requiring the instantaneous energy output of the sun emanating from your ship (inverse square law and all that) using equipment with an accuracy many orders of magnitude greater than anything currently available and able to scan every co-ordinate instantaneously for the next twenty years for the pings' reflections. (unless we just got 'lucky') Relying on them to 'tell us' whare they are - well using todays physics it's not working very well. Worse when you get there your hand held lasers going to look pretty pathetic compared to their zillion watt splogwand crystal.

As for your cigarette lighter how many watts - watt distance, how long (was the cigarette )

How big is your superconducting shield and what evidence do you have for suggesting a superconductor generated field would divert anything (even similarly charged) travelling at that modest speed. Where would this magical field divert the kinetic energy to and what acceleration would you be subjected to as a result of the none impact. Given that, during the duration of the experience everything on your space ship must continue to work in the normal way while being subjected to the induced EMI/RFI interference which would probably be present.

Trust me every SF book/film should carry a warning/leader saying

ABANDON ALL SENSE OF REALITY ALL YE THAT ENTER HERE

Course we don't really need to do that we just call it

Science Fiction.

 

[Anthony G Williams]

Chris: The hand held Terra watt laser: If it were possible using today's physics we wouldn't be contaminating the world with little pieces of lead.

Exactly so. But SF set in the future can reasonably be expected to include something beyond the limitations of "today's physics". After all, lasers would have been considered impossible a couple of generations ago: "A beam of light capable of cutting steel? You need medical help..."

You seem to have missed the point of the debate on this (or not read the posts). What is being objected to is not deliberately introduced ideas about "future science" which are there to make the story work (which are indeed essential to most SF), but silly mistakes about basics, like sound transmission or visible light beams in a vacuum. There is a fundamental difference between the two.

You can write stories about alternate WW2s (I have) which include time-travel. Most readers are happy to accept that, as the necessary starting point to the story. But if I'd got the basics wrong about what actually happened in the conflict, who the key players were, where battles happened, which equipment was used, etc, I'd have been roasted...

 

[TheEndIsNigh]

AGW: I did address the 'possible' means whereby the basics could conceivably occur earlier on on the thread and though extreme I thought not too incredible, given the right conditions suitably set up in the plot. Your steel cutting laser would have been science fiction back in the forties and no one would have taken it seriously.

It would have been laughed of the page... Wait a minute death rays and disintergrater guns have been around since 'Exeter' was a lad even before. The point is, the chances of getting your Terra watt laser in a handy battery powered unit is so fantastic we just have to rule it out in any serious SF. Unless the reader (and I believe most are) is prepared to suspend his critical eye for the good of the fiction.

Your WW2 stories requires the reader to jump into an alternative reality even to get started. You say that if you get the basics wrong about the key players and where battles happened then people would be turned off.

On the contrary I've already made the big leap, if in your story the Dunkirk debacle failed but then go on to suggest any of the rest of the war continued as before to a D-day landing on the same day then your stretching the realms of possibility too far for me.

The Germans could win (not so fantastic) in an 'alternate WW2' how does that gel with the times and all the dates being the same. A couple less spitfires, we loose the battle of Britain and get invaded. Where is the reality of the battle of Bog-nor Regis or the concentration camps on Bethnel Green in anyones basics.

As I said you pick up a SF book and providing... well nothing really, surprise me with sounds in space, visible lasers, time travel and Margaret Thatcher as the first woman prime minister

OK a little bit of reality massaging doesn't do any harm as in:-

Fred new things were getting desperate. So many of the spaceships had been destroyed that it was now possible to hear the faint explosions as more of them added to the small pocket of atmosphere that was developing in the battlespace...

It's enough, it acceptable, I can move on to the main feature without the need to get out my bell jar and test how many molecules of air are required to hear that bell in there (not so many as I recall) As Chris said, its attenuated but so what, it's a Krakatau level explosion I'm going to hear it, just before the blast tears me a apart.

 

[HardScienceFan]

all of you make valid points.
my take on this: in our entertainment,we like to be taken away out of reality.

