Expert vs. Logic

[choppy]

I was just browsing the fight thread and I had a few thoughts about the conflict of writer's expertise and the intelligent reader. The question I shall pose is the following: what do you do when someone makes a statement about something you have written - claiming it to be impossible - when you know in fact that it is possible?

As a case in point I recently received a critique of a chapter of mine that involved a space battle. In it I described the effects of a laser beam colliding with the hull of a space ship. I described how the exchange of momentum rocked the ship. My reader pointed out that photons have no mass, and by the relation p = mv, could not carry momentum. Now I'm quite well versed in physics and know for a fact that for a photon p = hf/c where h is Planck's constant, f is the frequency of the light, and c is the speed of light. Granted this is very small, but it does exist. And for a laser to be used as a weapon against a space ship, the intensity would have to be so great that the momentum carried by the light would actually have a kinetic consequence.

 

[Pluvious]

Could you rephrase the question please?

 

[choppy]

In speculative fiction there are many things that are physically possible, that to the intelligent layperson may seem impossible. For example - parrying a sword with a dagger, or a photon carrying momentum.

Naturally these things are pointed out when a work is read. How should one handle these? Is it worth getting worked up over? Should you as an author look back over your work and find some way of explaining how your "impossible task" actually is possible? Should you bother to point out that you are indeed correct?

 

[Kilroy]

In the contact of the light photons with the ship there is a transfer of the frequency (not exactly either but it will all be explained). The concentrated beam of light is being fired where there is quite a bit of light in the beam. When the beam hits the ship the contration of photons causes the ship to resonate at the same frequency as the photon. The higher the concentration, the higher amplitude in the transfer. The damage to the ship comes from the plates of the hull vibrating at the high frequency and coming apart. This may also cause i feedback in a sort of energy shield, causing things like burnouts, power drops, and the exploding panels you always see on Star Trek.
Momentum of the beam doesn't "really" exist, but you could think of of that transfer sorta like a momentum shift. What i do is just write it only to the precision i know, but i make sure i have that right.

BTW I'm only a Grade twelve student that am not actually taking gr12 physics till next year but I believe this is acturate for our purposes.

 

[Susan Boulton]

This is a quote made in an online discussion by the author Peter Morwood (his lady wife is Diane Duane)

If you get it right, 1 person in 1000 will praise you for it - but if you get it wrong, 995 people will write/fax/email/phone to point the error out, and the other 5 will track you down and tell you face to face. But not one of them will tell you how to fix it...

I am not sure if the words are Peter's they do have the sound of his wit. But I find them very apt.

In my writing I try to get things right, if a reader disagrees then it's their right I suppose. But as long as I know I got the facts right in my research, or based the "facts" in the piece on a real or known piece of knowledge, then I consider my job as a writer of "fantasy" done.

 

[Brian G Turner]

choppy -

If faced with the example you cited, I would err on the side of caution. I'm not too sure how much momentum could be transferred anyway, and if you're talking "speed-of-light" photons then you're in dangerously relativistic territory (ie, someone else always knows better!). Personally, in the example quoted, I would make an issue of the kinetic distrubance caused by the heating of said laser. I figure that effect would be more prominent. But that would simply be my own solution.

As for the original question -

The question I shall pose is the following: what do you do when someone makes a statement about something you have written - claiming it to be impossible - when you know in fact that it is possible?

Simple ensure that you know precisely what you are writing is supportable! This could be especially important with spec fic.

 

[Chlestron]

Alright, I have a few answers to this question.

First, it's possible to try to explain the physics involved and the math and what not, but chances are, that won't work. A simple explanation won't change what people "KNOW" to be true, especially coming from the person who just "LIED" to them. At best it will be seen as a self-defense justification thing but a lot of people will think you're trying to insult them.

Next

You can play the 'it hasn't been invented yet' or the 'we don't really know' gambit because, after all, considering that our space program is still young, we really don't know what would happen. Theories can only take on so far, but they always make assumptions and take out nasty little details that will drastically alter the specifics. That will sound like a cheap cop out.

Next

Don't go into that much detail in things. Don't call your weapon a laser beam, call it simply a beam. It can then be anything you want it to be and don't explain HOW or WHY it damaged the ship, that isn't important and can get you in trouble. Explaining that the beam hit the ship and that the ship rocked, electronics exploded, and what not.

Getting too specific will get SOME SMALL % OF PEOPLE trying to debunk the theory and people will point out that 'photons have no mass' though they DO impart energy even if it's not a momentum transfer. Another thing I'm surprised somebody didn't say is that "even IF photons have mass, the respective mass of the ship would negate any affects there (like shooting a marble at a volkswagon)

The average reader will not really mind minor errors if the story is good and what not. There are always some that like to pick apart things. Remember to take all critiques with a grain of salt.

 

[kahnovitch]

The arguement to me seems to be that..

Light has no weight, or the weight it has is negligable and therefore cannot move objects of greater mass.

