NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey all. Now, there may be a thread about this somewhere, but I couldn't find it with Search, thus the creation of this one.

I need to create a series of interstellar craft that could be constructed within the next 50 years or so for a short story of mine. I'm planning on making them be powered by either Inertial Confinement Fusion or an "Orion" drive. In order to resist acceleration forces, the ships would be filled with a breathable liquid (possibly perfluorocarbon), and they would be armed with no more than a handful of coilguns capable of firing miniaturized nuclear warheads into a planet's atmosphere. They would also carry a single "Cyclonic" torpedo.

Now, I need to know the following:

1) Is the above-mentioned technology feasible within the allotted time frame?
2) Is breathable liquid an actual alternative to air? Would it irritate the lungs and nasal passages too much to be effective?
3) Could nuclear weapons be shrunk down to, say, the size of a 120mm shell? And would the shell survive re-entry?
4) Could a Cyclonic torpedo be built? And how large would it have to be to destroy a planet's crust?

The ships would be assembled in space at a futuristic version of the ISS from parts flown up from Earth. If using the Orion Drive, it would be carried outside the magnetosphere before igniting its engines. If using the ICF it would be propelled by some other means to Jupiter, where it could stock up on Helium-3 for fuel.

I would appreciate it if you talked about any other ideas I might work into this ship series.

What the Hell is a 'cyclonic torpedo'?

:eek: doesn't this classify as homework help? what is this short-story for? *raises eye brow at you*

How far is 'interstellar'? Alpha Centauri? Another galaxy? Delta Quadrant? Man I'm a star trek geek...

Anyways, any vessel could be interstellar. It's just a matter of how long it takes it to get there, and what the odds are of it not getting caught by some obstacles gravity and dying horribly. If it's a ship that's only going on a one way trip you could always use the old stand by of hybernation.

Other then that, I'm not really sure what the hell the technology you're talking about is.

Would there be people on board? If there are, you're also going to need shielding from cosmic rays...or else your crew would either be dead or dying of cancer by the time they reached their destination.

finally a sensible thread!2) Is breathable liquid an actual alternative to air? Would it irritate the lungs and nasal passages too much to be effective?it would be perfect, first it makes it possible for the human pilots to withstand great accelerations and second it is even better for the lungs to 'breathe' liquid. afaik they use it for premature born babies with lung defects.3) Could nuclear weapons be shrunk down to, say, the size of a 120mm shell? And would the shell survive re-entry?i doubt you can shrink a nuke to that size since you must still achieve critical mass to initiate the chainreaction.

you could add large watertanks around the crewcompartments to shield them from cosmic radiation.

@BOP: A Cyclonic torp is a weapon that penetrates the crust of a planet and detonates near the core, causing massive volcanic activity. Basically it kills everything. Look it up.

@Tremerica: The story is for just-because. I like to write, and i had an idea.

@Moantha: Intersteller is interstellar. As in anywhere. I'm still working on an FTL drive (could use some help), but was thinking about using worm holes.

@Vetalia: Yes, there would be a crew of between one- and two-hundred. And yes, I forgot the radiation shielding. What would you suggest?

@Kossackja: I know they use it for babies, but thats inserted via a tube in the lungs. Im talking about removing the air in the ship completely, so that you would pretty much be filled with the stuff. And water tanks would be quite heavy at the size needed, and would be economically impossible, methinks.

Any alternative weapons capable of destroying a city that could be made small?

Oh, a planet-cracker, then. So sue me for not keeping up with current geek lingo.

As in wiping it off the map, or as in just killing everyone. Biological weapons, dirty, but effective, can be quite small. Although if there are aliens on this planet it might be a trick engineering something that will effect them.

finally a sensible thread!it would be perfect, first it makes it possible for the human pilots to withstand great accelerations and second it is even better for the lungs to 'breathe' liquid. afaik they use it for premature born babies with lung defects.i doubt you can shrink a nuke to that size since you must still achieve critical mass to initiate the chainreaction.

you could add large watertanks around the crewcompartments to shield them from cosmic radiation.

In the 1950's the United States experimented with a project called Leapfrog, that placed Nuclear warheads in the shells of SHerman tanks. ALthough it is feasible the radius was rather small

@Vetalia: Yes, there would be a crew of between one- and two-hundred. And yes, I forgot the radiation shielding. What would you suggest?


Some of the plans currently being thrown around involve using hydrogen compounds encased in a shell around the actual craft; water, ethylene, or even molecular hydrogen are the main ones. The only problem is, it's really massive and would not be easy to assemble.

The second is using rings of electromagnets, with an outer negative one to deal with the cosmic rays and a positive inner magnet to negate the magnetic force in the actual ship to prevent harm to the crew. The only problem with this is that the protection only extends in a planar fashion, leaving the ship vulnerable to rays travelling orthogonally to the ship.

The third would involve making the entire ship positively charged, repelling the cosmic rays. I don't know the exact mechanisms and drawbacks of this one, so I wouldn't recommend going with it until either you or I find more information.

A Cyclonic torp is a weapon that penetrates the crust of a planet and detonates near the core, causing massive volcanic activity.that is stupid, not even all nuclear weapons in the world combined detonated at the core of our planet could cause anything more than a blip on sensitive seismographs. [QUOTE=Einhauser]I know they use it for babies, but thats inserted via a tube in the lungs. Im talking about removing the air in the ship completely, so that you would pretty much be filled with the stuff. And water tanks would be quite heavy at the size needed, and would be economically impossible, methinks.i see no problem with breathing a liquid except that your vocal cords will not work.
you dont neccessarily have to get the water from earth, hike a comet and take its water or look for it on the dark side of asteroids or cold moons.

Some of the plans currently being thrown around involve using hydrogen compounds encased in a shell around the actual craft; water, ethylene, or even molecular hydrogen are the main ones. The only problem is, it's really massive and would not be easy to assemble.

The second is using rings of electromagnets, with an outer negative one to deal with the cosmic rays and a positive inner magnet to negate the magnetic force in the actual ship to prevent harm to the crew. The only problem with this is that the protection only extends in a planar fashion, leaving the ship vulnerable to rays travelling orthogonally to the ship.

The third would involve making the entire ship positively charged, repelling the cosmic rays. I don't know the exact mechanisms and drawbacks of this one, so I wouldn't recommend going with it until either you or I find more information.
Or you could hollow out the core of a small, tectonically dead moon, add a drive system and hey presto! Several miles of ship's shielding.

1) Is the above-mentioned technology feasible within the allotted time frame?
Not sure...

2) Is breathable liquid an actual alternative to air? Would it irritate the lungs and nasal passages too much to be effective?
Donno. Tho if you've seen Evangelion, the Eva pilots use this breathable fluid called LCL when piloting.

3) Could nuclear weapons be shrunk down to, say, the size of a 120mm shell? And would the shell survive re-entry?
The smallest nuclear weapon I know of is the Davy Crockett (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device%29). You might be familliar with it from MGS: 3 where it makes an appearance.

