Quick Fire Questions (A Place to Ask and Answer)

[Jo Zebedee]

You will not be surprised by this, Chrispy, but eh? tuning the worm acoustically, or a completely different type of carrier? Would it be a case of swallowing the egg and then it hatched, bio engineered to do this?

 

[chrispenycate]

Bio engineered, right. Look, a tapeworm's segmented, right? And as it grows the segments are slightly different sizes, in a continuous smooth expansion, so each is tuned a little differently, musically. You store the data in them as each one separates off from the head, so it is sequenced the length of the beast. Then you sweep an ultrasonic wave, and as each tuning point is struck, that section resonates. The data comes out time stamped, and absolutely nothing metallic or crystalline, no unexplained radio bursts, it's self powered and auto manufacturing and problems only arise when one of your competitors has put one in someone else in the room (another reason why bath detection is preferred). And, with solid state everywhere, nobody remembers tape as a storage medium any more…
Looks up.
Um. This is getting pretty silly, isn't it?

 

[Vertigo]

Personally I think things are getting into a bit of overkill for a simple tracking device. I still think a tiny mechanical/electronic device that hooks onto the inside of the stomach walls would work perfectly well. You don't need to go all nano- or bio-tech. After all you would want a device like this to be a moderately cheap throw-away thing and for your story you also want it detectable, which it might not be with nano- or bio-tech.

There would be no problems of the body's defences attacking it if it is made of metal; maybe make the hook from a plastic that breaks down over the same period of time as the batteries are likely to last. Then maybe your protagionists know that zapping a bug like that with a electromagnetic pulse will make it detach so they easily get to remove and recover it. Making it of metal means it is easily detectable by x-ray (for your protagionists) but it would generally be a safe bet for the people planting it as you don't get x-ray'd every day. Make it small enough and it's not going to be picked up by normal everyday metal detectors.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

@chrispy: Very creative, though. But perhaps, not quite practical for tracking one person across two star systems, when he's trying not to be found.... pity. Back to tequila's all round.
@vertigo, our posts crossed. Yours was the original sort of concept I was thinking of. I like the idea of some sort of parasite, it gets rid of lots of the mechanical problems, though.

 

[Esfires]

There are no conventional means to track someone across star systems unless you have some sort of faster than light communication.

Maybe have the parasite be a delivery vehicle for one of a pair of quantumly entangled particles? The parasite could be something that is photosensitive and it settles in or behind the character's eyes. Every time the character looks out the window of his ship, the parasite reacts to the star pattern that it "sees" and its physical reaction (twitches, chemical release, generation of electric current, etc.) to that light stimuli manipulates the particle it carries. Halfway across the galaxy, the paired particle is manipulated in the same way and by precisely measuring the particle's activity your chasers can determine the character's position relative to his surrounding stars.

The parasite can be quickly removed by something as simple as eye drops.

 

[luci2also]

But the whole chapter is in the character's close point of view, and I can't have it all as dialogue. (I would if I could, believe me....) So, it's not the god/omnipresent narrator's voice, but the character's.
Also, he's not speaking, nor is it close enough to be an internal thought. But it is from his close point of view. We're walking through the scene on the character's shoulder, experiencing it from them, not an omnipresent perspective.

And, when you say it'd get flagged by the copy edit, isn't this the sort of thing GRRM is doing with his pov approach? That the voice changes - and the approach, and the knowledge, acccording to the character who is the focus of that chapter? So, why would they flag it?

Can't claim too much familiarity with close POV. So I'm uncertain if it is flexible enough to allow you to establish exact knowledge of thoughts and motives of the person bearing them on their shoulder.
People sometimes do talk to themselves and they think to themselves. But can this close POV apparition hear the thoughts I don't know.

What i meant as far as the copy-edit flagging this.
From experience a copy-editor uses some specific predesignated method from which to edit. in most cases they will look at the way you stacked those and try to make it more readable and to the standard agreed upon. Then you would have to explain your intent and say do not touch that the next time through. That's all.

I tend to use first person for my main character's when it comes to something like this. Though, some people suggest first person is difficult and others just claim its not right. I find Science Fiction lends itself easily to first person narrative.

 

[luci2also]

But the whole chapter is in the character's close point of view, and I can't have it all as dialogue. (I would if I could, believe me....) So, it's not the god/omnipresent narrator's voice, but the character's.
Also, he's not speaking, nor is it close enough to be an internal thought. But it is from his close point of view. We're walking through the scene on the character's shoulder, experiencing it from them, not an omnipresent perspective.

And, when you say it'd get flagged by the copy edit, isn't this the sort of thing GRRM is doing with his pov approach? That the voice changes - and the approach, and the knowledge, acccording to the character who is the focus of that chapter? So, why would they flag it?

I took out some time to study close POV.
Sounds like first person disguised as a multiple personality watching themselves do things. It's a device to keep you from wandering with third person and going to far away from the character and the action. Preventing the narrator from getting to far from the emotion and feelings of the subject. Keeping you on the edge of being in first person.

One suggestion was to write it in first person then convert it to third person- which actually sounds pretty easy. IT also sounds like hiding first person in third person just in-case the reader has some issues with reading in first person. The writer who blogged this confessed to having issues with first person narrative.

I think though that this still doesn't solve the issue that what you have sounds best in dialogue and should probably be in dialogue.
Maybe you could draw in a thought bubble for it.

 

[David Evil Overlord]

There are no conventional means to track someone across star systems unless you have some sort of faster than light communication.

