Future Tech Advice and Assistance Thread [O.O.C.]

[The V O I D]

So, assuming that you had sophisticated enough sensors and the incomprehensible amount of memory and computing power it would require (and that the whole weird paradox about being dead on arrival or not having any memories didn't apply), how would teleportation of a person work? I'd be thinking that a matter transference beam uses tidal forces to break every atom of them apart at the exact same time, they get passed through an accelerator, and then basically beamed through a particle accelerator while a computer sends all the data about the states and layouts of every last quark. Once they arrive, some sort of receiver system would just arrange the atoms exactly as they were, or the teleportation beam could somehow be adjusted to fire every individual atom to a specific position in spacetime corresponding to the destination and the desired layout of a person or a cargo. Could either of these work, assuming you had the enormous computing resources required to track every single quark?

I'd also like to know- seems like FT makes surprisingly little use of teleportation in general. Is that just me who feels that way?


On another subject, since the cuttlefish aliens I asked about a while back don't use soundwaves to communicate, does it humanize them too much to just use the excuse that the humans who discovered them gave a lot of the stuff around them Aztec-sounding names?

The Foldspace Drive requires an insane amount of power. It essentially takes the space around a person, "folds" it until such time as they are instantaneously in the new position. It doesn't require breaking atoms at all. Think of the FSD as something like a wormhole generator that forces the user instantly inside the wormhole and then back out, without a wormhole portal or any of that appearing. The same concept applies to ships. They appear to 'teleport' instantly from point a to point b, but what's really going on is the FSD is simply folding space around the specific area of effect (determined by how powerful/large the FSD is), causing a 'wormhole' to instantly fold the person over to the new position. A personnel-equipped FSD would be connected to the same thing which powers the powerarmor, along with two of it's own separate batteries of sorts. Teleportation via removing the "middle man" portal-gates or sudden wormhole generators. Just instantly appear where you need to go. You just need the proper and exact coordinates, and you're set.

[Kyrusia]

To remind everyone, from the original post:

"Refer to the above. In short, this is an advice and assistance thread, not an argument thread or a simple "chat" thread (such as found on other boards). If you would like to argue the merits of a given technology, that is more than acceptable - but not here."

Let's keep things from being simple "chat," if folks wouldn't mind. Thank you!

[The Fedral Union]

I use teleporters; in many ways; wormholes in to hyperspace (different from SW or SG1 hyperspace my own invention). Ectera.


What your talking about is star trek transporter tech; and or quantum entanglement. To be honest. I would just leave out the buzzwords; to preempt "You die if you beam over!" or to preempt "you don't die!" We don't know our mode of thinking in this field is in its infancy. And often its based on the belief of "having a soul" if there is one. Its really complex.

The point is; we just don't know. And no one can tell you, your people will die if they use trek style teleporters, because that's not how rp works, and not everyone subscribes to christian beliefs on the manner. We just don't know.

Theres a 4th wall thing here, NSFT laws on teleportation of atomizing (if you have enough tech to muck with quantum stuff, and honestly most should considering advances now).. Are not absolute so long as your not beaming a bomb in to someones capital or engine room. If you say someone is the same person coming out of a transporter than no one can say otherwise. The cat can be both dead, alive, and inbetween...

[Source Swarm]

Theres a 4th wall thing here, NSFT laws on teleportation of atomizing (if you have enough tech to muck with quantum stuff, and honestly most should considering advances now).. Are not absolute so long as your not beaming a bomb in to someones capital or engine room. If you say someone is the same person coming out of a transporter than no one can say otherwise. The cat can be both dead, alive, and inbetween...

While I can't speak to the existence of any NSFT Laws to the contrary, this very thread points out in its OP that pretty much any technology is playable given that it maintains the Rule of Bro, so it doesn't matter if you're using teleportation, hyperdrive, wormholes, or magic pixie dust, as long as your ass makes it to the thread on time.

[Kyrusia]

"Teleportation" has a semi-sordid history in FT that I won't get into because it's really not relevant here. I will, however, describe how it is often seen, viewed, and employed.

In FT, while there is the general science-fiction spectrum of "hard-to-soft," there is also a somewhat related spectrum of "clunk-to-sleek." "Sleek" would be something akin to, say, the technology utilized by the Covenant in Halo, while "clunk" is more akin to the technology seen in the Alien franchise. There are variations and infinite permutations, but that's a simple way to look at it for the purpose of this issue.