If using the ICF it would be propelled by some other means to Jupiter, where it could stock up on Helium-3 for fuel. I would appreciate it if you talked about any other ideas I might work into this ship series.
IIRC, there's a ship called the Jupritis from some sci-fi I saw before...built exactly to transport Helium-3, though it uses a pulse engine as opposed to ICF...but I'm sure it could just as well be powered by ICF Jupritis (http://www.mahq.net/mecha/gundam/seed/tsiolkovsky.jpg) pic, if you're interested.

Would there be people on board? If there are, you're also going to need shielding from cosmic rays...or else your crew would either be dead or dying of cancer by the time they reached their destination.
I assume you just read the latest Scientific American?
:p

I assume you just read the latest Scientific American?
:p

Hell yeah. :cool:

I assume you just read the latest Scientific American?you must be mistaken, there are no scientific americans, they are all dumb rednecks, that believe in creationism.

Oh, a planet-cracker, then. So sue me for not keeping up with current geek lingo.

Just because you have not heard of something does not make it stupid. Assuming so is a sure sign of ignorance, as I am sure you will agree.

As in wiping it off the map, or as in just killing everyone. Biological weapons, dirty, but effective, can be quite small. Although if there are aliens on this planet it might be a trick engineering something that will effect them.

The ships will be used against aliens exclusively in this story, so biological might not work. I'm aiming for something that can wipe a city off the face of a planet. Radiation is not really an important factor.

*snip*

I don't think the first two methods would work for the same reasons you mentioned. The third seems overly complicated (I'm pretty sure it would work, but I have no idea how to do it), so I probably won't use that either. Perhaps I could come up with some sort of radiation-repellant sown into the Kevlar armor of the ship?

that is stupid, not even all nuclear weapons in the world combined detonated at the core of our planet could cause anything more than a blip on sensitive seismographs.

As with Bobs Own Pipe, I will caution you about assuming something doesn’t work. That blip is exactly what needs to happen. The nuclear blast will create an irregularity in the core, causing the destruction of the surface.

i see no problem with breathing a liquid except that your vocal cords will not work. you dont neccessarily have to get the water from earth, hike a comet and take its water or look for it on the dark side of asteroids or cold moons.

I had not thought about the vocal chord thing... Now how would that be overcome? And using the restroom would also be difficult. Perhaps some kind of suction system…

Although yes, I could get the water from an asteroid, I would first have to catch one, and then all the added mass would burn through my fuel.

Tho if you've seen Evangelion, the Eva pilots use this breathable fluid called LCL when piloting.

LCL is more or less what I am going for. The only problem is that I don't have many Liliths or giant lakes of blood on hand ATM, :p

The smallest nuclear weapon I know of is the Davy Crockett (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device%29). You might be familliar with it from MGS: 3 where it makes an appearance.

Excellent! I think I could say that the technology has developed enough in the 100 or so years since that project to make smaller sized nuclear weapons. Perhaps the coilgun nuke isn’t dead after all!

you must be mistaken, there are no scientific americans, they are all dumb rednecks, that believe in creationism.

Just because you do not believe in creationism does not mean you have to insult it. Now, everyone STOP. I do not want a discussion of merits of Darwinism v Creationism. If that happens, I'll get a mod to close this thread so fast your heads will spin.

Apologies for not posting earlier. My dad spilled a tank of gasoline in the back of his truck (which was parked in the garage, over which this room is built), and the fumes kept me away. Crazy, huh?

The only way to fly.

http://www.homestead.com/jasonpaulhamus/files/transformers/unicron.jpg

My design pwns all.

http://www.unlc.biz/images/rocket.JPG

I <3 roket siense.

Hahaha, yea, those two rockets will work great! Hehehe

For a drive, there where a few threads on this (http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18925331.200) a while ago.

I had not thought about the vocal chord thing... Now how would that be overcome?never watched the abyss? there they do it with a small keypad, where the person breathing the liquid types in what he wants to say. not so far from reality either, if you look at how fast some people can communicate typing short messages into their cellphonesAnd using the restroom would also be difficult. Perhaps some kind of suction system…no, restroom would be easy, the perfluorocarbons dont mix with water, you need a region with artificial gravity, maybe a part of the ship that spins (or spin the whole ship) to create centrifugal force and the denser liquid will sink to the bottom.
the centrifugal force could also stop degredation of muscles and bones, which would happen in microgravity.

I hate that movie. Its horrible, and ive tried to block it out of my mind. But that is the place I first saw breathable liquid, so I must dispense due credit.

And the restroom thing, although it would work (I think), it may be a little too... graphic for publication, lol.

And the restroom thing, although it would work (I think), it may be a little too... graphic for publication, lol.and the "suction system" is not?

I can think of a few ways to make it defiantly less graphic. Better than having it float around in the liquid you are breathing.

I don't think the first two methods would work for the same reasons you mentioned. The third seems overly complicated (I'm pretty sure it would work, but I have no idea how to do it), so I probably won't use that either. Perhaps I could come up with some sort of radiation-repellant sown into the Kevlar armor of the ship?

I don't know...if this is set somewhat in the future, you could always use the old "Treknobabble" technique, although your story would not be as legitimate or unique if you did that. With my layman's knowledge of the subject, I can't really help you much more. I'd suggest asking someone in the field, if you can.

You're on the West Coast, so there's probably a number of places nearby that you can consult.

Very true. Although I don't exactly live next door to a university. *sigh,* this story is more work that I thought it would be.

Very true. Although I don't exactly live next door to a university. *sigh,* this story is more work that I thought it would be.

Scientific accuracy can be the difference between a great story and a generic one...if anything, scientific accuracy will lead to a more coherent plot with fewer holes or inconsistencies.

@Moantha: Intersteller is interstellar. As in anywhere. I'm still working on an FTL drive (could use some help), but was thinking about using worm holes.

A pre-existing system I assume ? That is rather limited if you want to go to planets that need blowing up... though at least it is somewhat realistic.

Of course, if your vessel is advanced enough to create massive wormholes you already have your superweapon. Dropping a black hole (assuming you make your wormholes through them) on a planet will definately damage it.

For the FTL drive have you considered the alcubierre warp drive? It's got the same feasibility problem as wormholes, though in that it requires negative gravity (which would require exotic matter to create).

Hey all. Now, there may be a thread about this somewhere, but I couldn't find it with Search, thus the creation of this one.

I need to create a series of interstellar craft that could be constructed within the next 50 years or so for a short story of mine. I'm planning on making them be powered by either Inertial Confinement Fusion or an "Orion" drive. In order to resist acceleration forces, the ships would be filled with a breathable liquid (possibly perfluorocarbon), and they would be armed with no more than a handful of coilguns capable of firing miniaturized nuclear warheads into a planet's atmosphere. They would also carry a single "Cyclonic" torpedo.

Now, I need to know the following:

1) Is the above-mentioned technology feasible within the allotted time frame?
2) Is breathable liquid an actual alternative to air? Would it irritate the lungs and nasal passages too much to be effective?
3) Could nuclear weapons be shrunk down to, say, the size of a 120mm shell? And would the shell survive re-entry?
4) Could a Cyclonic torpedo be built? And how large would it have to be to destroy a planet's crust?