Maybe have the parasite be a delivery vehicle for one of a pair of quantumly entangled particles? The parasite could be something that is photosensitive and it settles in or behind the character's eyes. Every time the character looks out the window of his ship, the parasite reacts to the star pattern that it "sees" and its physical reaction (twitches, chemical release, generation of electric current, etc.) to that light stimuli manipulates the particle it carries. Halfway across the galaxy, the paired particle is manipulated in the same way and by precisely measuring the particle's activity your chasers can determine the character's position relative to his surrounding stars.

The parasite can be quickly removed by something as simple as eye drops.

OR...you could show the character a star map from the POV of someone on the other side of the galaxy. Bad guys go hooning off to the Small Group Of Faint, Boring Stars, while Our Hero is actually in the Very Exciting Star Cluster.

Rinse and repeat.

THEN remove the parasite.

 

[luci2also]

There are no conventional means to track someone across star systems unless you have some sort of faster than light communication.

Maybe have the parasite be a delivery vehicle for one of a pair of quantumly entangled particles? The parasite could be something that is photosensitive and it settles in or behind the character's eyes. Every time the character looks out the window of his ship, the parasite reacts to the star pattern that it "sees" and its physical reaction (twitches, chemical release, generation of electric current, etc.) to that light stimuli manipulates the particle it carries. Halfway across the galaxy, the paired particle is manipulated in the same way and by precisely measuring the particle's activity your chasers can determine the character's position relative to his surrounding stars.

The parasite can be quickly removed by something as simple as eye drops.

A problem with quantum entangled particles is that its difficult to be certain that the ones you have captured and isolated for your project are the only ones being networked into that entanglement. Even if you could isolate them they would have to be particles which for some reason were already streaming media back and forth exclaiming their position and other relevant characteristics. You would have to understand the mechanics behind what drives the spooky action at a distance. If you knew that you might not need the particles.


On the other hand if you entrap the entangled particles in some nano control that would then be able to manipulate the particle and send encoded messages. You could have the nano control be the brains running the spy. You still Run a risk that someone somewhere else might have a triplet particle over which they are intercepting your encrypted signal. Of course they would have to decrypt it unless you were reckless and did not encrypt at all.
You would also have to determine the event horizon limits of the spooky action.
But, that may coincide with the technical boundaries of your faster than light travel or whatever means you have of bouncing around the universe.

 

[luci2also]

Grumbles at Luci, too, also – that screen with the inverted commas down there – yes, there at the bottom right of the post – is a multiquote, enabling you to avoid doing multiple sequential posts.

Tapeworms hatch from eggs (hey, those are just droppy off body segments; I wonder if tapeworms are asexual. Well, finding a mate in those conditions might be a bit problematical, and I don't remember them having another vector), and precoding an organic radio ping receiver/data transmitter into a genetic structure sounds a bit too unlikely to me. How about tuning it acoustically, so a tuned ultrasonic burst brings back the data in reverberations? Short range, and easier to use in the bath than with the air/skin interface, but unless you knew about the thing, unlikely to be detected by chance.

Ok now this is like the dvd and vcr dvr setup for me. I'm a technophobe with those things.

I keep hitting that multi-quote button and it does nothing for me. It should at least make me feel good, but, NO.

So I missed where the instructions on multi-quote are could you point me.
Meantime I'll rummage around a bit till it strikes me.

I was thinking multi-quote was for the post you were quoting to split things up. Certainly not for posting separate topics- that would just be confusing so now I'm confused about serial posting and what it is and why I keep doing it.

Please enlighten me with the power of your flaming.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

You see on the right, beside the quote button, there's one beside it with speechmarks and a +, if you hit that in each message you want to quote, it'll go orange. Hit quote when you're ready and each message will appear on your reply screen, and then delete whatever within the message you don't want to reply to.

 

[Abernovo]

It took me a while to work out how to use the multi-quote. Hit the multi-quote button for each post you wish to quote. On the last post you include, hit the quote button as well.

Thank you, by the way. I don't feel like the only one who's technically compromised now.


EDIT: Ah, springs got in before me. Note to fingers: type faster!

 

[luci2also]

Can't claim too much
.

Ok now this is likeflaming.

something in the middle.

Might be

A quick question a

perfectly correct .

It depends:

Er... well, I wouldn't say

Thanks for the responses.

Now you know

the annoying

didn't help.

All right I think I got it. This is like the day I learned to use the cruise control. Look out everyone get off the highway!

 

[chrispenycate]

I was thinking multi-quote was for the post you were quoting to split things up. Certainly not for posting separate topics- that would just be confusing so now I'm confused about serial posting and what it is and why I keep doing it.

'M sorry. Didn't explain properly to start with, then wasn't there to get shouted at. Still, you seem to have had adequate aid. Happy cruisin'.

 

[Vertigo]

All right I think I got it. This is like the day I learned to use the cruise control. Look out everyone get off the highway!

Hehe - love the posted quotes, though I wouldn't recommend doing it too often!

 

[Interference]

I dunno, at least that way, everyone gets to contribute to all your sentences....

 

[Warren_Paul]

Any suggestions on a way to say 'Part One' in a more scientific or historian fashion?

Something that sounds flashy?

I'm splitting my book in half, but thought to just use the same name for both halves like what they did with the last Harry Potter and Twilight movies. But after something a little more fancy then just saying "A Touch of Ice, Part One" and "A Touch of Ice, Part Two".

 

[David Evil Overlord]

A Touch of Ice, Part the First

A Touch of Ice, The First Chronicle

A Touch of Ice, Chronicle One

 

[Warren_Paul]

A Touch of Ice, Part the First

A Touch of Ice, The First Chronicle

A Touch of Ice, Chronicle One

I like chronicle.

A thought that also came to mind was Codex, but that sounds more sci-fi.

Thanks, David.

 

[alchemist]

Book one?

Volume one?

A Touch of Ice - freezing. A Touch of Ice - melting.