Why I bring it up is because "teleportation" (beyond point-to-point FTL, regardless of the stated means of achieving that) is often (read: traditionally) seen as an exemplification of the "sleek" end of the spectrum. To put it another way: it is a characteristic of an aesthetic of relative great advancement in the Galaxy. If you're able to replace highways, shipping, etc. with instant, point-to-point teleportation that is no longer restricted to ships, but individual people, cargo, and minutiae, the civilization in question is typically seen as having a grasp of very, very fundamental laws of the cosmos and, more importantly, being able to willfully exploit those laws for their own ends (see: teleportation) - with some exceptions (though those, too, apply a limiting of scope; see: the Star Trek franchise).

If a player does not feel this aesthetic "fits" for their star-state, then I would avoid the employment of teleportation in any appreciable manner in society. If a player desires it, I would suggest have it being experimental, expensive, or otherwise exceptionally limited in scope (for military, governmental, or possibly commercial uses, as opposed to the proverbial middle class taking a weekend vacation to Titan because they can teleport there on Friday and teleport back Sunday evening). This is especially an important characteristic to consider for a player with a star-state on the "clunkier" end of the spectrum.

Hope that helps!

[The V O I D]

Sorry about getting a bit chatty, there. Anyways, I must be going; goodnight.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

On another subject, since the cuttlefish aliens I asked about a while back don't use soundwaves to communicate, does it humanize them too much to just use the excuse that the humans who discovered them gave a lot of the stuff around them Aztec-sounding names?

Given the bizzare fractal nature of the universe, it would be entirely possible to have a world that mimicked all of human history, only with cuttlefish instead of monkey people.

[Hyperspatial Travel]

On another subject, since the cuttlefish aliens I asked about a while back don't use soundwaves to communicate, does it humanize them too much to just use the excuse that the humans who discovered them gave a lot of the stuff around them Aztec-sounding names?

Given the bizzare fractal nature of the universe, it would be entirely possible to have a world that mimicked all of human history, only with cuttlefish instead of monkey people.

Yeah, history and time in FT really aren't a shared experience - some people experience galactic apocalpyse, others have peaceful histories stretching back thousands of years. Cuttlefish who were discovered by humans and became Aztecs doesn't seem that implausible.

[Tierra Prime]

"Teleportation" has a semi-sordid history in FT that I won't get into because it's really not relevant here. I will, however, describe how it is often seen, viewed, and employed.

In FT, while there is the general science-fiction spectrum of "hard-to-soft," there is also a somewhat related spectrum of "clunk-to-sleek." "Sleek" would be something akin to, say, the technology utilized by the Covenant in Halo, while "clunk" is more akin to the technology seen in the Alien franchise. There are variations and infinite permutations, but that's a simple way to look at it for the purpose of this issue.

Why I bring it up is because "teleportation" (beyond point-to-point FTL, regardless of the stated means of achieving that) is often (read: traditionally) seen as an exemplification of the "sleek" end of the spectrum. To put it another way: it is a characteristic of an aesthetic of relative great advancement in the Galaxy. If you're able to replace highways, shipping, etc. with instant, point-to-point teleportation that is no longer restricted to ships, but individual people, cargo, and minutiae, the civilization in question is typically seen as having a grasp of very, very fundamental laws of the cosmos and, more importantly, being able to willfully exploit those laws for their own ends (see: teleportation) - with some exceptions (though those, too, apply a limiting of scope; see: the Star Trek franchise).

If a player does not feel this aesthetic "fits" for their star-state, then I would avoid the employment of teleportation in any appreciable manner in society. If a player desires it, I would suggest have it being experimental, expensive, or otherwise exceptionally limited in scope (for military, governmental, or possibly commercial uses, as opposed to the proverbial middle class taking a weekend vacation to Titan because they can teleport there on Friday and teleport back Sunday evening). This is especially an important characteristic to consider for a player with a star-state on the "clunkier" end of the spectrum.

