: Re: How do I describe Newtonian physics to the reader in a way that is realistic yet not too complex? I have a story where I adhere strongly to plausible physics for space combat (some behind-the-scenes

@Speyer920

Vote Up Vote Down

Choose the level of description you give to the readers. From Space Odyssey to today, readers have certainly gain a knowledge level about "how things are" in space, in average. Choose your level - the average today reader; Somewhat lower? Somewhat higher?

Choose what you describe with a set of rules. Is that the events protagonists/actor experience? Some tech you need to explain for any reason? Just everything happening? Only things that if you do not explain lie traps for disappointment?

Choose the properties of your science fiction world. Space itself is hard to explain when needed in a story. Space combat goes tremendously farther. Just to mention consistency - the same event with the same parameters happening twice may have slightly different results, but definitely not much different or opposite. This will embarrass regardless good Newtonian explanations or not.

Think of some properties of your space combat:

Does combat spaceships commonly have crews or not? Can a crew be better in combat than a self combat AI controlled ship? Why a crew is superior against a quantum CPU calculating trillions of trillions of scenarios every second? If your setting is highly advance, i believe combat crews will be absent. If not, certainly present.

Does spaceships have shields or equivalent? Because if so, you probably need 2 kind of weapons, shield buster and mass buster types. Same here, higher tech says yes to shields, lower means no.

So obviously, having unmanned AI combat ships without shields is contradiction.

Uniqueness: Are combat ships what most imagine, or something different. What if one fleet is as we know and the other is one carrier, few protectors and trillions++ of nano-battleships, each one capable of e.g. enter a thruster and explode it inside out. Or enter the ventilation and kill the crew.

Reason, define why your combat sides are as they are: Combat designs always have a reasonable source, a need, always driven by evolution. Galleys were just to get combat to see. With oars. Then sails some. Sails remove oars. Then cannons come. Cannons remove archers. Then steam comes. Steam removes oars. Internal combustion engine removes steam. Heavy armor removed Wood and low armor. Airplanes prove heavy armor useless. Let's see ground combat. Unorganized group fights overwhelmed by organized groups - units. Phalanx defeat plain units. Cavalry defeats phalanx. Artillery and muskets defeat cavalry. Tanks defeat artillery. And so on. There are some not that true statements above but you get the meaning. So the question is, about your space combat, the fleets that will engage where they were designed from? What is the past chain of events lead to their creation?

(0)

Login to post a comment!