However.....

Space is an almost weightless environment so the slightest force can act on even the largest mass.

But as Choppy was giving the example of a laser beam striking a ship in space and being rocked I offer these possible solutions..

A) The ship was rocked by the resultant repulsion of the laser by an energy shield (happens all the time!)

B) Some minor/temporary hull breach may have occured causing a momentary change in the internal/exteral pressure of said ship, causing the rock/jolt effect.

C) Space (despite common misconceptions) is not a "pure vacuum" as there are various gravitational forces, heavy/high speed particles flying about all over the damn place, which can indeed cause subtle currents in space (such as the "solar wind" etc).

D) The laser struck a part of the ship that controls the vessel, causing a loss of control etc.

If someone beefs at you about the "realism" of the science etc in a book just tell them this ...

"Hell, it's science fiction for crying out loud! Fiction! Want me to spell it out for you!
F.I.C.T.I.O.N
If it was real and physically possible I wouldn't be writing about it, I'd be patenting it and becoming incredibly rich!
Now shut the Hell up and give me my Big Mac!"

 

[Bardos]

Writers are Liers.

Readers had better accept that.

I do.

 

[Twelve]

Originally posted by choppy
Is it worth getting worked up over?

No. Especially if you know you are right. Only get worried if someone catches an obvious mistake...

...and then you can just admit it if it comes down to it. I think people respect that.

12

 

[Aik Haw]

kahnovitch:-
You will still have to overcome the massive inertia a spaceship would pose.

choppy:-
Your arguement has some point as photons can move things. Things such as a solar sail or the solar gating system used in still experimental transistor gate system aims to use photons to move minute gatings.

However, even if say your photons can overcome the phenomenal mass a spacecraft ( assuming we are talking about the classical idea of what a space craft is ), would not the ship be spun away into space instead of being rocked about?

Of course, since such experiments have never been carried out in the void of space, the answer is, who knows? We can theorise all we like and next thing the very foundation of physics itself known as gravity is being flung out of the window in the even that phlogistonic dark matter theory proves false.

To all:-
I was being chided by a few readers for writing about a future where genetically engineered plants are being used to help deal with the fading arboreal ecology. The next thing I got were readers pounding back at me saying that the "Utopia" I pose is impossible.

Little did they know, and I chose to apologise instead, that the story was based upon two going to be published and one published results on interspecies gene transmission between already GM plants which shows that gene transmission is radically low between the modded and the wild!! Even in cross proximity, less than 0.001% of the offsprings in a species of birch were crossed in a single generation, and there were trees growing in close proximity!! Imagine, you will take at least a few hundred thousand crosses to get a viable offspring in close proximity, and how many GM and natural trees of the same species will be in close proximity given the "nutrient drag" of both are so different unless humans meddle?

 

[mistri]

I'm not a scientist, so I can't say what is accurate, but writers always have to be aware that things suggested in critique are not always going to be the right thing to do.

When I get my work critiqued I don't change everything that people suggest - I weigh what has been said and see what I agree and disagree with. Sometimes critiquers are just simply wrong and offer bad advice, or they may be jealous and overly critical for all the wrong reasons. Many critiques are very valuable but it's worth taking everything with a pinch of salt.

If you believe you're right and can back that up then go with your own instincts. If you write something you don't believe in it could easily negatively impact the story.

 

[An8el]

Many artists are historically regarded as "psychics"!
Aik, your ability to predict was awesome! Nothing like that to get you to believe in your projective thinking a little more.

When I get criticized for my imaginative ideas, I sometimes just agree with those who tell me that something is impossible. Then I do whatever I want. I will change something when quite a few people point to that same spot in the writing. It take so much more capacity & effort to positively invent something and imagine how it might play out - and very little to criticize it. Some people just like to get a rise out of you.

If I wanted to bother, I would ask, are they misunderstanding me because they don't agree with my idea, or is it that I haven't made the idea clear enough? I listen to anyone telling me what to do only as an example of what they mean. Then I write what I want to write. I always listen when multiple people say that they don't follow my thinking somewhere.

Another thing - I wrote this one story and it freaked everyone out who read it - then I realized it was because the subject (human/animal sexuality) was a severe social taboo. So I had to decide if I wanted it or not as a story topic at all, even though it powerfully affected people. I still haven't decided on that one.

 

[kahnovitch]

Originally posted by Aik Haw
kahnovitch:- You will still have to overcome the massive inertia a spaceship would pose.

Nobody said how big the ship was, or at what velocity it was travelling old chap.

"No, I don't want fries with that!"

 

[pcarney]

I think it is important to have a good base of knowledge on what you're writing about. Infact, I find that I can become somewhat obsessive about this- for my own projects. Oddly, when I read someone else's work, unless it's completely, blatantly wrong, I don't really worry about it.
Actually, this is one of the reasons I find myself drawn to fantasy, and not science fiction. This 'science' thing both scares and confuses me.