All of us entertain*pun intended* different ideas about reality.
All of us have different levels of knowledge about the universe.
all of us even have different levels of gullibility or willingness to suspend disbelief,even for the duration of a movie or novel.

most science in SF novels is sheer bunk
at least,that is,given our current state of knowledge about the cosmos.
If in the 17th century you 'd have written a novel featuring a thing called the telephone ,people would have laughed heartily.

all of us possibly also like mysteries,or detective novels
are there plots in real life as devious and wellconceived as in those novels ?

thanks for mentioning the wizard,End
slightly underestimated gem,that one

 

[TheEndIsNigh]

HSF: 17th century telephone fiction:-

No they wouldn't.

They would have dragged you out and burnt you as a witch at the O2 mast...

Oh oh... wrong thread. (twice... is that a record)

 

[HardScienceFan]

hm
and another thing:inertia

the rapid twists and turns in space battles.......

the apparent lack of G forces.....

 

[Anthony G Williams]

Your WW2 stories requires the reader to jump into an alternative reality even to get started. You say that if you get the basics wrong about the key players and where battles happened then people would be turned off.

On the contrary I've already made the big leap, if in your story the Dunkirk debacle failed but then go on to suggest any of the rest of the war continued as before to a D-day landing on the same day then your stretching the realms of possibility too far for me.

The Germans could win (not so fantastic) in an 'alternate WW2' how does that gel with the times and all the dates being the same. A couple less spitfires, we loose the battle of Britain and get invaded. Where is the reality of the battle of Bog-nor Regis or the concentration camps on Bethnel Green in anyones basics.

I perhaps didn't explain my story well enough (you can read the first couple of chapters of the book here: The Foresight War Reviews ). Of course, as soon as the time-travellers make significant changes to historical events, everything
after that changes. But a theme of the story is the way in which the time-travellers keep comparing what happened in their previous reality (i.e. ours) with the effects of their changes in this alternate reality, as they desperately try to keep events more or less under control (and usually fail...).

Alternate WW2 stories do labour under the disadvantage that most readers of such tales are very interested in WW2 and will instantly be aware of any errors or implausibilities. I had to do months of research to get the historical details right and to ensure that my departures from history were plausible.

Fred new things were getting desperate. So many of the spaceships had been destroyed that it was now possible to hear the faint explosions as more of them added to the small pocket of atmosphere that was developing in the battlespace...

That's acceptable because you have provided an explanation for the sound (the creation of a thin atmosphere) although some might pick you up on exactly how densely packed the destroyed spaceships would have to be to produce such as result.... But we've been debating the transmission of sound in a vacuum, which is not acceptable (IMO anyway).

 

[Anthony G Williams]

A further general thought on this subject. There is a continuum in the feasibility of science in SFF which starts with the inclusion of only that science which is currently known (sometimes called "mundane" SF) through to, at the other extreme, pure fantasy. So how much attention you pay to the basic laws of science depends on the type of book you're writing. If it's a fantasy - and especially a comic fantasy - you can get away with just about anything (as Terry Pratchett ably demonstrated). The one rule which cuts across all of this, however, is that whatever scientific developments or natural laws you invent should be internally consistent.

 

[ctg]

Isn't it the writer job to explain if he or she is using different psychics, as Douglas Adams did in the Hitch-hiker Guide or Terry Pratchett in his books? So, if you have done that then the reader can imagine what's what and why's that happening? Without it, the disbelief would be broken and the reader would think you're taking a piss.

 

[jezelf]

I've been waiting for a movie to mix the 2001 & star wars thing. I've not known it to be done yet and it'll be a fresh approach.

I think it would be quite dramatic to have the interior scenes of a ship when a battle happens with lots of noise and such going off, then to switch to the exterior scenes and it's silent. Contrasts are very powerful when used well. I guess I could try it with the DVD star wars scenes and press the mute button! (Though the sound track music over the top probably won’t help)

I just love 2001 -one of my top 3 films of all time, and I saw it on the big screen (intermission and all) and the silent bits where quite powerful in the cinema after cutting from the interior of the pods. For me, It gave it authenticity and credibility leading to further immersion into the film.

Suppose it depends what you are trying to achieve in terms of entertainment. Hard SF or a Space-opera?

On the page, you can say 'the ship explodes' and the reader could determine if it made a noise or not depending on their preference.