Modding, Mission Design, and Coding > Help Wanted/Offering Help


<< < (7/7)

I'd like to posit that the scientific method can be applied to speculative fiction. Obviously, we can't run experiments on Shivans or jump drives, but we can test hypotheses against the data we do have, namely canon. Under this model, you've proposed five hypotheses. Each of them has has been responded to with canon or something that can be easily derived from canon. I'm sure you'd agree that refusing to reconsider your hypothesis when faced with new information isn't very scientific, being an astrophysicist and all. So, rather than this little tantrum, why not do the scientific thing and defend your hypothesis - taking into account the new data you've been given - or gracefully concede the point? There's still a discussion to be had here, if you want, but you've got to consider the game's canon as a valid source. As you say, real life doesn't have jump drives; therefore, to speculate about how they work without considering what the game tells us about them isn't a productive exercise. I think you've already seen how frustrating it gets.


--- Quote from: Banedon on December 20, 2017, 12:51:12 am ---
--- Quote from: Nyctaeus on December 15, 2017, 02:11:45 pm ---I have no idea where did you get your theory. I guess it's derived from some science publications.

--- End quote ---

I'm an astrophysicist by training. You'd think I know what I'm saying. If you cared I could point you towards references on this, but do you?

I won't be reading this thread anymore. If anyone still wants to talk, send me an email, but no promises.

--- End quote ---
I actually care, but your references will be just a bunch of thesis. Mostly because that's only thing we can do now in case of hypothetical alien life - make thesis. To make something more than thesis, you need to have representative sample and repeatable results according to modern scientific methods... Which you won't have unless we make contact with multiple alien species. What I don't understand is the fact that you defend your obviously not-confirmed thesis with incredible stubbornness. It's not that hard to admit: "Okay, it's just a thesis. One of many. We have no proof that this one will ever be confirmed".

--- Quote from: General Battuta on December 20, 2017, 12:06:30 pm ---If you're an astrophysicist by training, why did you come into a forum full of smart people who've been thinking about this stuff for nearly twenty years and try to 101 it? No personal offense intended, it's just a weird choice.

--- End quote ---
Common trait of all hard-science enthusiasts. They're all trying to show everyone else how smart they are [and how others aren't :P]. This is also nothing personal, but this is not the first time I see something like that and it's quite common behaviour among devoted science enthusiasts. No offense Banedon. Don't do typical ragequit but instead calm down your ego. Your knowledge may be very useful here for plot and lore designing, but try to use your knowledge for expanding FS lore instead of negating it because it is not fully scientifically accurate.

I guess there is no point in continuing this discussion any further. May I kindly request any moderator to close it to avoid further pointless, unproductive discussion?

Mito [PL]:
I just want to point out that there are some interesting fan fiction texts on HLP that are astronomically... quite correct (or at least logical). Like Shetland/Ephesus.


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version