The idea of using Star Trek transporters or something similar in RPs annoys me greatly. While Star Trek ships are likely to have systems to handle transportation, if you jet into a RP with people who aren't familiar with Star Trek or who are using a differenct sci-fi as their technology base, their ships likely won't be able to handle transportation beams. For example, if I'm in a RP and a RPer decides he wants to beam marines over to my ship (That's how Star Trek ships conduct boarding actions after all), I'm tempted to say the transporter beam impacted on my ship's armour, or was reflected back into space. Essentially, your away team is now a red mess on the outside of my ship, because my ships are plated in energy-resistant armour.

Stargate does the whole transporter thing the best by requiring ships to have a special antenna to accept the matter stream. If the antenna is destroyed, or the matter stream is intercepted (A plot point in one episode), you won't be transporting over.

[Tierra Prime]

Given the bizzare fractal nature of the universe, it would be entirely possible to have a world that mimicked all of human history, only with cuttlefish instead of monkey people.

Yeah, history and time in FT really aren't a shared experience - some people experience galactic apocalpyse, others have peaceful histories stretching back thousands of years. Cuttlefish who were discovered by humans and became Aztecs doesn't seem that implausible.

What's the consensus on tailoring your nation size to those you are RPing with?

My factbook and region state my nation controls the core of a dwarf galaxy, because I like the whole idea of space operas (I'm writing my factbook primarily for my own enjoyment), but if I enter a RP with someone who controls a few systems, I'll say my nation is based in a very small star cluster of similar size just outside the Milky Way (Getting stranded outside of the Milky Way is a big part of my nation's history), and that my people travel to the Milky Way via a convenient natural wormhole.

[The Fedral Union]

If done right ST transporters (or teleporters in general) can be fun; they can be dampened, they can make an interesting scenario for borders if they can only manage to beam in to one section (say they take out the shielding) and you get to have an epic corridor to corridor fight.

[Tierra Prime]

If done right ST transporters (or teleporters in general) can be fun; they can be dampened, they can make an interesting scenario for borders if they can only manage to beam in to one section (say they take out the shielding) and you get to have an epic corridor to corridor fight.

I don't mind them being used to exploit weaknesses, like transporting marines through damaged armour plating, but because I don't personally use them, they make my nation look incompetent.

Think of it like this:

"I'm transporting marines over to your ship. What's that, you don't have teleporters? How primitive."

That's how using transporters comes off to me, and Star Trek sci-fi players in particular (Star Trek is rather "sleek"). I'd rather use shuttles and ships for transport, they are much more... "clunky"?

[The Fedral Union]

If done right ST transporters (or teleporters in general) can be fun; they can be dampened, they can make an interesting scenario for borders if they can only manage to beam in to one section (say they take out the shielding) and you get to have an epic corridor to corridor fight.

I don't mind them being used to exploit weaknesses, like transporting marines through damaged armour plating, but because I don't personally use them, they make my nation look incompetent.

Think of it like this:

"I'm transporting marines over to your ship. What's that, you don't have teleporters? How primitive."

That's how using transporters comes off to me, and Star Trek sci-fi players in particular (Star Trek is rather "sleek"). I'd rather use shuttles and ships for transport, I don't like the idea of people zipping around.

My question is: why does it matter? So long as you can still kill people with transporters.... (IE using guns to shoot at boarding parties) I don't think image will matter much there, hell in fact it would look /BETTER/ if that happened. Not having transporters =/= incompetent. Beating back boarding parties who use them... Would be the opposite of incompetency. Its all personal preference.

[Tierra Prime]

I don't mind them being used to exploit weaknesses, like transporting marines through damaged armour plating, but because I don't personally use them, they make my nation look incompetent.

Think of it like this:

"I'm transporting marines over to your ship. What's that, you don't have teleporters? How primitive."

That's how using transporters comes off to me, and Star Trek sci-fi players in particular (Star Trek is rather "sleek"). I'd rather use shuttles and ships for transport, I don't like the idea of people zipping around.

My question is: why does it matter? So long as you can still kill people with transporters.... (IE using guns to shoot at boarding parties) I don't think image will matter much there, hell in fact it would look /BETTER/ if that happened.

I suppose I like the whole idea of FT technology being somewhat grounded in reality and realism. Not to hard sci-fi terms, though I did go through a stage like that before. I remember looking up which materials were the strongest, and then describing my armour as composite plates reinforced with titanium and carbon-nanotubes, only to realise that someone else is using tungsten reinforced with unexplanium, ect. In the end, I just went for "energy-resistant adamantium."

