How Much Impact Can a -200 Degrees Centigrade Ice Shield Withstand?

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the feasibility of a science fiction ice cruiser equipped with a -200 degrees Celsius ice shield, exploring its resistance to kinetic and nuclear impacts. Participants analyze the ice's structural integrity, estimating that 17.4 Tsa Bomba-sized nuclear weapons could potentially compromise the shield, while also discussing the immense fuel requirements for propulsion, suggesting billions of tons of fuel for effective acceleration and deceleration. The conversation highlights the challenges of using ice as both a shield and fuel source, with suggestions to consider alternative propulsion methods like fusion or ionized particle drives. Participants emphasize the importance of the ideal rocket equation in calculating mass and fuel needs, and the limitations of current scientific understanding in achieving such ambitious space travel concepts. Overall, the thread illustrates the complexities of merging hard science with speculative fiction in space exploration scenarios.
  • #31
schonovic said:
O.K. so what if I have a magical mass to energy converter converting all fuel mass to energy and could apply 100% of the energy to a photon drive. What's the best I could hope for?
That's what D H was describing with the antimatter photon rocket above.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
It is science fiction, so you just do what most authors do. Just give the engine/thruster some cool sounding name and just don't explain how it's able to obtain relativistic speeds.

Or how a star fighter is able to behave like a fighter jet in outerspace.

Etc.

If you look at the most popular science fiction books, TV shows, movies; having a good story line and good characters is more important than the science. You could take the best stories out of the science fiction realm and put them into the time of Alexander the Great, the Roman Empire, or World War II and still have a great story.

For example: The movie that best compares to the original Star Trek TV series? Master and Commander! Even though the story is set during the Napoleonic Wars, the interplay between the Captain and the Doctor feels very much like Captain Kirk's relationship with Dr McCoy and Spock.

Another example: Asimov's Foundation Series. It's based on the Fall of the Roman Empire! But with a "what if" twist to find a way to reestablish the Empire at some future date - at least until the series took on a life of its own and Asimov just took it wherever (it was originally a serial for a magazine and the most important thing was to ensure readers wanted another installment so Asimov could make another paycheck, seeing as how he wasn't a famous, successful author yet).
 
  • #33
BobG said:
It is science fiction, so you just do what most authors do. Just give the engine/thruster some cool sounding name and just don't explain how it's able to obtain relativistic speeds.
Bingo. The MacGuffin Drive, or something like that. Even PhD physicists who write science fiction on the side do this. In fact, they know they have to do this because the only way to make science fiction compatible with known science is to write about spaceships that take generations to get from star A to star B, or write about races to whom a thousand years is but a blink of the eye, or just stop writing science fiction altogether. Amateurs who try to make their science fiction realistic typically end up with egg all over their faces.
Addendum:
BobG said:
If you look at the most popular science fiction books, TV shows, movies; having a good story line and good characters is more important than the science.
Exactly. The best science fiction is about people, not machines. The thingy that let's the people in the story quickly flit from place to place is just a plot device, aka a MacGuffin. Hence my name the MacGuffin Drive. Plot devices help the writer write, and help keep the reader engaged. Done right and plot devices don't need a lot of motivation or justification. In fact, an author who feels a need to provide that motivation or justification should see that as indicating that the device is being used incorrectly.
 
Last edited:
  • #34
D H said:
Exactly. The best science fiction is about people, not machines. The thingy that let's the people in the story quickly flit from place to place is just a plot device, aka a MacGuffin. Hence my name the MacGuffin Drive. Plot devices help the writer write, and help keep the reader engaged. Done right and plot devices don't need a lot of motivation or justification. In fact, an author who feels a need to provide that motivation or justification should see that as indicating that the device is being used incorrectly.
It's a matter of taste but personally I think this is an example of the worst kind of science fiction. That doesn't mean that it's bad by any stretch, just that it's a plot made possible by science fantasy rather than an exploration of the consequences of various scientificesque plot devices.

This really falls back on how hard you like your SF boiled but personally the type of SF that proposes no or very few overly-speculative plot devices and explores the social consequences of those propositions is what I consider good SF; not a variation of the Napoleonic wars in space.
 
Last edited:
  • #35
See that's where I wanted to go with this. All I really was looking for is the possibility of using ice as a starship hull. I didn't want to have to justify how the ice ship moved through space. For that I was going to use simple physics numbers to say it has a superfusion engine with spacetime compressors that allow the ship to go through more densities of spacetime than it normally would in any given moment in uncompressed spacetime. That I already had worked out.
 
  • #36
schonovic said:
See that's where I wanted to go with this. All I really was looking for is the possibility of using ice as a starship hull. I didn't want to have to justify how the ice ship moved through space. For that I was going to use simple physics numbers to say it has a superfusion engine with spacetime compressors that allow the ship to go through more densities of spacetime than it normally would in any given moment in uncompressed spacetime. That I already had worked out.
A few tips;
  • When choosing technobabble terminology be wary of the words you choose. You've got to take into account both the consternation of people educated in the field and boredom of those who aren't (in other words watch out for terms like spacetime density compression that may irk scientists for being nonsense and bore laypeople for being innacessable).
  • Watch out for over-explaning. Mystery is a great asset in story telling, it brings a sense of depth to the setting and allows the reader to fill in some of the blanks themselves (as well as hook them for more).
  • Be consistent with your plot devices. Science fiction and fantasy are hotbeds for imagination and innovation, readers are going to be thinking of different ways the technology presented could be used. If they come across an obvious use that is ignored (especially if it is a solution to an obstacle the characters must overcome) they will feel the world is broken. Generic example; if the setting includes the good-guy fleet outnumbered by the bad-guy fleet but also includes self replicating machines or very advanced autonomy/robotics/AI people will wonder why the protaginists are for some reason lacking in industry/numbers.
  • Be intelligent with the ramifications of your plot devices. As I mentioned in the previous point there are obvious economical and industrial considerations for advanced autonomy. Good science fiction explores the ramifications of speculative science/technology (e.g. addressing unemployment, technosocialism, post-industrial economics, Jevons paradox etc in an increasingly automated society), it does not just use it to prop up a plot.
 
  • #37
Exactly. The best science fiction is about people, not machines.

agreed... my all-time favorite science fiction short story was this simple one
where the spceship is an assemblage of kurmudgeonly living organisms each with its own personality. The author poked fun at our foibles, and probably at bureaucracy. It was written aboout the same time as 'Parkinson's Law'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specialist_(short_story )
https://sites.google.com/a/depauw.edu/robert-sheckley/-the-specialist
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #38
Again you misinterpret me; I'm not writing a novel or choosing plot devices I'm inventing things for people who play tabletop roleplaying games, such as battletech, star trek space combat simulator, star wars the role playing game, etc... All of which can get pretty inventive if you want to have a fun game. That's why I made the Ice ship. I figure an Imperial cruiser could have a time of firing turbolaser batteries at the Ice ship before destroying it. anyways I'm done with the idea now and am moving on to turning a rotating asteroid into an electrical power generator but then that would be another discussion.
 
  • #39
schonovic said:
Again you misinterpret me; I'm not writing a novel or choosing plot devices
I know you're not writing a novel but the points stand for any science fiction media (and others who may read this thread later who may be writing could benefit too).
 
  • #40
Oohhh, gotcha Ryan_m_b!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
9K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
3K