The ships would be assembled in space at a futuristic version of the ISS from parts flown up from Earth. If using the Orion Drive, it would be carried outside the magnetosphere before igniting its engines. If using the ICF it would be propelled by some other means to Jupiter, where it could stock up on Helium-3 for fuel.

I would appreciate it if you talked about any other ideas I might work into this ship series.


Can't answer many of your questions, but I can answer this one:
Liquids, even liquid oxygen (if it could be maintained at 20degC approximately while in liquid form) do not support respiration. Regardless of the liquid used, the people on board would die in that environment. Our lungs are designed to breathe gases, liquids are too dense for our lungs to handle, try an inertial dampening field instead...

I'm not sure I get the "pickled people" idea. If it's to prevent extreme Gs, wouldn't the weight of the fluid itself present a bit of an obstacle - assuming for a moment the aquanouts wouldn't be squished by the weight of the fluid, how would their lungs handle the liquid contents?

I'd go with wormholes if I were you. Much more managable. I'm not you though..

Wormhole technology would severely limit exposure to radiation, and together with conventional shielding technologies & anti-radiation treatments, would potentially solve the problem altogether. Otherwise EM fields are probably the most realistic solution.

Nukes need a certain size to work, and more still to be efficient. If it's a space weapon you're looking for, I'd think a rail gun or an EM weapon would be more efficient. A very strong magnetic field would be devastating to a spacecraft & since velocity is a near non-issue in space, a small projectile could potentially penetrate pretty much anything.

Orbital weapons are a bit harder. They generally need a certain size to generate enough of an effect. Atmosphere isn't the real problem (unless it's very dense), as shielding would be relatively easy. But the size..

I have no idea how anything would go about penetrating a planetary crust. But you're most likely right about it not needing to cause much of a bang to devastate life on the surface. Perhaps some sort of china-syndrome mechanism could make a hole that deep?

I think planet-killing would be easier accomplished by doing things to the atmosphere, or perhaps by pushing stuff into the planet. If you go with the wormhole idea, planet killing would be easy - but perhaps a bit unexciting (though spectacular).

There's quite a big wikipedia article on liquid breathing by the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid-breathing

I think planet-killing would be easier accomplished by doing things to the atmosphere, or perhaps by pushing stuff into the planet. If you go with the wormhole idea, planet killing would be easy - but perhaps a bit unexciting (though spectacular).

If just "dropping a black hole on the planet" is a bit too impersonal, one could always do something fun with gravity and tides. Ripping the aliens in half and such ;)

A pre-existing system I assume ? That is rather limited if you want to go to planets that need blowing up... though at least it is somewhat realistic.

Of course, if your vessel is advanced enough to create massive wormholes you already have your superweapon. Dropping a black hole (assuming you make your wormholes through them) on a planet will definately damage it.

I highly doubt that it would be possible to drop a black hole through a worm hole. The only way it wold be possible is if the gravity of the black hole kept the worm hole open and it slowly destroyed the target planet. (Think Stargate SG-1. I don't remember the title of the episode.) Of course that is assuming that the ship itself doesn't get sucked in by the gravity of the black hole.

I highly doubt that it would be possible to drop a black hole through a worm hole. The only way it wold be possible is if the gravity of the black hole kept the worm hole open and it slowly destroyed the target planet.

I was actually referring to the black hole needed to create the wormhole in the first place ;)

3) Could nuclear weapons be shrunk down to, say, the size of a 120mm shell? And would the shell survive re-entry?

The U.S. military designed a 155 mm shell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_artillery), which was shot out of an artillery cannon.

I'm sure with advanced technology, and the fact that the shell had to survive the massive pressure from being shot from an Artillery Cannon, it would be entirely feasible.

However, it only has 1/10th the yield of the the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, so I'd suggest something the size of a Cruise Missile.

I was actually referring to the black hole needed to create the wormhole in the first place ;)Yups. I wrote a little sci-fi myself a few years ago, and had to opt for that kind of technology to pull off interstellar travel in a "plausible" & efficient way - at the cost of a planetary battle I had planned. The amazing split-second spectacle of collapsing a planet really isn't all that nerve-wrecking to read about :(

As far as speaking through LCL goes, a device called an Aural Resonator is currently being trialled for use in such circumstances. It's a neck-mounted enhancer to the vocal cords (which do actually work in liquid, just not strongly enough).

You do not need nukes. Carry five or so dense, metal projectiles with you on an Orion Drive ship. Accelerate to somewhere around 10% of lightspeed, then disengage the projectiles from your hull. Make sure the projectiles are guided.

Once you enter the target system, adjust the projectile's course such that they will strike any strategically valuable targets in said system.

Five or six tonnes of metal impacting the surface of an inhabited planet at 10% of C - can you say "Dinosaur Killer"?

*snip*

Wormholes are certainly complicated, but I can think of no other FTL possibilities. If you have any, please post them.

I cannot destroy a planet in this story completely, as the eyes of the galaxy watch every move of the Terran Bloc (earth government). I need to allow the planet to sprout life again in the future, or popular opinion would turn against the Bloc.

For the FTL drive have you considered the alcubierre warp drive? It's got the same feasibility problem as wormholes, though in that it requires negative gravity (which would require exotic matter to create).

Its an interesting idea, but the lack of a way to get in or out of one would hinder its use, to say the least.

*snip*

See Kzord's link for an argument against your position.

I'm not sure I get the "pickled people" idea. If it's to prevent extreme Gs, wouldn't the weight of the fluid itself present a bit of an obstacle - assuming for a moment the aquanouts wouldn't be squished by the weight of the fluid, how would their lungs handle the liquid contents?

See Kzord's link.

*snip*

All I want the coilgun-nukes to do is kill cities on a planet's surface. There are no other space faring species in this story, so no other ships.

*snip*

I couldn’t find any articles on Aural Resonators. I was thinking about implanting a mic in the throat, which would pick up and transmit voices to receivers imbedded in the crew's back teeth. The vibrations would travel up the jawbone and into the ear. Thoughts/

And that weapon is a great idea. Only problems are that it’s not as dramatic as dropping a bomb on a planet (IMO), and there is the possibility that a hardy civilization could survive.

I couldn’t find any articles on Aural Resonators. I was thinking about implanting a mic in the throat, which would pick up and transmit voices to receivers imbedded in the crew's back teeth. The vibrations would travel up the jawbone and into the ear. Thoughts/
I have two suggestions for communications.

