NationStates Post-Modern Tech Community Thread

[Naval Monte]

Based on the gist of how you've described your canon, I would personally classify it as "soft-supernatural PMT", since despite a number of advanced anomalous phenomena, it lacks the technological, economic, and quantitative essence of FT. While this nation (my main) is hard mid-high PMT (set over a hundred years in the future, yet very much adhering to the principles of hard sci-fi) soft PMT is a field in which I have been very active, and would be happy to converse with you further on it.

And for the record, this thread was made for NationStates the website, not just nations-states the geopolitical concept.

So there are different variety to the tech levels, fascinating. But yes the group is bound to the planet and while Gate tech does allow them to travel to other realities and they have made some facilities in some of the safer regions in other worlds for the most part they aren't going to make cities or colonies on them due to the fact that most of the population doesn't know they exist and as such the will for colonization is just not there. Most of those facilities are for studying those realities, gathering resources, and testing and housing some of their more advanced technologies that would be a threat to the masquerade if discovered on a warehouse on earth. They also sometimes contain dangerous anomalies away from the Earth so if they escape than Earth isn't screwed but that is an extremely rare use of those facilities since those facilities are very rare themselves and they want to make the best use of them and not dedicate them to a sole task.

[Naval Monte]

So what is the difference between soft and hard PMT?

[The Macabees]

So what is the difference between soft and hard PMT?

Basically, soft PMT places less emphasis on scientific realism.

By way of example. Suppose you want to write a story about a human civilization living around Earth's orbit. This is super simplified, but it illustrates the thinking:

• Hard PMT: You might use a rotating wheel station or a torus to create artificial gravity.
  Soft PMT: You have a Thompson-Dickens Gravity Machine (totally made up) that allows you to create artificial gravity throughout your space stations.

There's nothing wrong with either. People who like to read on physics, technology, etc., will tend toward hard PMT because it's what they like. People who don't care about those things will veer toward soft PMT.

Edit: Good question, by the way. I'll add definitions to the glossary.

[Lord Dominator]

I'd note that some of us are perfectly happy to read about said topics, just don't want to deal with doing that stuff in practice

[Naval Monte]

So what is the difference between soft and hard PMT?

Basically, soft PMT places less emphasis on scientific realism.

By way of example. Suppose you want to write a story about a human civilization living around Earth's orbit. This is super simplified, but it illustrates the thinking:

• Hard PMT: You might use a rotating wheel station or a torus to create artificial gravity.
  Soft PMT: You have a Thompson-Dickens Gravity Machine (totally made up) that allows you to create artificial gravity throughout your space stations.

There's nothing wrong with either. People who like to read on physics, technology, etc., will tend toward hard PMT because it's what they like. People who don't care about those things will veer toward soft PMT.

Edit: Good question, by the way. I'll add definitions to the glossary.

Figures as much, just an extension of the soft and hard sci-fi scale. The setting I made for my faction bu it's nature woukd lean towards soft since the paranormal would do that, but I try to keep a level of realism with the setting and that realism goes to some of that tech that isn't completely anomlous in nature (though they may have anomlous components in them to make them function in what would otherwise by a modern setting).

[Kylarnatia]

Basically, soft PMT places less emphasis on scientific realism.

By way of example. Suppose you want to write a story about a human civilization living around Earth's orbit. This is super simplified, but it illustrates the thinking:

• Hard PMT: You might use a rotating wheel station or a torus to create artificial gravity.
  Soft PMT: You have a Thompson-Dickens Gravity Machine (totally made up) that allows you to create artificial gravity throughout your space stations.

There's nothing wrong with either. People who like to read on physics, technology, etc., will tend toward hard PMT because it's what they like. People who don't care about those things will veer toward soft PMT.

Edit: Good question, by the way. I'll add definitions to the glossary.

Figures as much, just an extension of the soft and hard sci-fi scale. The setting I made for my faction bu it's nature woukd lean towards soft since the paranormal would do that, but I try to keep a level of realism with the setting and that realism goes to some of that tech that isn't completely anomlous in nature (though they may have anomlous components in them to make them function in what would otherwise by a modern setting).

You certainly don't have to be strictly hard or soft PMT. I myself am very fascinated with technology and how things work - even experimental technology - and try to feature that in my writing as best I can, but there are times when I'll veer more towards soft PMT for the sake of storytelling, because that to me (personally) is more fun than realism.

[Naval Monte]

---

To be honest I tend to go somewhere in the middle. I go hard in some areas and soft in others. For the detailed tech stuff is when I feel I can get away with it, others story telling and fun take over.

