| |< | << | >> | >| |
|---|
| |< | << | >> | >| |
|---|
Welcome to an elementary course in Theoretical Cryptoastronomy, the study of imaginary things from outer space. The syllabus consists of five modules:
| SPACE JUNK SCIENCE 101 | Introduction |
|---|---|
| LONELY PLANET | Guide To Fermi's Paradox |
| LOST PROPERTY IN SPACE | A BDO-Spotter's Handbook |
| SPATIAL WEAPONS AND TACTICS | Starship Combat Top Tips |
| CONTACT SPORTS | Space Invaders Howto |
| SPACE WITHOUT FRONTIERS | The End |
Evaluation will be based partly (~7%) on secret observation by intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, partly (~12%) on direct use of the Probe, and partly (~98%) on guesstimates derived from arbitrary assumptions.
I'm at a loss for an explanation of quite why I should have written this, apart from the obvious fact that it's yet another foray into the world of quasiscience cliché-mockery. It lets me add a few more site-internal links, recycle offcuts from previous efforts such as my guides to SF Chronophysics and Xenolinguistics, and put on display the routines I've got bored with rehearsing in arguments.
| |< | << | >> | >| |
|---|
The big mystery in SETI (the search for extraterrestrial intelligence) is why we should have to search for it at all. There's nothing obviously special about Earth; starsystems much like ours have been around for billions and billions of years. So shouldn't outer space be crawling with lifebearing planets, technologically advanced aliens and unmistakeable evidence of inhabitation? Shouldn't somebody already have come looking for us? As the Italian physicist Enrico Fermi put it, "Where is everybody?"
Naturally, it's only a paradox if we're right to imagine that the ETs are out there. Somewhere in our chain of assumptions there's got to be a misstep - a Great Filter that's winnowing our imagined multitude of space-opera galactic empires down to approximately zero. But where is it? Let's run through the options:
MAYBE planetary systems are rare. This idea used to seem highly plausible; but astronomers have discovered an awful lot of stuff going around nearby stars lately, so it's out of fashion. Mind you, it's all seriously weird stuff, so perhaps what they're detecting is the junk that's messed up all the potential biospheres. Well, at least it improves the likelihood of extra-solar planets having interesting things in their skies to stand in for the absurd fire-balloon nightlights the SciFi Channel has been promising us... people don't appreciate what a great light-show Luna puts on, compared to, say, Phobos and Deimos!
MAYBE life doesn't appear very often. Somehow it's taboo to mention that possibility at all these days - dead Martian sands don't sell newspapers or attract research grants. However, even if life isn't so common that we can afford to wreck Earth and move next door, it still might be common enough that anyone prepared to spend a few centuries freeze-dried in transit could expect to get someplace where the air's only a slow poison. That would mean a galaxy teeming with potential ETI... but we really have no idea what the odds are.
MAYBE it's rare for intelligence to evolve. That is, perhaps the microbes in most alien seas come up with some obvious alternative to being multicellular that outcompetes all opposition and stops any interesting "higher" fauna ever developing. Or perhaps the biochemistry of Earthly vertebrates is unusual and all the comparable creatures elsewhere find the warm-blooded big-brained lifestyle unprofitable. I'd be mildly surprised if this was true - life on Earth made it all look so easy, beating the deadline with aeons to spare - but again, without a good statistically significant sample of laboratory planets, who's to say?
MAYBE intelligence rarely leads to sufficiently high technology. Now, it's easy to dream up doomsday scenarios in which With a Tragic Irony the ETs are Destroyed by their Own Creations as soon as they invent nukes (or fire, or VR Tetris, or warpdrive)... but it's hard to imagine every single sentient race messing things up so badly no replacement civilisation ever arises. Once you're thinking on a galactic scale, it hardly matters if they do suffer a Dark Age or two, or get stalled in the palaeolithic - they can keep ringing the genetic and memetic changes for millions of years, and if the cultural snowball ever gets rolling then science and technology are pretty much downhill all the way. They may not come up with the same problem-solving techniques in the same order, but as long as they keep finding new problems they'll have to keep building on the toolkit they've got.