First, some scientist somewhere (saw this on the discovery channel, although about a year ago so I cannot remember the details). Using a headband that could messure the our "brainwaves," they were able to give the monkeys control over the mouse on a computer. Given enough time and monkeys, some input device could be derived from that then produced en mass. The astronauts could use the device to either type their messages like it was a keyboard, or be used like a mouse to press the buttons on an on-screen keyboard (which would probably require helmets with a Heads Up Display). The message would be sent via an advanced wifi system to the reciever. As for the case of recieving other peoples' messages, I think a helmet with an HUD would be the easiest solution. The message would just appear on the screen near the corner(like in a first-person shooter) and the person simply has to read them.
The drawbacks of this system are, it makes stealth tactics significantly more difficult. Having a wifi signal sent out every time two crewmates want to comunicate would create alot of nonvisible light, which the aliens may or maynot be able to detect. If they can detect it they could easily "crack the code" and read the messages being sent. The humans could design their spacecraft to keep the signals from escaping the ship, but that could cause other problems. Also, this solution is very dependant on people's ability to read. While literacy will not be a problem, the slower readers on the ship may not be able to read an important message before another message bumps it off the screen.

My second Idea is also based of something I saw off the discovery channel. A man and his wife both implanted two wireless comunicators into there forearms and attached them to a few nerves. After much practice, they were eventually able to send and recieve messages with eachother and communicate. This system could be improved upon and used to allow the crew to communicate with eachother. This would allow you to keep your crew helmet free if you need them to be.
The disadvantages of this system are: it creates alot of brackground light that the aliens could detect (although, the messages would be harder to for the aliens to read, the messages would not be in the crews spoken language, but rather a fairly new one [which would use the same grammer]). The system also would not have the success rate that the other would. It would be much more difficult to teach someone how to use it. The system would optimally be inserted before birth, which leads to all sorts of ethics issues. Also, many people would hate your book because it would of the cyborgation. Some people just find it unethical, and that could reduce your aduience.

What the fuck is an "Orion" drive?

*snip*


Your first idea is great. It sounds like it would work perfectly, except for the problems you already mentioned. Of course, the crew may go insane from not hearing human voices for years on end, or something like that.

There is no chance of the aliens picking up the signals. The whole idea of the story is that Earth, but some incredibly minute chance, was the first planet to sprout life. Thus, humans are the most advanced force in the universe, and fly around killing species that are warlike (read: humanish) and accelerating desirable ones. So, unless they allow it, their signals will not get picked up.

You raise a valid point, but I am honestly not concerned about getting those who would be opposed to the book to read it. I mean, take the cyborgation as an example. If it improves you, I say go for it. Screw the people that want to remain human. As long as the brain exists, you are still human. Or even if you just copied the contents of the brain to a hard drive or something, I would call that human. And who is to say that humans are the best form possible? Why not machines? Machines are perfect in nature. Humans create any and all flaws in them.

What the **** is an "Orion" drive?

As this is a civilized thread, I would like it if you would delete your filthy language. And do a wikipedia or google search for Orion drive instead of swearing at random individuals.

Your first idea is great. It sounds like it would work perfectly, except for the problems you already mentioned. Of course, the crew may go insane from not hearing human voices for years on end, or something like that.

There is no chance of the aliens picking up the signals. The whole idea of the story is that Earth, but some incredibly minute chance, was the first planet to sprout life. Thus, humans are the most advanced force in the universe, and fly around killing species that are warlike (read: humanish) and accelerating desirable ones. So, unless they allow it, their signals will not get picked up.

You raise a valid point, but I am honestly not concerned about getting those who would be opposed to the book to read it. I mean, take the cyborgation as an example. If it improves you, I say go for it. Screw the people that want to remain human. As long as the brain exists, you are still human. Or even if you just copied the contents of the brain to a hard drive or something, I would call that human. And who is to say that humans are the best form possible? Why not machines? Machines are perfect in nature. Humans create any and all flaws in them.
Well, if you got with th first idea the whole ethics of cyborgation are avoided which is an added bonus.

Also, upon further thought, a full helmet would not be needed for the system. I simple headband that has a small screen on it that would go over the eye would suffice. A tiny screen quite close to the eye would appear huge.

I never thought about the psycological effects of never hearing a voice. You should put some research into it and see how you could work it into the novel.

As this is a civilized thread, I would like it if you would delete your filthy language. And do a wikipedia or google search for Orion drive instead of swearing at random individuals.
I'm not swearing at anyone. And I sure as hell am not going to look something up when the obligation is on you to explain it.

Well, if you got with th first idea the whole ethics of cyborgation are avoided which is an added bonus.

Also, upon further thought, a full helmet would not be needed for the system. I simple headband that has a small screen on it that would go over the eye would suffice. A tiny screen quite close to the eye would appear huge.

I never thought about the psycological effects of never hearing a voice. You should put some research into it and see how you could work it into the novel.

Continuing with that train of thought, one could stick the needed screens in glasses, or even (admittedly far-off) contact lenses.

You are correct, that would certainly make an interesting story. I have no idea how I would go about researching that if there is nothing or very little on it, being a lowly highschooler.

I'm not swearing at anyone. And I sure as hell am not going to look something up when the obligation is on you to explain it.

Then ill put it this way: no swearing on my thread. The habit is despicable and unneeded in modern society. Keep it off my thread.

I know that when I have a question about something, I go to Wikipedia or Google first. They often have more in-depth explanations than any single user can provide.

But, because I have nothing better to do ATM, I will explain. An Orion drive is a system of propulsion developed in the 1950s-60s. It is basically a rocket with no engine. Instead, a large steel plate is stuck on the end of it, and small nuclear bombs are detonated below it. This is an extremely fast engine by today's standards, being able to reach Mars and come back in four weeks (as opposed to a year for modern rockets). The problem is that every time it fires within Earth's magnetosphere, between 1 and 10 people die somewhere.

Perhaps you could use zero point energy or cold fusion or the aether, that would be cool.

Seriously though, why not use physical hybernation while their minds control robots or something.

Because none of that is even remotely possible. I am thinking about including "hybernation" pods for a portion of the crew, since once they drop out of FTL, they have several months of travel to the center of a solar system.

The problems would be freezing the bodies so that they could be brought back. A solution could be euthanizing the crew, draining their blood, and replacing it with Saline solution. Then you freeze the body (probably in a container drained of all perfluorocarbon), and when you need to revive them, simply replace their blood and give them an electric shock.

It sounds strange and satanic, but the process has been used on dogs with no apparent brain damage. Perhaps it would work on humans as well...

Wormholes are certainly complicated, but I can think of no other FTL possibilities. If you have any, please post them.

Hyperspace and warpdrives are popular.. but the realism is debateable.
Perhaps something could be done with quantum teleportation ? Although at this moment we can only "teleport" a few atoms...

Interstellar vehicle designs? Why havn't this turned into pointing out your favorite sci-fi universe spaceship yet?

<snip>
See Kzord's link for an argument against your position.




I did. And I stand by my arguement. As of yet, no one has managed long term survival of an air breathing animal by submersing it in liquid, even oxygen saturated liquid, and animals tended to die from pulmonary damage as a result of breathing this liquid. In order to saturate a liquid with a gas, it has to be done under pressure, our lungs do not exert enough pressure on the liquid to allow a transfer of CO2 back into the liquid being expelled.

Also, bear in mind that liquids have a much higher viscosity than gases at standard temperature and pressure, so this would make moving around very difficult - like trying to sprint through water...

