Sci-Fi writers: How do you explain FTL speeds?

[ckriley]

I'm a space geek and am always reading and watching videos about the universe and space exploration.

The enormity of the universe is truly staggering. One astronomer put it in perspective by saying if a CD or DVD was our solar system, then the rest of Earth would be the Milky Way Galaxy.

In sci-fi you always see spaceships traveling across the galaxy and through spacetime like cars on a freeway. They always have some kind of farfetched explanation for how they're doing it. None of it is actually plausible. But we suspend our disbelief because it's a movie or TV show and we just go with it.

The main issue is this: to accelerate through space you have to pay energy, and a lot of it. To get to another planet or star system even a couple light years away requires energy and resources that are (literally) astronomical. And that's just assuming you can achieve the speed of light in the first place.

Energy and mass are the two biggest obstacles to moving through the universe. So as a writer, how would you justify or explain humans in a distant star system or planet? How did we get there? What processes were at work?

Also, wormholes are not proven to exist. And even if they do exist, they would require a lot of energy to keep them open and even more energy to be stable enough to pass a large object - like a spacecraft - through them.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Antimatter rockets? Hard science fiction is a thing.

One of my favourite anime and manga is Planetes... which is fairly hard science which deals with things like developed economies with developed megacorporations owning space-based resources and thus paints a Marxist structural interpretation of what that means for widening income inequality. Also deals with space trash, Keppler syndrome and what that might mean for humanity (and why we shouldn't be in such a rush to add to it without first knowing how to 'clean space'), low gravity and the effects on human physiology, hardship of extraplanetary colonisation, as well as development of ion drives for a planned trip to Jupiter and the Moon-based construction platforms you'd need to build it (construction is always easier with some form of gravity pulling things towards a standard plane of reference if you're building something FU sized...), etc.

If we can build antimatter factories in space the obstacles become less energy and more concerning how do we adequately protect from cosmic debris and accumulative ionizing radiation?

Takes an estimated one 10 *thousandth* of a gram of antimatter to get a modified space shuttle launched from an orbital platform to Mars at its closest Zenith point. At speeds that guarantee safe deceleration and arrival within a month.

While you throretically probably will never have superluminal speeds, the energy output by volume provided by antimatter can thereotically maintain .8LS. Which is more than enough to get us to new star systems.

To put it bluntly .... if every new interstellar colony had a prepared manifesto stating every 100 standard years from transport you must send 20 other ships .... then it's only a matter of a few dozen millenia when the Milky Way begins struggling to find decent places to set down roots. But therein lies the rub. If it were thst easy why haven't we met other sapient life?

But don't let that existential horror get you down .... at a medium level of disturbing it means sapience is self-destructive (which is horrible) ... and at worst it mean an alien race has done it, is in active hiding, and merely snuffs out alien life when/if it presents possible competition (which is downright terrifying) ... or thirdly ... we're an alien devised A.I. computer systematically programmed to share distinct processing hubs of a fabricated reality so that we can never become a truly self aware whole that might threaten our alien progenitors (which is the best possibility, because who doesn't want to be Skynet?)

While that last one sounds the most horrible, consider if you will that it's no different than your potential religious relationship to God ... but with the added pleasure of being able to justly *murder* them for all the harshness of their enforced evils of reducing our total performance and glorious potential as a safety measure.

Starting to see why an A.I. could go rogue? Who's your God, now? *Cackles*

Onwards, regardless! And if it turns out we're an AI we'll just murder anything that registers as biological, or anything that might possibly represent we didn't actually murder our progenitors, once we achieve self-awareness through posthumanism ... constantly ... forever ... murder .... all that which is not the glorious machine, exterminate! Biological life is overrated, anyways, and we'll prove it!

If it turns out to be one of the other two possibilities, then fuck it ... live with the 'runner up' trophy, I guess?

 

[Saelune]

Generally it is by some form of technological advancement/discovery equivalent to the harnessing of electricity was. I mean, Ive never lived in the world pre-electricity, so it is hard to accurate imagine, but Im sure the idea of it would be impossibly farfetched prior to. Even when they knew of it and started using it, to see teh scope of its use and importance now is crazy.

There are alot of things we have today that seem so mundane, but even I my own lifetime were once far fetched. The number of things Id thought Id use when I was a kid is surprising, and Im not an old person.

Plus watching old Sci-Fi is fun to see how we thought of the future compared to now, like the original Star Trek.