[Vistora]

---

To be honest I tend to go somewhere in the middle. I go hard in some areas and soft in others. For the detailed tech stuff is when I feel I can get away with it, others story telling and fun take over.

Very much so, and I find the best PMT settings regard both "hard" and "soft" as tools that can be used in concert, rather than mutually exclusive categories in which to box oneself. This can involve taking the middle ("firm") ground, or blending the two concepts in more eclectic ways. For example, my Novaluna (blatant plug :3) setting is in many ways quite scientifically hard, even where it veers into wholly speculative territory, such as with the alien life inhabiting the moon on which it is set. In one notable area, it nevertheless departs quite significantly from reality; psionics are a critical component of the setting, and while I have built psionics in Novaluna to be very internally consistent and more or less mesh well with real-life laws of nature, rather than just being space magic, there remains the fact that it is a pure fabrication.

[Naval Monte]

To be honest I tend to go somewhere in the middle. I go hard in some areas and soft in others. For the detailed tech stuff is when I feel I can get away with it, others story telling and fun take over.

Very much so, and I find the best PMT settings regard both "hard" and "soft" as tools that can be used in concert, rather than mutually exclusive categories in which to box oneself. This can involve taking the middle ("firm") ground, or blending the two concepts in more eclectic ways. For example, my Novaluna (blatant plug :3) setting is in many ways quite scientifically hard, even where it veers into wholly speculative territory, such as with the alien life inhabiting the moon on which it is set. In one notable area, it nevertheless departs quite significantly from reality; psionics are a critical component of the setting, and while I have built psionics in Novaluna to be very internally consistent and more or less mesh well with real-life laws of nature, rather than just being space magic, there remains the fact that it is a pure fabrication.

With the magic on my setting it does follow the law of conservation of mass due to one of it's main rules but it follows it's one rules but they remain consistent and has limits even though it is super powerful.

Plus when magic and the paranormal is real it is hard to be fully in the hard scale.

[A m e n r i a]

Hello, another question, if I may...What do you think would be great features for a helmet besides a cool HUD which tells you the name of the friendly you're looking at so only you and your comrades can recognize each other while in full armour?

[UniversalCommons]

If you look at intelligent motorcycle helmets, you could add proximity sensors, and rearview cameras. Also, map display, and communications link. Nightvision, infrared, and magnification options. Building in a camera and a live feed streaming option for the battlefield could also be useful.

For certain operations, you could also have targeting systems built into the helmet with an additional arm mounted computer which would inclusive of being able to call in fire from artillery.

[Lord Dominator]

Your health indicators would be something pretty big you'd want

[Post War America]

If you look at intelligent motorcycle helmets, you could add proximity sensors, and rearview cameras. Also, map display, and communications link. Nightvision, infrared, and magnification options. Building in a camera and a live feed streaming option for the battlefield could also be useful.

For certain operations, you could also have targeting systems built into the helmet with an additional arm mounted computer which would inclusive of being able to call in fire from artillery.

Is it wrong that I actually kinda want that bike helmet? I mean, the map and IR might be unnecessary, but it'd be very helpful to not have to rely on my crappy mirrors to see what's behind me.

[Lord Dominator]

If you look at intelligent motorcycle helmets, you could add proximity sensors, and rearview cameras. Also, map display, and communications link. Nightvision, infrared, and magnification options. Building in a camera and a live feed streaming option for the battlefield could also be useful.

For certain operations, you could also have targeting systems built into the helmet with an additional arm mounted computer which would inclusive of being able to call in fire from artillery.

Is it wrong that I actually kinda want that bike helmet? I mean, the map and IR might be unnecessary, but it'd be very helpful to not have to rely on my crappy mirrors to see what's behind me.

Why would it be wrong?

[Post War America]

Is it wrong that I actually kinda want that bike helmet? I mean, the map and IR might be unnecessary, but it'd be very helpful to not have to rely on my crappy mirrors to see what's behind me.

Why would it be wrong?

It feels like a bit of bourgeois extravagance, which is problematic since I most ride a motorcycle because I cannot afford to drive a proper car.

[UniversalCommons]

Mag Lev Electric Cars
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/224 ... ev-spheres

I am looking at this and trying to figure out how you would make a Maglev Humvee, or even if it is possible to create a super maneuverable light artillery or troop transport.

[The Macabees]

Mag Lev Electric Cars
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/224 ... ev-spheres

I am looking at this and trying to figure out how you would make a Maglev Humvee, or even if it is possible to create a super maneuverable light artillery or troop transport.

I'm partisan toward the idea that many of the modern pain points of driving will change radically in the next 10-20 years.