As for your HUD display system you coudl use a rapid scanned laser system (akin the system used on modern Helment mounted displays) that scan a laser over the iris to provide an image. Current systems are about the size of a really chunky pair of glasses so in about 10-20years time they you could likely ge away with what looks like a matchstick on either side of your head.

As fro weaponry why fire the nukes at all? why not just drop them from high orbit in a nice non powered or maybe rocket powered reentry vehicles, thus you could have bombs as big or as small as you liked. if you want to go with a gun launched nuke then in the 70s/80 a 155mm warhead would give you up to 1kiloton so by 2050 you might be able to get a hiroshima sized (15kt) gun launched weapon.

1) Is the above-mentioned technology feasible within the allotted time frame?
2) Is breathable liquid an actual alternative to air? Would it irritate the lungs and nasal passages too much to be effective?
3) Could nuclear weapons be shrunk down to, say, the size of a 120mm shell? And would the shell survive re-entry?
4) Could a Cyclonic torpedo be built? And how large would it have to be to destroy a planet's crust?


1) Not in 50 years. Well, 50 years from NOW anyway.

2) Getting it down into the lungs without a pipe would be hard without people coughing like buggery though. Of course you could have them breathign air whilst sitting in water and not BREATHING the liquid, just using it as a dampener.

3) I dont think so, but slightly bigger certainly, tactical nuclear shells already exist, I think they are a bit over 120mm though. Surviving re-entry, probably, depends what they are made of.

4)Possibly, but it is a better idea to use nuclear weapons along a fault line or something to cause widespread vulcanism, getting things to the core of a planet is difficult.


Now, drivewise. The orion whatsit sounds fun. Just dont start it up close to earth, use an ion drive or something untill then. Although refuelling might be a bastard, lets be honest, carrying god-knows-how-many tonnes of uranium or plutonium around with you is going to really limit the ships accelleration. Also the slight danger inherent with letting off nukes right next to your arse.

And even at rather exessive speeds (large fractions of c) it will take a while getting anywhere. Unless you have an FTL drive that needs a running start.

I need to create a series of interstellar craft that could be constructed within the next 50 years or so for a short story of mine.


I'm not convinced that there are any realistic forms of interstellar craft on the horizon at the moment, not in 50 years anyway. 500? Maybe. 5,000? (Assuming humanity survives that long), probably (if it's physically possible).

I'd suggest that if you want to fly about the Galaxy then you push your time-frame out into the future. Then you can pretty much get away with anything. After all, given enough time and money, anything is possible.


I'm planning on making them be powered by either Inertial Confinement Fusion or an "Orion" drive. In order to resist acceleration forces, the ships would be filled with a breathable liquid (possibly perfluorocarbon),


I like the pickled people idea. It seems to work as a story-device especially having read the wiki article.They're treating premature babies with it now, so there's no reason that within 50 years it wouldn't work well with adults.



and they would be armed with no more than a handful of coilguns capable of firing miniaturized nuclear warheads into a planet's atmosphere. They would also carry a single "Cyclonic" torpedo.


I'm not sure about this. Why would you want your craft to have mini-nukes? If it's an interstellar craft, I'm sure it could carry normal sized nukes. The reason ICBMs and so on are so big is for all the fuel etc to carry them. An orbital nuke would be much smaller of itself (no need for as much fuel). I don't think you'd need to go for mini-nukes.

Cyclonic torpedoes - not within 50 years.
How would the torpedo survive entry into the atmosphere? How would it get through the upper and lower crusts? How would it survive in the liquid parts of the earth's layers? Wouldn't it just get pushed off course? What about all the radiation and electromagnetic forces in the earth - wouldn't they fry the torpedo's electronics, making it fundamentally useless?

I'd suggest alternatives forms of destruction ... the post about large dense metallic objects slamming into a vulnerable point on a planets surface 'dinosaur killer' events is a good one.

For taking out large city areas, how about solar power - a la the James Bond type scenario 'Diamonds are forever' or the upgraded Pierce Brosnan film - the one with the Korean in it with the diamonds embedded in his face? You could use a microwave beam - yes just like the one in your kitchen - as the form of energy delivery. Solar collectors on the ship would gather in solar energy and charge up batteries. The energy would be expelled in the form of microwave radiation.

Setting off Natural Gas Hydrates.
There was a great die-off on the Earth's surface many millions of years ago. About 95% of all ocean life and 70% of terrestrial life died. One theory is that the release of natural gas hydrates caused it. (Look up methane clathrate on wikipedia). Basically, it is a form of ice that contains lots and lots of methane. Methane is 20 times more of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and there are trillions and trillions of tonnes of the stuff just offshore. If that gas gets released all at once, so the theory says, it will pump out an asphyxiating mass of methane that will cause massive and rapid global warming. Cue hurricanes, thunders, droughts, famines. It's a real apocalypse scenario. The technology to relase hydrates exists now. To do it from space you would have to bombard senstive points just of the coast line with small missiles (need not be explosive). The energy released from impact would cause the gas to dissociate from the ice.

Hope this helps.

Have a happy armageddon :D

Also consider that a spaceship equal in mass to the US space shuttle (1500 metric tons) moving at 99 percent of the speed of light, impacting on the planet, would be a weapon of unsurpassed power.

Far, far more deadly than any asteroid or bomb you could think of. Probably kill everyone on one side of the planet and blow an enormous crater down to the mantle.

Making it a one-way rocket, and removing the crew requirement makes it more feasible than a ship that goes there, drops a bomb, and comes back.

The only problem is getting 1500 tonnes of [insert material here] moving at a respectable fraction of c without an unfeasibly large railgun and more power than something with a lot of power.

The only problem is getting 1500 tonnes of [insert material here] moving at a respectable fraction of c without an unfeasibly large railgun and more power than something with a lot of power.
A beamed core antimatter rocket would do quite nicely.

A whatwhatwhat?

I know what antimatter is but the beamed core bit of that lost me.

A whatwhatwhat?

I know what antimatter is but the beamed core bit of that lost me.
http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/213.web.stuff/Scott%20Kircher/beamedcore.html

Heheh, blammo!

Rockettastic.

Any such rocket would need to be built in space though as it would weigh "an absolute frigload"

Because nuclear matter is quite (extremely) hefty densitywise. And a lot of it would be needed.

Heheh, blammo!

Rockettastic.

Any such rocket would need to be built in space though as it would weigh "an absolute fuckload"

Because nuclear matter is quite (extremely) hefty densitywise. And a lot of it would be needed.

If you designed it for a one-way trip, and didn't have a human crew, it could be far smaller than a rocket designed for a round-trip with people aboard.

Hell yeah. Would be a most apocalyptic weapon.

Hell yeah. Would be a most apocalyptic weapon.
The best thing to get maximum effect would be to build a rocket that could accelerate to over 90 percent light speed.

As it comes into the target system, it would make final course corrections. Then the front half of the rocket would separate, and the rear section would turn around and decelerate briefly, just so that the first section would impact on one side of the target planet and the rear section would impact on the other side of the target planet (strikes 12 hours apart on the Earth, for example).

That would kill every living thing on the planet, and probably destroy all evidence of civilization.