MAYBE the technologically advanced societies aren't interested in exploring. This one again sounds strained: we're the only race ever to evolve that isn't autistic? Sure, they might not be conquistadors dedicated to settling every available rock, but that's fine. We can already imagine ways of using foreseeable technologies to get probes to every last corner of the galaxy within a mere couple of million years; if the average alien isn't interested enough to insist on going there in the flesh, and waits until the task's trivial before bothering to start designing automated probes, then if anything that's likely to mean an obviously intelligence-filled universe sooner rather than later. After you've launched a self-replicating interstellar explorer AI, it doesn't matter what happens to you - your culture will come into contact with ours sooner or later.
MAYBE the galactic explorers have indeed found us, and have been watching us for millions if not billions of years, but they're hiding, like traditional little green men. The problem with this idea (apart from its sheer tinfoil-hattiness) is that the fewer inhabited worlds exist, the more talking to us becomes a rare and valuable opportunity; and on the other hand the more there are, the more races have to independently come up with a reason for abiding by a strict ultra-long-term policy of pretending not to be there.
So; there's no good obvious candidate for the Great Filter. For such a tenuous piece of reasoning from so little hard evidence, this has surprisingly big and unwelcome implications, since we know the filter's somewhere, and it might be somewhere that's bad news. Real evidence of life on Mars or Europa becomes something we should be hoping never to find! After all, the weaker candidate #2 is, the more danger it puts at position #4 where it might be about to filter us. We're left having to consider possibilities like strong nanotech being a universally lethal thing to research...
| |< | << | >> | >| |
|---|
It's conceivable that a super-advanced space-travelling civilisation used to be out there, but - oh, bad luck - we just missed them! In which case they might have left some fun pieces of industrial palaeontology lying around waiting for us to find and investigate them. And I don't mean crumbling ancient cities or drifting space-hulks - I mean truly vast pieces of machinery.
People who are trying to be serious about this kind of stuff usually call them "megastructures". Unfortunately, architects have started using that term to refer to mere office blocks; and on the whole rather than retreat up the SI prefix table to "gigastructures", I prefer going straight for the SF-fannish jargon term: they're "Big Dumb Objects".
| |< | << | >> | >| |
|---|
There are two possible approaches to planning for interplanetary or interstellar battles. If what's important to you is efficient and well-engineered astronautics, read the recommendations in the left-hand column. If you prefer something that's going to provide good footage in the media, read the right-hand column, and don't forget to arrange the schedule of internet trailers, main release, and associated games/action-figures to fit your reelection campaign.
|
While you aren't accelerating, point your nose
towards safety and your drive-tubes towards danger. This
not only saves time in emergencies but presents any potential
attacker with the prospect of a reaction-drive going off in
their face.
|
Keep your nose pointed in the direction
of travel. Where possible, use a stardrive that
enforces cinematic kinematics,
such as a stutter-teleporter: you aren't accelerating, you're
just being continuously relocated in front of where
you were.
|
|
Projectile and coherent-radiation weapons work
perfectly well at long ranges; there's no excuse for
star-destroyers to collide with one another when they have the
whole of space to manoeuvre in. If you can see
one another, you're too close.
|
Make sure your fights are dramatic by only
engaging the enemy while parked at a strategic location (such as
a wormhole exit), and/or only using blasters with
inverse-cube-law range limits. Never miss an
opportunity to call for "ramming speed".
|
|
Organic lifeforms make good mascots but bad
pilots. When the enemy's deploying clouds of war-drones,
each accelerating on its own vector in its own relativistic frame
of reference, primate tree-swinging instincts just won't
cut it.
|
Embedded-software journalists are one thing, but
never put an AI in charge of your Ultimate Weapon. Get
Star-Captain Biggles to centre the cross-hairs by hand - his
brain may be made of meat, but he's far more photogenic.
|
|
If you don't want to run the risk of your orbit
decaying, standard operating procedure should be to use a
"forced" orbit at higher than escape velocity, so
that if you stop actively maintaining it you drift away
from the planet.
|
Given that your stardrives provide cheap
hyper-acceleration and you're not planning on hanging around for
long, gravity-wells are relevant mainly for the associated
scenery. Remember to park side-on to the planet so your
starboard portholes get a good view.