The type of traffic will change as people commute less to work, have more of their goods delivered to them, and as more people start to turn to their computers.

I think this is an interesting concept and totally worth bringing into a setting on NS. My guess, though, is that the future car will look radically different to any of the ideas currently out there (as tends to happen, since it's almost impossible to guess what the future will look like).

[Roania]

https://discord.gg/febnCaH

So, i've come up with a discord for all varieties of worldbuilding, on the principle that we're all facing many of the same challenges. We've got a good team of mentors and players, and we've been dry-running for the past two weeks.

[UniversalCommons]

Would it be possible to mount a 60 mm etc cannon and an elctrolaser on a fighter bomber?

[UniversalCommons]

I have gotten another one of those ideas. If you linked together several Cloud 9 tensegrity spheres or as Buckminister Fuller calls them Spherical Tensegrity Atmosphere Research Station, could you build a permanent high altitude launch platform for reusable rockets.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidewalt ... 6177284216

[Haishan]

Would it be possible to mount a 60 mm etc cannon and an elctrolaser on a fighter bomber?

On the 60mm ETC cannon, if you have enough space and mass allowance, sure. But considering the size of such weapon, ordinary jet fighters might find it difficult as the bigger calibre, the bigger the resultant recoil from operation, necessitating certain tradeoffs. On electrolaser, it's a different ball game. While laser weapons are feasible, electrolaser poses a different kind of problem.

As electrolaser involves making the atmosphere between the emitter and the target conductive to electricity, this in my opinion, will cause certain limitations; fast moving air may be able to dissipate the created conductive channel (usually plasma) and thus affecting the overall efficiency of the weapon. if one is really unlucky, the created plasma channel will drift backwards...and electrocute the emitter instead.

It might be simpler to just use the laser as it is sans electro-thing given with proper application, the laser can cause small structural faults on target and let aerodynamic forces do the rest. Or in air to ground context, specific targeting to induce structural failure such as igniting the target's fuel tanks or similar.

On air to ground application, electrolaser might be worthwhile but what's stopping one to just use the 60mm ETC cannon and bombard the ground? The question of electrolaser then will be rather circumstantial and heavily depends on the context. Don't read this wrong, one may have the way they wanted but on practicality purposes, electrolaser is quite complex for little gain, in context of a flying platform.

[UniversalCommons]

Would it be possible to mount a 60 mm etc cannon and an elctrolaser on a fighter bomber?

On the 60mm ETC cannon, if you have enough space and mass allowance, sure. But considering the size of such weapon, ordinary jet fighters might find it difficult as the bigger calibre, the bigger the resultant recoil from operation, necessitating certain tradeoffs. On electrolaser, it's a different ball game. While laser weapons are feasible, electrolaser poses a different kind of problem.

As electrolaser involves making the atmosphere between the emitter and the target conductive to electricity, this in my opinion, will cause certain limitations; fast moving air may be able to dissipate the created conductive channel (usually plasma) and thus affecting the overall efficiency of the weapon. if one is really unlucky, the created plasma channel will drift backwards...and electrocute the emitter instead.

It might be simpler to just use the laser as it is sans electro-thing given with proper application, the laser can cause small structural faults on target and let aerodynamic forces do the rest. Or in air to ground context, specific targeting to induce structural failure such as igniting the target's fuel tanks or similar.

On air to ground application, electrolaser might be worthwhile but what's stopping one to just use the 60mm ETC cannon and bombard the ground? The question of electrolaser then will be rather circumstantial and heavily depends on the context. Don't read this wrong, one may have the way they wanted but on practicality purposes, electrolaser is quite complex for little gain, in context of a flying platform.

I was thinking of something big like an updated version of the Tupolev or the Rockwell B-1, a kind of modernized flying fortress with a mix of tactical high energy lasers, electrothermal cannons and bombs. To make it particularly interesting we would add a Hypermach engine or a jet engine charged with superconductors. It fits with our technology platform we have been developing wind turbines and wave turbines with superconducting technology to make them more efficient. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/10/s ... s-are.html I don't think it would be mach 5, but it might be mach 2 or mach 3.

[The Macabees]

Very interesting Twitter thread on the economics of [space] exploration and colonization.

[Allanea]

Very interesting Twitter thread on the economics of [space] exploration and colonization.

There's a question that both space exploration enthusiasts and opponents don't seem to want to answer, and it's crucial to the whole debate:

What is the price that the different space activities need to have for them to be economically viable?

Let us imagine a counterfactual, a sort of economic teleportation, if you will - suppose space launches were entirely free (that's obviously impossible). Obviously if this were the case, humanity would experience an era of space abundance where we'd be just willing our colonies to Mars by snapping our fingers.