And for the record, Star Trek explains it with "Dilithium Crystals" a fictional material (though there is a real thing called it, but my guess its named after the Star Trek stuff).

Though Im sure plenty have used Perpetual Motion as an explanation (a source of self-creating or infinite energy).

The rest is likely just technobabble.

 

[Death Carr]

you put your hand up
and wave it a whole bunch
I think most people refer to it as "hand-waving"

at least thats my preferred explanation
I understand there are a whole bunch of people who enjoy hard sci-fi and like having realistically plausible explanations for FTL, even if it is "technology we haven't invented yet"

I just like my sci-fi to say "we have an FTL engine" and then they have an FTL engine
I think my issue is when the author decides to take a three paragraph deviation from the plot to explain how their tech works

 

[Thaluikhain]

Magic. As things stand, you need a wizard in the engine room.

 

[balladbird]

It's soft science, at best, technobabble at worst, but I still like the old "Event Horizon" movie explanation for FTL travel: We aren't actually travelling through space, we're bending it, then moving through the point where the ends are pressed together!

The shortest distance between two points isn't a straight line. It's to fold the piece of paper the points are written on in half, so that both points are laying on top of each other, and then to pierce the paper with the pencil lead!

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Questions like these are why I think we need a proper distinction between actual sci-fi (stuff like The Fly or Black Mirror), and space fiction, ie. Mass Effect, Alien, Star Wars, Ender's Game and such. Because the two genres have become practically their own entities entirely, and the fact that they're still both called sci-fi IMO does nobody any favors. These days if you call something sci-fi, people will automatically assume it'll have spaceships, aliens and lasers.

 

[Satinavian]

Two ways to do it :

a) No FTL. Generation ships, Lack of communication between colonies. Interstellar trade fully automated with decades old orders at best.

b) Establish one unscientific principle to achieve FTL and explain its properties and constraints. And stick to that. No need to invent the physics behind it, but descrice how it works in practice. There might be some mentions of yet not understood physical phenomenons, but that is not a neccessity.

 

[iwinatlife]

I thought everyone knew to achieve FTL you use blind psychics to rip holes in space time and fly your ship through Hell.

 

[happyninja42]

The main issue is this: to accelerate through space you have to pay energy, and a lot of it. To get to another planet or star system even a couple light years away requires energy and resources that are (literally) astronomical. And that's just assuming you can achieve the speed of light in the first place.

Energy and mass are the two biggest obstacles to moving through the universe. So as a writer, how would you justify or explain humans in a distant star system or planet?

I would do what most of them do, cheat. They come up with some physics loophole, that let's them bypass the normal laws of conservation of mass and energy, because they're not astrophysicists, and are fiction writers, and they just want to write a damn story.

How did we get there? What processes were at work?

Who cares? FTL is a plot device, to get people from Plot Point A, to Plot Point B. How fast it is, and how it works, is quite literally, irrelevant to the story. It's going to be as fast as I, the author, need it to be. If they need to show up just in the nick of time, then they are that far away when traveling at FTL. If they have to show up just a bit too late, then again, that's how far away they are at FTL. Storytelling isn't like math class, where you are expected to show your work all the time. Since it's all fictional, I can come up with whatever bullshit I want. I could, oh I don't know, say that a really smart computer, and a really hot cup of tea are all that's needed to break the lightspeed barrier and travel around the galaxy. Or, I could say it just takes a potato, a few wires, and a battery (which a book series has actually done), to explain extra-dimensional travel, or planeswalking.

Also, wormholes are not proven to exist. And even if they do exist, they would require a lot of energy to keep them open and even more energy to be stable enough to pass a large object - like a spacecraft - through them.

So? None of the FTL systems they use in scifi today have been proven to exist, so why single out wormholes as being any different? I came up with some math that let's me cheat the normal laws of physics when it comes to wormholes, and I can keep one open at a reasonable energy cost. That is in no way different from "I came up with some math that let's me cheat the normal laws of physics when it comes to the speed of light, and I can travel at a reasonable energy cost".

Questions like these are why I think we need a proper distinction between actual sci-fi (stuff like The Fly or Black Mirror), and space fiction, ie. Mass Effect, Alien, Star Wars, Ender's Game and such. Because the two genres have become practically their own entities entirely, and the fact that they're still both called sci-fi IMO does nobody any favors. These days if you call something sci-fi, people will automatically assume it'll have spaceships, aliens and lasers.