Considering Star Trek marines are equipped with nothing but a pistol and a red shirt, I suppose killing them using power armoured troops armed with laser rifles and power weapons would look rather good. I consider Star Trek's "sleekness" annoying and unrealistic, but at the same time Star Trek's sci-fi has a lot of weaknesses, just as Star Wars' and Warhammer 40k's (Although this one is intended) sci-fi have weaknesses do. Am I hugely over-thinking this, or am I right to some degree?

[Vocenae]

Most of the FT community does operate on a more 'realisitic' level, in the sense that it 'feels' like it could work in reality. This also means, on top of the sordid history of teleportation tech being used to godmod by iWin players, is looked upon poorly by the vast majority of players in the community in and kind of role except extremely plot centric, and by players who have earned the community's trust for using such tech responsibly. Most of us do prefer our glorious Clunk tech because once again, it feels more 'real', and thus upholds the suspension of disbelief in this crazy galaxy full of FTL and aliens and vast array of garden worlds.

Again, it's an issue of communal trust, which relates to how the Code of Bro regulates the Rule of Cool. The more you prove you're not out to 'win' and dominate (or claim galaxies or dimensions), the more 'wiggle room' the community will generally grant you to use and do crazy stuff. Like how when the Rethast ate eight star systems. Remember the 4C: Creativity, Consistency, Collaboration and Compromise.

[The Fedral Union]

There is Realism in situation, and realism in tech.... Your already throwing out the latter by using FTL. Clunky feeling tech isn't invalid; but trying to apply realism to tech in science fiction beyond a certain point is like trying to divide by zero. Voc has a point inso far that if someone writes it well enough and doesn't wang wave and says hes better than anyone because of his tech; it will be accepted more. Furthermore, high tech folks with sleek tech who put WORK... and innovate mechanics and ways of fleshing them out should not be ruled out.

I must contest though Voc: I may have misread ya; but most of FT isn't based off of super realism or realism in tech; I can point to various examples why but so long as you said in a less blunt way one is not a dick about tech; I don't think anyone would care. Teleporting bombs on to bridges and so forth is a no no unless its agreed upon. I do get your saying realism in situation applies to suspension of disbelief but we've got tones of variables that would take ages to get through to solve for.

[Kyrusia]

There is Realism in situation, and realism in tech.... Your already throwing out the latter by using FTL. Clunky feeling tech isn't invalid; but trying to apply realism to tech in science fiction beyond a certain point is like trying to divide by zero. Voc has a point inso far that if someone writes it well enough and doesn't wang wave and says hes better than anyone because of his tech; it will be accepted more. Furthermore, high tech folks with sleek tech who put WORK... and innovate mechanics and ways of fleshing them out should not be ruled out.

I must contest though Voc: I may have misread ya; but most of FT isn't based off of super realism or realism in tech; I can point to various examples why but so long as you said in a less blunt way one is not a dick about tech; I don't think anyone would care. Teleporting bombs on to bridges and so forth is a no no unless its agreed upon. I do get your saying realism in situation applies to suspension of disbelief but we've got tones of variables that would take ages to get through to solve for.

That's not what Voc was referring to. Voc is not referring, in any way, to what some mean (especially those mostly/exclusively familiar with its usage in relation to MT) when they say "realism" or "realistic," which is more akin to "reality emulation" than the way it is used in relation to FT.

"Realism" in the context Voc, myself, and most mean is more akin to a form of "literary realism" applied-to (or otherwise presupposing) the inherently fantastical: in other words, "Does this fit with the common theme(s) of the star-state and the Galaxy in general?" In another way, it means "feasibility" or "does this feel right?" - admittedly a subjective judgment call. The issue with "transporters," "teleportation," etc. is not that it is not "realistic" in the sense that it doesn't emulate reality (which is true, it doesn't, but that's not what is being referenced here); what is being referenced is realism in the capacity of being able to suspend disbelief. In many implementations for many players, "transporter technology" breaks that suspension of disbelief if done poorly; historically in this community, it has been done poorly in greater proportion than it has been done well. Hence the hesitation in regards to it.