|
|
There's no such thing as a survivable
impact. You get enough lethality to spare from any contact
that doesn't involve deliberate velocity matching; there's little
point using fancy gimmick missiles if they're going to hit the
enemy head on at Einsteinian velocities.
|
An armoured hull will save you from drifting
space-grit, but to fly through the Peasoup Nebula on ultradrive
you need a serious tachyon-snowplough - and since that has
to be magic in the first place, you might as well go for the
whole "divert power to shields!" schtick.
|
|
Never look directly at an enemy starship -
if it explodes it'll be a silent (and slightly delayed)
point-source blast as their antimatter cells lose containment,
and if not you're staring up the barrel of their laser
cannons! Either way, ophthalmologically inadvisable.
|
To make beam-weapons visible in a vacuum, you'll
need side-scatter; maybe some sort of laser-launched
plasma-bolt? With luck it'll also produce static-roar
sound effects on your comms channels... as will your
manoeuvring thrusters. But what you really want is
Cherenkov radiation "vapour-trails".
|
|
Unless you've got some appropriate
"jumpdrive", you can only ambush a victim in the
emptiness of space by outrunning their sensors - for
instance, radar's no good against photonic torpedoes.
|
Nobody to fight? Hunt
Space Pirates! Not only are they naturally exciting,
they're also guaranteed to remain a lurking menace to
civilisation for as long as you need them!
|
|
Asteroid belts are negligibly hazardous compared
to the junk-strewn space around your homeworld; even deliberately
scattering "mines" is a waste of effort unless they're
armed and mobile in their own right.
|
Space badly needs chunky bits. Hang around
in ring-systems as much as possible, and always fly through a
planetary system in the plane of the ecliptic (banking
dramatically as you steer) with all your hull-mounted lights
blazing.
|
|
Any strategy that involves blockading a frontier
in space (let alone hyperspace) against intruders is
doomed. Indeed, why would you have territorial borders when
the Rigellians aren't interested in Earthlike planets?
|
The best thing about sweeping fleet manoeuvres
in three or more dimensions is that you can usually find a map
display angle that makes it look as if you outflanked them while
they were trying to run away rather than vice-versa.
|
|
The one thing you need before you can conquer an
Earthlike world is atmospheric supremacy. As soon as your
military nano-robots have 0wn3d the inhabitants' brains, you can
recruit any infantry you need from the local populace.
|
Space Marines are cool. The name's a bit
dumb, given that "marine" is the one thing they aren't,
but hell, give them space-axes and call them Special Ninja
Assault Squad, what does it matter as long as they're blowing
things up!
|
| |< | << | >> | >| |
|---|
I hear of more and more alien invaders these days who seem to set out with no clear idea of what they want or how they should go about getting it, and who unsurprisingly end up bungling the whole operation. It's dreadfully upsetting to see Greys bawling their eyes out, so here's a guide to best practice classified by objective.
| |< | << | >> | >| |
|---|
While "researching" all this I've run into several pages advocating a position that seems dafter the more often I see it - the idea that humanity should throw all its energies into filling the Milky Way with self-sustaining colony-worlds so as to reduce the risk of extinction when Sol goes red giant in five billion or so AD. Here's an alternative proposal: we round up all the gung-ho idiots so keen on exhausting our planet's resources and fire them out of a catapult in the general direction of Alpha Centauri. That's a much better way of safeguarding our survival.
Besides, why should we care whether the cosmos will ever run out of hominids? It's not as if our evolutionary descendants at that distance would be recognisably human! And while the development of true "artificial intelligence" is a way off yet, on a geological timescale it's the AIs we should be thinking of as our descendants, not their pet monkeys. As long as we avoid doing anything irresponsible in the short term, we can expect the long-term survival of our intellectual offspring to take care of itself.
So by all means let's have manned bases anywhere we have business doing things that can't be automated; it might even make sense to terraform Mars, eventually. But there's no need to dress up squalid factional land-grabs as some sort of grand cosmic destiny. Exporting concepts like political boundaries, territorial conquests and military arms races into space sounds like a good way of ending up fighting wars of independence against our colonies - and Mutual Assured Destruction won't help anybody's survival chances.
Further Reading:
Deep Space |
Deep
Time
| |< | << | >> | >| |
|---|