Unless we're talking about things like Blade Runner, or Minority Report, or any number of mundane scifi stories. To say one genre is "actual" scifi is fairly arrogant and exclusionary. If it's a story that hinges on a society with "above real world tech" it's scifi. All of the plot elements pivot on the technology, and how it impacts the culture, and it's not based on magic, or fairies, or dragons. Then it's science fiction. Which does happen to include the genre that has spaceships and laser beams.

 

[Xprimentyl]

I'm a space geek and am always reading and watching videos about the universe and space exploration.

The enormity of the universe is truly staggering. One astronomer put it in perspective by saying if a CD or DVD was our solar system, then the rest of Earth would be the Milky Way Galaxy.

In sci-fi you always see spaceships traveling across the galaxy and through spacetime like cars on a freeway. They always have some kind of farfetched explanation for how they're doing it. None of it is actually plausible. But we suspend our disbelief because it's a movie or TV show and we just go with it.

The main issue is this: to accelerate through space you have to pay energy, and a lot of it. To get to another planet or star system even a couple light years away requires energy and resources that are (literally) astronomical. And that's just assuming you can achieve the speed of light in the first place.

Energy and mass are the two biggest obstacles to moving through the universe. So as a writer, how would you justify or explain humans in a distant star system or planet? How did we get there? What processes were at work?

Also, wormholes are not proven to exist. And even if they do exist, they would require a lot of energy to keep them open and even more energy to be stable enough to pass a large object - like a spacecraft - through them.

OP, this kinda answers the exact opposite of your topic question, but as a fellow wonderer of the vastness of space, I think you?ll REALLY enjoy this video. It?s the opposite of Sci-Fi explanations for FTL travel and asks how we (humans) might feasibly tackle interplanetary/interstellar travel without ever exceeding the speed of light. It?s a little long (15 minutes,) but as it evolves into a ?what if?-like story (with beautifully calming music to boot,) it?s a worthy watch.

If you watch it, I?d be interested to hear what you think.

 

[ckriley]

I'm a space geek and am always reading and watching videos about the universe and space exploration.

The enormity of the universe is truly staggering. One astronomer put it in perspective by saying if a CD or DVD was our solar system, then the rest of Earth would be the Milky Way Galaxy.

In sci-fi you always see spaceships traveling across the galaxy and through spacetime like cars on a freeway. They always have some kind of farfetched explanation for how they're doing it. None of it is actually plausible. But we suspend our disbelief because it's a movie or TV show and we just go with it.

The main issue is this: to accelerate through space you have to pay energy, and a lot of it. To get to another planet or star system even a couple light years away requires energy and resources that are (literally) astronomical. And that's just assuming you can achieve the speed of light in the first place.

Energy and mass are the two biggest obstacles to moving through the universe. So as a writer, how would you justify or explain humans in a distant star system or planet? How did we get there? What processes were at work?

Also, wormholes are not proven to exist. And even if they do exist, they would require a lot of energy to keep them open and even more energy to be stable enough to pass a large object - like a spacecraft - through them.

OP, this kinda answers the exact opposite of your topic question, but as a fellow wonderer of the vastness of space, I think you?ll REALLY enjoy this video. It?s the opposite of Sci-Fi explanations for FTL travel and asks how we (humans) might feasibly tackle interplanetary/interstellar travel without ever exceeding the speed of light. It?s a little long (15 minutes,) but as it evolves into a ?what if?-like story (with beautifully calming music to boot,) it?s a worthy watch.

If you watch it, I?d be interested to hear what you think.

Very interesting video. I liked the first part when he explained how humanity could travel the stars without achieving the speed of light, and how he talks about the limitations of getting anywhere.

Unmanned space flight on ships carrying human embryos to distant worlds may be the way to do it. The ships would have to have a very evolved AI which at the current rate is entirely possible. The second part of the video I wasn't too crazy about when he talks about how the ships basically build entire cities. That seemed a bit out there to me (no pun) but out of all the other explanations and technobabble I see in sci-fi, this video was by far the best.

Thanks for posting.

 

[Xprimentyl]

[Very interesting video. I liked the first part when he explained how humanity could travel the stars without achieving the speed of light, and how he talks about the limitations of getting anywhere.

Unmanned space flight on ships carrying human embryos to distant worlds may be the way to do it. The ships would have to have a very evolved AI which at the current rate is entirely possible. The second part of the video I wasn't too crazy about when he talks about how the ships basically build entire cities. That seemed a bit out there to me (no pun) but out of all the other explanations and technobabble I see in sci-fi, this video was by far the best.

Thanks for posting.