Now, obviously, again, free space launches are physically not possible. However, it's also obvious that there is some kind of cost boundary at which, say, a moon colony or Mars colony becomes viable.

Now, currently, the cheapest you can get cargo to orbit is $1600 per kilogram (the person authoring the tweets is somewhat out of date on this). Obviously, again, neither $2000, nor $1600, nor $1400 per kilogram is a viable cost for getting significant amounts of things and people into space, and obviously, there are other issues and not only launch costs.

But I think it would clarify the debate a lot if we said 'it needs to cost X to be viable'.

I know that there are some posters on this forum who have intimate knowledge of this subject so I'd like to see their input.

[UniversalCommons]

It costs $6708 per kilogram to launch from Space X. This is a reusable rocket. Lets say I have a crazy airship the size of a Walrus Hula and pick the thing up into the air and launch from altitude like a reusable space rocket, you cut the costs by 20% or even crazier a giant cloud 9 like the STARS, Then lets say you improve the manufacturing costs and make your ship out of recycled materials and 3D printed plastics and are able to cut costs another 20%. You are down to $4295 per launch. Now lets say you pull off around 100 -- 250 kilogram satellite launches and charge 5000 per kilogram 1,250,000 per launch cheaper than anyone else. Everyone is charging 20,000 per kilogram. People have put a lot of satellites up at $20,000 per kilogram.

You have just cornered the satellite market. The costs goes way down after you reuse the launch vehicle 20 times before it blows up. You create routine automation for the launch from your high altitude platform. Your prices go down again because of reuse to $3000 per kilogram. You now start sending up cargo pods which can manufacture pharmaceuticals, exotic materials, and computer chips which are worth more than $3,000 per kilogram. Something like ZB Lan Optical Fiber . You have done a second income generating activity, manufacturing something no one else can make. It is not necessarily the whole product, but a piece for a new type of computer, part of a pharmaceutical, etc. Now you have two levels of manufacturing. You get greedy and decide you have to snatch that rock, the big one with 500 pounds of platinum in it. Industry gives you money to grab that rock before anyone else can. You now have some people in space to monitor that industry which makes money. It is not enough to keep those people up there, you have to keep them up there cheaply. You build transhab modules and you arrange to have people come up as tourists. You are bigelow aerospace. $1,000,000 per day to have a space holiday. It costs $300,000 to get them up there assuming 100 kg goes up. You now have a few more settlers. Your first rock returns. It has a giant advertisement on it and huge amounts of publicity, it makes the money from publicity initially. What is next. Get to that moon. Why the moon, Helium 3-- you can have fusion power with helium 3. Also it is possible to build fusion thermal rockets with water and Helium 3 both found on the moon. Initially the money is not what counts. You got there first and built there first.

Modification 08/18/2018
You develop a new type of rocket engine based on solid propellants. Paraffin is an ideal environmentally friendly fuel that will reduce your cost for fuel by an order of magnitude.
http://www.spg-corp.com/advanced-hybrid ... fuels.html This further reduces your costs to $2500 per kilogram.

You work on miniaturization of many of the components in the space craft to reduce weight. Then you do a general search across industries to find standardized industrial components to replace many of the parts with cheaper mass produced industrial grade parts from many different heavy industries-- trucking, airplanes, manufacturing, etc. This reduces the cost of valves and numerous standard electrical systems. The next step is to upgrade the battery and spark plug systems with standard batteries you might find in industry like lithium ion batteries in cars. We have standardized industrialized bio-batteries made from sugar. The changes further bring the costs down to $2000 per kilogram.

The DNEPR rocket created by the Russians could get a satellite into low earth orbit for about $2000 per kilogram.

More recently, The Falcon Heavy Rocket by Space X could get rockets to GEO for $1411 per kilogram with multiple flights ten of them it would go to $743 per kilogram. If it went to twenty flights, it would be below $500 per kilogram.

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/02/r ... power.html

Now you are getting people up there. What is the next step, you build a space gun. The space gun can't send up people, it can send up supplies cheaply. A space gun costs about $250 per kilogram. Things like food, metals, wood, biologicals which are heavy and durable can be sent up fairly quickly. If you have a high altitude platform like a big tensegrity sphere that is heavy enough, you might even be able to use your space gun at high altitude allowing for more cargo and less chemicals for firing the shell. I think this would be kind of soft PMT. http://www.astronautix.com/a/abriefhist ... oject.html


OOC: ZB Lan Optical Fiber https://www.space.com/39039-made-in-spa ... -test.html