That says nothing, as Voc (and others) have pointed out ("Again, it's an issue of communal trust, which relates to how the Code of Bro regulates the Rule of Cool. The more you prove you're not out to 'win' and dominate [or claim galaxies or dimensions], the more 'wiggle room' the community will generally grant you to use and do crazy stuff.") about it being done well. If it, like most things in FT, is executed well with a moment of pause by the player going, "Hey, why am I really wanting to implement this and does that reason have the potential to lead to unnecessary problems with other players?" then there, simply put, won't be problems nine times-out-of-ten.

Even then, however, that threshold simply isn't going to be the same for everyone. What I consider "feasible" isn't what Joe Bob at the local QuickiMart considers "feasible" (but Joe Bob is silly and thinks that combining all of the slushy flavors is logical, much less not slushy heresy, but I digress) and, as a consequence, there are some people who simply don't like a concept. You can find at least one person who dislikes, even irrationally (as a pet peeve, perhaps), one concept or another in Future Tech; a point of this thread, however, is to provide something akin to a litmus relative to what is or is not commonly accepted in the community and to give a "temperature," if you will, in regards to any given concept.

In the case of teleportation, as others have indicated, I would be lying if I said it was flung-around willie-nillie and seen on the same level of acceptance as rail(coil)guns, torpedo buses, or directed energy weapons, because it isn't. It simply isn't something that is common, for one reason or another. As Voc indicated, this may be simply because there is a preponderance of members of the FT community that model their star-states off a "lower end" of the FT spectrum of relative advancement (a "clunk state," as we sometimes say) where transporters, teleportation, etc. simply (for them) breaks the immersion and suspension of disbelief. Does this mean it can't (or isn't being done, for that matter) be done? No, of course not, but admitting that, "Hey, this idea doesn't see wide appeal, so there is extra scrutiny placed on it," is a part of providing assistance. Hopefully this lets players see the table with all of the cards face-up, rather than simply saying, "Hey, do it this way because it's what I think is best," as many different players are allowed to provide their own perspective in advice and assistance which, ideally, let's players find their own middle-ground and work from there.

Regardless, hope this helps folks that are still curious about teleportation and similar notions.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

I think the concept that's important here is 'consistency' more than 'realism.' If something is internally consistent, then it is, by definition, realistic within its own context.

I've never claimed that Space Russia is 'realistic' in relation to the real world, but I do try to keep it internally consistent. Everything makes perfect sense within the context of the universe it's in.

[The Fedral Union]

All right I figured I may have misunderstood some of those points; that makes sense; question. How would your nations handle the need to forward deploy forces?

[Jovian Lunar Empire]

Jovians are fond of the lulzy-soft-SIFI idea of transorbital drop pod. Paratroopers from Orbit, Yo.

It's less silly when you consider that most of the worlds they assault in this way have no atmospheres to speak of, but still silly.

[Hyperspatial Travel]

That's simply absurd. How do you get the fully sick flames surrounding your drop pods without an atmosphere?

[Jovian Lunar Empire]

That's simply absurd. How do you get the fully sick flames surrounding your drop pods without an atmosphere?

The ablative shielding on the basal surfaces of the pod can be electrically ignited when dramatically convenient, obvs.

In all seriousness, you don't. Then again, this is the race that pointedly refuses to adapt gravity manipulation tech from their trading partners, so they're a useless sort.

[The Fedral Union]

Depends... Is that planet being hit by solar wind? Do you sheath them in plasma in order to penetrate fortified positions? Are there any collection of free hydrogen or particles that could create a sparse plasma?..

Actually that's not a bad idea for decoy pods; they'll light up on enemy sensors like a Christmas tree with ionizing radiation.

[Tierra Prime]

All right I figured I may have misunderstood some of those points; that makes sense; question. How would your nations handle the need to forward deploy forces?

You mean as in how do we conduct a planetary invasion or how do we send in troops in advance of an invasion?

[Tierra Prime]

Depends... Is that planet being hit by solar wind? Do you sheath them in plasma in order to penetrate fortified positions? Are there any collection of free hydrogen or particles that could create a sparse plasma?..

Actually that's not a bad idea for decoy pods; they'll light up on enemy sensors like a Christmas tree with ionizing radiation.

If your enemy has encountered you before, they'll also know which pods are decoys and which are not.

You'd be better off giving them energy shielding and some kind of EM device or flare system to fool missiles.