Need feedback and input

[rwley]

I have begun the outline for sci-fi trilogy; ca 2227; Main Character, MC, was born 2007, still alive, trillionaire several times over, Christian. American gov't under control of American Party, defeated both Dems and Reps and is basically secular, atheistic, humanistic type of philosophy; MC wants to save what values are left and buys the rights to settle the moon. Creates new (?) type of gov't called Theocratic Democracy. I have the whole system laid out but it's a bit complicated for this. Anyway, my science is weak, so I'm looking for technical help; types of power systems, best type of building materials, transportation, etc. My husband suggested that the transport be underground. All help, suggestions, ideas, pitfalls welcome. Thanks.

[Jeff Gerke]

You might check into the Mars simulation outposts maintained by the Mars Society and others. They have these isolated habitats, similar to what we would use on Mars or the moon, located in the frozen tundra or in desert wastelands. They don't exactly have power cables running to them from the local power plant. They have to create everything themselves. Same with the Antarctica labs. They have to be completely self-sustaining.

Other resources would be NASA and related Web pages.

Do a little digging. There's plenty of information out there, rwley (and welcome to The Anomaly!). You may have to do some reading, though.

Jeff

[rwley]

Thanks. That gives me a direction to go. See, my technical stuff is so weak, I don't even know where to go! And I don't mind a little light reading!

[Christian Soldier]

It looks interesting, and I look forward to seeing it. Another thing to ask youself is how far along do you want everything to be? Once you get past a certain level of technology, your dealing more with magic of the technical sort.

The advantage there is that you don't have to explain anything, just let the reader accept it. This is basically what I plan to do with my own stories.

Hope that helps, and God bless your efforts -- CS

[rwley]

I'll remember that, too. With some research, maybe I can come up with some sort of blended "real" and "magic" technology. This is still such a new project that some of this stuff just hasn't had time to be worked out. But at least now I know have some place to come for help. Thanks.

[Divides the Waters]

I tend to think that the "magic" technology takes the story out of the realm of science fiction (that is, hardcore science fiction, where real science is used, or potentially real science is extrapolated). You could fall into the Star Wars mold where nothing is explained, or into the Star Trek mold where the pseudo-technology is explained with technobabble. Neither Star Wars nor Star Trek are truly of the science fiction category; they're really space opera and space western, respectively, with futuristic trappings to give the illusion of science fiction.

[rwley]

This is true and I want this to stay in the sci-fi arena. I'm really thinking about using nuclear power. My husband suggested it and said that if my cities are underground, which they are, a nuclear power system on the surface would almost eliminate any contamination fear. And the moon is highly irradiated anyway because it has no, or much less, atmosphere to filter solar radiation. I just have to figure out how to put it all together. Thanks for all the information.

[Divides the Waters]

I got this snippet from Hal Duncan's blog in my OMNIVORACIOUS (Amazon newsletter):

"As SF writers and readers we are ready, it seems, to abandon the limitation of light speed that comes with Einsteinian Relativity so we can play with FTL, or to ignore the physical foundations of mind in the neurochemistry of the brain so that we can use ESP. We are willing to ditch the Conservation of Energy that is a basic aspect of Newtonian thermodynamics in order to portray teleportation as an act of mere will, to swallow jaunting as an ability to transport oneself instantaneously through space-time. We are more than able to throw away the very coherence of the space-time continuum we exist in so we can imagine a road that links all possible times and all possible histories. If we're ready, willing and able to play this fast and loose with science why should we draw the line at equivalent paradigm shifts that, for us, render a work fantasy rather than SF? Aren't the secondary worlds of fantasy simply alternative realities where the archaeological distinction of gracile and robust hominids translates to elves and dwarves as distinct races? Aren't the magical powers of fantasy just the telekinetic talent to manipulate a reality tractable to the human will? Aren't all the spurious fabrications of fantasy in fact equally as recastable as rational speculations if only we accept paradigm shifts no more radical in truth than those required with the seminal SF of Bester and Zelazny?"


I tend to think there are a few more gray areas than this, but I can sympathize with the sentiment. All too often things are called "science fiction" when perhaps they should be called "futuristic fantasy."

[rwley]

I am going to try to stay out of any "fantasy" elements for this particular story. That's why I'm doing more science homework than I ever did in school. My moon colony will be "real" science in that I'm having fuel cells that are driven by hydrogen energy which I've learned can also produce pure water. I will have hydroponic farming, solar energy, rockets, asteroid mining for precious metals and ice for more water; all of these science elements that make for science fiction, not fantasy. My main character is a filty rich old curmudgeon of a Christian who is building a colony that will be a real, viable community on the moon. He has the resources and the power to do this. He is so fed up with the secular, humanistic society that he's going to be his own Moses and set his people free (talk about using cliches and existing storylines) but there will be real threats and real issues that would occur in space.

Anyway, the completed project is a long way off yet, but I'm working on it. I love the input and help I can get here. Especially since I am not a science person. But, I'm learning.

[Divides the Waters]

I like the notion. The only thing I might do differently if this were my story would be to make the point-of-view character perhaps an assistant to the rich guy, or a worker, or something, just because I can't really identify easily with filthy rich people (oh, how I want to!). Orson Scott Card suggested that the reason the Sherlock Holmes stories were so successful was that they were told from an "average" man's perspective, rather than Holmes'. He carried the analogy to a number of other literary examples, and he was right; most of the best stories about extraordinary people are done from the perspective of someone ordinary. Not having read your story, though, I don't know how this might or might not apply.