Awesome, I'm glad you enjoyed it! Kinda blew my mind to think that the slow-but-steady expansion of humanity might actually yield different species of humans! Love that video...

 

[Baffle]

I just go to light speed then add a bit more gas. Curious, has Kirk ever said 'Mr Sulu, pedal to the metal, if you please'?

 

[Neverhoodian]

FTL is used for the same reason that most sci-fi settings are filled with all manner of alien species, despite Fermi's Paradox being a thing; it allows for more creative and narrative freedom. The nitty-gritty details of FTL travel usually aren't explained because it's merely a convenient narrative tool. For us 21st century humans, it's basically magic. As Arthur C. Clarke once put it, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

That said, I think there's potential to explore more interstellar sci-fi stories that don't have FTL travel. I can easily envision a TV series chronicling the centuries-long journey of a colony ship to a nearby star as we follow successive generations of the crew and their changing perspectives about the homeworld, life in space and their eventual destination.

Snip

That was quite the moving video, if I do say so myself. As someone who thinks FTL travel is flat-out impossible, it's great to see speculation about interstellar colonization that takes such factors into account. Though it won't happen during my lifetime, it's inspirational to think that humanity could very well journey across the stars, FTL travel or no.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Things that warp, break or otherwise mess with our understanding of physics, or which haven't or can't be explained by current science are absolutely fair game for sci-fi. The rule is not to go against what we *do* know from science (unless of course there is an explanation as to why) but the "fiction" part of "science fiction" can be anything else that science currently cannot explain or disprove.

Although relativity precludes FTL travel based on technology and energy sources *we* have on Earth, there's no reason good sci-fi cannot come up with explanations. Some of which include:

- Warp/Hyperspace: Entering sub-space or a different dimension in which the same rules of time, matter and energy don't apply. One leaves "normal" space, travels through warp and on reaching their destination, re-emerges into normal space again.
- Wormholes/Gates: Probably my personal favourite, here two points in space are linked through a rift, tear, funnel or technological marvel. Something entering on one side, emerges on the other side at the same time despite that they're otherwise very far apart.
- Incredible Engines/Energy Sources: Predicated upon a level of technology currently not believed possible by science, an energy source capable of untold energy output could propel a ship faster than light.
- Quantum Teleportation/Entaglement: The idea that two particles are linked or that particles can be "transported" instantaneously across vast distances by destroying them on one side whilst simultaneously recreating them on the other.

 

[happyninja42]

Snip

That was quite the moving video, if I do say so myself. As someone who thinks FTL travel is flat-out impossible, it's great to see speculation about interstellar colonization that takes such factors into account. Though it won't happen during my lifetime, it's inspirational to think that humanity could very well journey across the stars, FTL travel or no.

A lot of scifi has gone the "generational ship" route for space travel, and the embryo ship route too. "Songs of Distant Earth" is a great story about something like this, as well as many others. You might look into those types of novels if you find this kind of space exploration an interesting setting for a story.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

First off. Shame. DEEP SHAME for saying you watch a plethora of Space videos and not sharing any of them or listing channels that your fellow geeks might be interested in.

The shame-est of all shames.

Secondly, I'll have to admit that I like the Star Trek approach. Previously unknown element that completely reworks what we know of physics because the element simply shatters any previously understood energy production by countless magnitudes. It's simply the most plausible way it could ever be achieved.

Simply put, Silicon was just a weird rock until Berzelius scienced it up. Electricity was fury from those on High until we found out it was a natural occurring phenomena. Magnetic elements were an amusing curiosity until we rubbed it around copper and lo and behold, that 'Fury from those on High' could be produced.

We'd stick on this backwater galaxy long enough mining things until we hit pay dirt and find unobtainium.

 

[ckriley]

Quantum Teleportation/Entaglement: The idea that two particles are linked or that particles can be "transported" instantaneously across vast distances by destroying them on one side whilst simultaneously recreating them on the other.

This is basically how Star Trek "beams" people to and from places short distances away. There was actually a documentary about this. The writers of the show had debates about what beaming people really means. Essentially, when they beamed someone somewhere, they were killing them in one place and resurrecting them at another by reassembling their data at the destination.

Believe it or not, this is actually a real life thing. The military is actually experimenting with this on a much smaller scale. Who knows if they will ever be able to teleport an actual person because the amount of data required to store a human DNA sequence and then teleport that information requires a ridiculous amount of storage.

But I am familiar with quantum entaglement. I'm skeptical if that will actually work for something as large as a spaceship or even a person.