About the liquid, I'm not sure how fun it is to spend months in a tank of liquid in contact with your mouth and nose. There's gonna be spit and mucous floating all over the place! Gross.

The NASA astronauts had that flying crap problem with air, even. Apparently once the suction fan in the restroom malfunctioned somehow, turning in the wrong direction...

Well, a 1500 tonne impacter would have a momentum of 3x10^14 Kgms

Assuming the speed to be say 2x10^8 ms, which is a fair whack less than 99% of c

Well, a 1500 tonne impacter would have a momentum of 3x10^14 Kgms

Assuming the speed to be say 2x10^8 ms, which is a fair whack less than 99% of c
At 90 percent of light speed, you get relativistic effects on the mass. It isn't the simple Newtonian kinetic energy equation.

Rough thumb guess is over 100 million megatons.

At 90 percent of light speed, you get relativistic effects on the mass. It isn't the simple Newtonian kinetic energy equation.

Rough thumb guess is over 100 million megatons.

Hmm, every physics teacher/lecturer I have talked to has said that the thing about the mass increasing with speed is not actually true but is just a cop-out to keep certain equations working at reletavistic speeds.

Hmm, every physics teacher/lecturer I have talked to has said that the thing about the mass increasing with speed is not actually true but is just a cop-out to keep certain equations working at reletavistic speeds.
Nope. It happens to particles in a particle accelerator. They live longer and gain mass.

*snip*

As is stated later by another poster, I believe that given time perfluorocarbons could be made to work with adults. The technology is already advancing rapidly.

*snip*

I’m concerned about the possible health effects that having a laser shinning into your eye for tears on end could bring. If you only take it off to sleep, just what could happen?

I really want to use nukes for the dramatics of it, to be honest. You get a nice fiery explosion, shockwaves, searing heat, and radiation to boot. When a captain of a starship chooses to wipe out an alien city, I want it gone for good. I want the site to be plate glass and the surrounding lands turned to an ash desert.

*snip*


1) 50 years is the minimum timeframe for this story. I think I may actually aim for 100, and possibly even 200, but no more.

2) I admit it would be hard, but I think it will work out.

3) I want to avoid making them as large as I can. This is, after all, a ship that needs to carry enough provisions for 150 people for years at a time without restocking.

*snip*

As stated earlier, I like the dramatics of nukes. However, just dropping them on someone is no fun. I want to have them scream out of the ship and smash through the atmosphere at a hundred million billion miles an hour, lol.

Indeed the "Dinosaur Killer" is a good idea, but some life would survive. I need to be certain that all life dies.

I can't be certain what an alien world would be composed of. There might not be sufficient quantities of methane to set of a mass asphyxiation.

*snip*

The whole story revolves around crewed ships that are the policemen of the universe, not weapons. I can't just build "interstellar bombs."

A beamed core antimatter rocket would do quite nicely.

Sadly, I don't think antimatter fits in with the feel of the story. Plausible it may be within the time frame, but the common man would scoff at the idea (in ignorance, of course).

Any such rocket would need to be built in space though as it would weigh "an absolute ****load

I will repeat myself: no swearing on my thread! Edit your post to reflect the changes.

*snip*

That wouldn't be all it was touching... *shudders.* Admittedly it wouldn't be pleasant to be submersed in that goo for years on end, but hopefully the filtration systems would clean it...

Indeed the "Dinosaur Killer" is a good idea, but some life would survive. I need to be certain that all life dies

A pair of impacts in the millions of megatonnes range would kill everything

And possibly rip apart the planet, I dont know and I hope I never find out (form the recieving end anyway).



Sadly, I don't think antimatter fits in with the feel of the story. Plausible it may be within the time frame, but the common man would scoff at the idea (in ignorance, of course).

Do you have to explain how it works? If not just call it a beamed core rocket and say that it ejects a jet of subatomic high-energy particles.




I will repeat myself: no swearing on my thread! Edit your post to reflect the changes.


Edited, but I really dont see why people get so upset about swearing, most people use words like that almost as punctuation :P


Nope. It happens to particles in a particle accelerator. They live longer and gain mass. Fair enough, the living longer is time dilation yeah. But I really did think the mass increasing was just to keep certain equations working.

Obviously your first statment is incorrect. If it were true, nothing would have survived from the time of the dinosaurs (*coughcrocodillians*)

I am talking about the 1500 tonnes at near lightspeed.

There is no way that any meteorite would be travelling within a good few orders of magnitude of that speed.

I'm not even sure I could get near light speed. I would have to do more research about ICFs. And even if I could, that would mean I would have to have the destruction of a planet on my mind before I started decelerating from FTL. In other words, i would have to want to kill every living thing on a planet months before I even enter within a lightyear of it.

Hell, even a tenth of lightspeed would probably be fast enough to wipe out any higher life forms.

And if ther is no near light speed then it is going to feel a bit wierd going around other star systems in relatively short times.

I'm not even sure I could get near light speed. I would have to do more research about ICFs. And even if I could, that would mean I would have to have the destruction of a planet on my mind before I started decelerating from FTL. In other words, i would have to want to kill every living thing on a planet months before I even enter within a lightyear of it.

Yes, at the time of launch from your planet.

Here's an interesting thought question.

You are on your planet. You detect a ship moving at 90 percent of light speed as it enters your system - a few light days out. It is not decelerating.

Is it an unmanned probe that was built on a budget for a one-way, one pass trip through your system, or is it a planet-killer?

They would both appear identical.

In either case, with out current technology, we couldn't do diddly squat until it was within terminal range. I guess we pray its a probe.

EDIT: Of course, if it is a probe, that could mean an even worse fate is comming in the form of an invasion fleet... :(

About the breathable liquid thing - it's to prevent any accel. shock right? SO why not just have the ship pumped full of water and have the people breth through an aqualung or similar? And it would only have to be used while the ship is accelerating or decelerating, so you could pump it into storage tanks during the rest of the trip.

The storage tanks add mass to the ship, decreasing fuel effeciency, increasing costs, and descreasing overall range. It is far more effecient to just make the crew breathe that stuff than to remove it. Plus, you would have to carry equipment to generate a LOT of air instead of the small ones already included in the design to pump out the perfluorocarbon from restroom systems and docking bay things.

The storage tanks add mass to the ship, decreasing fuel effeciency, increasing costs, and descreasing overall range. It is far more effecient to just make the crew breathe that stuff than to remove it. Plus, you would have to carry equipment to generate a LOT of air instead of the small ones already included in the design to pump out the perfluorocarbon from restroom systems and docking bay things.

Not much really - especially since you'd be having all that mass there anyway if you filled the ship with it. And if you've got water in there you could just electrolyse it to get the oxygen out.

Or failing that if it's still impractical, why not just have a fairly small area of the ship filled with water/whatever for the accel/decel periods, and have the rest of the ships dry?

That wouldn't be all it was touching... *shudders.* Admittedly it wouldn't be pleasant to be submersed in that goo for years on end, but hopefully the filtration systems would clean it...

But still, unless it's constantly in a state of neck-break speed flux it would take time for all the disgusting drool and what not (Ugh!) to get to the filter inlets, so in the least you'd have to constantly dodge incoming suspicious-looking goo bits coming your way.

Incidentally, a couple of questions:

1) What is the actual plot? I mean you've said it's about Earth people policing the galaxy, but what actually happens? After all, it's gonna be a bit lame if they just go around dropping bombs on various planets for a few hundred pages without anything happening.

2) Why do they have to be so wary? You said humans were the only space-faring species in the galaxy, so why worry about what anyone else thinks? What could they do after all? And how could they prevent Earth annihilating them as soon as they tried any funny business?

3) What are you planning on calling it? If you're stuck for ideas I suggest 'Galaxy Rawk!' :D

Incidentally, a couple of questions:

1) What is the actual plot? I mean you've said it's about Earth people policing the galaxy, but what actually happens? After all, it's gonna be a bit lame if they just go around dropping bombs on various planets for a few hundred pages without anything happening.

2) Why do they have to be so wary? You said humans were the only space-faring species in the galaxy, so why worry about what anyone else thinks? What could they do after all? And how could they prevent Earth annihilating them as soon as they tried any funny business?

3) What are you planning on calling it? If you're stuck for ideas I suggest 'Galaxy Rawk!' :D


Some really good points here.

I'd also add this ...

whatever you do, don't spend ages explaining what the technology is and how it works. Remember the old adage 'SHOW DON'T TELL'

Concentrate on the 'story'. What is a story?

A story has the following elements ...

People-personality-confict-tension-resolution of tension ...

I'll give you an example in my next post (below) ...

whatever you do, don't spend ages explaining what the technology is and how it works. Remember the old adage 'SHOW DON'T TELL'

Actually, an appendix concerning the "boring" stuff is great in my opinion. It saves the actual narrative the trouble of being a half-lecture and doesn't leave the reader clueless.

What would the Lord of the Rings be without its appendix? Dune?

Well, on your planet killer thing, I have two ideas:

A Nuke accelarated to close to the speed of light. Glass the area, and pretty much blows the planet in half.

Don't know if this is pyhsically possible, but it sounds so to the average person: atomic overload. Basically, some weapon will force all atoms in organic matter to burst. Creates some billion nuclear explosions. Would glass the entire planet, and make it uninhabitable for maybe millions of years.

I'll give you an example in my next post (below) ...

And here it is, Based on the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exterminatus ...

OK ... here's how I would run a planet-death ...

[TEXT BEGINS]
A terrible decision confronted the Imperial Warmaster. Battle reports and transmissions from the surface an the screams from Dolumar V rang in his mind.
"we're being overrun!" "The're everywhere" "we can't hold them", he heard and heard again. And then, again and again, his own voice repeating in his head "commit more reinforcements", "lay down a suppressing fire around the Ultramarine positions," "Ready the space-marines," "send in more of the Imperial Guard", "lay down a suppressing fire around the Ultramarine positions," "Order a fallback," "target your fired on the enemy vanguard," "Tell them to establish a defensive position at the river," "Request for reinforements denied," "Order a fallback," "order a retreat" "retreat," "fallback."
He slumped in the Bridge's command seat, put his head in his hands and breathed deeply. He massaged his temples, closed his eyes and tried to push the voices out of his head.
And now, after many hours of reports, commands and defeat, he could hear nothing on the bridge,nothing. He could feel the pressure of the crew's eyes on him.
He looked up at the view screen. The orange glow of Dolumar V filled the bridge. Bright lights appeared and faded as, down there, people struggled, fought and died by the actions on monsters.
A vein in the Warmaster's temple throbbed as his shoulders slumped.
"Can I do it?" he thought. "Maybe there is a chance? Maybe if I send in more reinforcements?" he asked himself. "What, so they can be slaughtered, or worse?" asked his own, sarcastic, voice.
"But by the Emperor, can I murder so many?" he silently screamed at himself. "But by the Emperor, can you not?" bit back the sarcastic voice.
"And by, and for, the Emperor, I will have to," a third, calmer voice in his said.
The Imperial Warmaster stood up.
"Fire," he said.
And, on the surface of Dolmus V, billions died.

[TEXT ENDS]
---------------------------------------

Compare that to ...

[TEXT BEGINS]
The Imperial Warmaster slumped on the bridge seat of the Avatar class flagship. It was an antimatter triple beam core ship that accelerated at 95% of C and the crew were forced to breathe perfluorcarbon during the long trips through the warp.
The Imperial Warmaster was faced with a decision. Should he order Exterminatus - the procedure whereby a Cyclonic Torpedo (a nuclear space-atmosphere-submantle nuclear explosive) would penetrate the crust of Dolumar V and cause a chain reaction of volcanic explosions across the planet thereby wiping out 90% of marine and 98% of terrestrial life. His planetary forces had been swept out of their defensive positions at Granby and Telic and they were now making a final stand at position Garden. He had denied all requests for reinforcements as per the Codex Astartes page 6, paragraph 4, sub para 6, clause 2.
He reasoned for an against ordering Exterminatus, weighed up the intellectual arguments before deciding to act in accordance with religious instruction. He ordered the launch of a Cyclonic Torpedo - 12m in length, 2m wide, also with antimatter beam core and 'mole-burrower' head equipped at the Weapons factory of Luna. The weapon took about 3 seconds to traverse several hundred kilometers of space before striking at the weakened point in the planetary crust therby causing an immediate and mass extinction. Exterminatus.
[TEXT ENDS]

I would suggest that the first is by far more the gripping read as it skips over the technicals, concentrates on the human angle and IT TELLS A STORY ...

People (the Warmaster) personality (his evident humanity, concern for troops, his position as a warmaster, his sense of religious duty) Conflict (between the more humane and more duty-bound aspects of his personality) Tension (what is the 'decision' he keeps thinking about - and then when that is revealed 'what will he decide?) Resolution (he decides to fire, yet feels guilty about it).

Hope this helps

CDA

Actually, an appendix concerning the "boring" stuff is great in my opinion. It saves the actual narrative the trouble of being a half-lecture and doesn't leave the reader clueless.

Exactly my point. An appendix is the perfect place for these things for those who are interested. The story's the thing and in no-way should it impede the flow of the narrative.


What would the Lord of the Rings be without its appendix? Dune?
Both are great, epic and sweeping tales of human love, duty honour and conflict.

I must confess, I never read any of the appendices to either of those books. And I certainly never read the Silmarillion *shudders*

The important thing was that the author knew all the background for his own purposes - so he could weave it into the story, it helps with myth-making and world-setting. And it helps greatly with creating internal consistency. The fact that they published the appendices are the authors' little bonus gifts to the readers. The technicals etc don't need to be published in full.

Or failing that if it's still impractical, why not just have a fairly small area of the ship filled with water/whatever for the accel/decel periods, and have the rest of the ships dry?

That’s a great idea, except that the only time you would not be accelerating or decelerating, is during FTL travel. Actually, if using a wormhole, you would still be accelerating.

But still, unless it's constantly in a state of neck-break speed flux it would take time for all the disgusting drool and what not (Ugh!) to get to the filter inlets, so in the least you'd have to constantly dodge incoming suspicious-looking goo bits coming your way.

The ships rotate to provide gravity to the crew, so heavier elements should sink to the floor, where a system of vacuums and filters would clean the liquid. Hopefully...

*snip*

1) Well, the story is about the military branch of the Terran Bloc (the government that controls Earth, Luna, and most of the Sol system), which is called the Gardeners (they get their name from the quote, "The universe is not to be preserved, it is to be gardened. And we are the gardeners," by some guy I saw on a Discovery Channel show on weather manipulation.

The plot follows a captain or officer of a Ganymede class warship from the time the ship leaves Lunar orbit, to leaving the Sol system and entering a wormhole, and then the long journey to a planet.

A large portion of the story revolves around the fact that, by sheer chance, Earth was the first planet to develop the needed qualities for life. As such, humans are the most advanced species in the universe. So, the Gardeners go around visiting newer species, killing (weeding) the "bad seeds" and accelerating (fertilizing) desirable ones.

Anyway, when the ship with our hero arrives at this alien world after they intercepted a radio broadcast, a landing party is sent down to observe the aliens. After exploring their planet for a while, the captain decides they are to be killed, goes up to his ship, and kills every living thing on the planet.

The story will deal with the ethical complications of their actions, as well as the difficulties of space travel and philosophical stuff.

2) Because if the humans go around all vigilante-style, the accelerated aliens might unite in revolt. I guess... I don't know, its more a plot driver than anything else.

3) I was thinking of calling it "The Gardeners," but not certain.

*snip*

Haha, don’t worry. I’ve been writing for years, and if I do end up including all the technical jargon, it will be worked in to the narrative. For an example of my writing, go here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=434274). I wrote that about a year ago, and its not edited, and I have written better since, but none of them are uploaded. That story takes place in 3586, 4 years before my Future Tech civil war.

EDIT: Also, this is a short story. A couple dozen pages at most, methinks.

1) Well, the story is about the military branch of the Terran Bloc (the government that controls Earth, Luna, and most of the Sol system), which is called the Gardeners (they get their name from the quote, "The universe is not to be preserved, it is to be gardened. And we are the gardeners," by some guy I saw on a Discovery Channel show on weather manipulation.

The plot follows a captain or officer of a Ganymede class warship from the time the ship leaves Lunar orbit, to leaving the Sol system and entering a wormhole, and then the long journey to a planet.

A large portion of the story revolves around the fact that, by sheer chance, Earth was the first planet to develop the needed qualities for life. As such, humans are the most advanced species in the universe. So, the Gardeners go around visiting newer species, killing (weeding) the "bad seeds" and accelerating (fertilizing) desirable ones.

Anyway, when the ship with our hero arrives at this alien world after they intercepted a radio broadcast, a landing party is sent down to observe the aliens. After exploring their planet for a while, the captain decides they are to be killed, goes up to his ship, and kills every living thing on the planet.

The story will deal with the ethical complications of their actions, as well as the difficulties of space travel and philosophical stuff.

So the main bulk of the story is ethical complications? Hmm... I still think it needs a little beefing up. Maybe their ship gets infiltrated and taken over so the ground team have to get back on board and take it back from the aliens before said aliens take the ship back to Earth and whup arse? Maybe, just something to add a little more tension and... I dunno, I suppose direction would be the best word, to the plot. Otherwise it just seems a little aimless.

Nothing about my idea?:(

Well, on your planet killer thing, I have two ideas:

A Nuke accelarated to close to the speed of light. Glass the area, and pretty much blows the planet in half.

Don't know if this is pyhsically possible, but it sounds so to the average person: atomic overload. Basically, some weapon will force all atoms in organic matter to burst. Creates some billion nuclear explosions. Would glass the entire planet, and make it uninhabitable for maybe millions of years.

Sorry, I didnt see your post. Anyway, that sounds good. I'm not sure the nuke would still work at those speeds though. Do you know?

EDIT: Yes, the story is about the ethics of the situation, mainly. It's not meant to be an action story, but i will keep that idea in mind.

Sorry, I didnt see your post. Anyway, that sounds good. I'm not sure the nuke would still work at those speeds though. Do you know?
Not sure. I personally love the atomic overload idea, though.:D
Edit: Well, I think it's a big ethical problem to tear apart atom by atom everyone on the planet. Also, I didn't mean a gun type thing, I mean a missile or ray type thing.

Ohhh. I thought you meant some kind of minature starship-bomb-thing.

And millions of years of uninhabitability may be a bit overkill. With the massive vulcanic activity caused by a Cyclonic torp would at least settle down in time, but that radiation would leave some lasting effects.

I was planning on just using nukes to eradicate individual cities, not entire planets.

Ohhh. I thought you meant some kind of minature starship-bomb-thing.

And millions of years of uninhabitability may be a bit overkill. With the massive vulcanic activity caused by a Cyclonic torp would at least settle down in time, but that radiation would leave some lasting effects.

I was planning on just using nukes to eradicate individual cities, not entire planets.
You could target only specific cities with the bomb. And, yes, millions of years is overdone, but it sure as hell won't be habitable in your grandchildren's lifetime.

Well kinetic weaposn dropped from orbit would easily give you as much of a light show as a nuke and without all the nasty radiation effects... You coudl even have them set to burn up and explode at a certain height above the ground for a tungusta style event, of coruse with nukes you don't nessicarily need to go for big blast waves you could go for a neutron bomb enhanced radiation style weapon that wipes out the lfie and leaves everythign else for the accademics to come and explore altter. hat coudl actually open another plot issue, perhaps the aliens are advanced enough that they survive the neutron bombings so you ahve to resort to more destructive weapons thus pissing off the exploration teams and a higher command level?

As for the eye lasers from what we can see from modern versions the fact that the alser cosntantly scans means that there is not any noticeable effect on the eye in terms of strain or damage and you can always turn it off. the system woudl be sueful for thigns other than coms (scematic overlays for engineers, targting systems, alternative vision modes etc etc), the only issue might be with the light tranmission wehn inside the support liquid woudl ti cause a lot of defraction or anything?

Edited, but I really dont see why people get so upset about swearing, most people use words like that almost as punctuation :P

Watch Southpark the movie. "Gratuitous violence is ok - as long as you do not use any dirty words".

Since we are dicussing ways to commit interplanetary genocide the quote seems fitting.
Btw- I am surprised noone mentioned "nova bombs" yet. Blow up the systems sun(s) and the planets go too. Of course, scientific realism is again a toughy here...
Or the more moderate version found in larry Niven's ringworld: make the sun flare in the direction of your enemy.

Sorry, I didnt see your post. Anyway, that sounds good. I'm not sure the nuke would still work at those speeds though. Do you know?

It doesn't need to. Something hitting the planet at those speeds would destroy it anyway; the explosive power of the nuke is neglible in comparison.

If you want a spectacular way of eliminating life on a planet, try a nitrogen-reactor bomb.

A very real fear of some of the Manhattan Project scientists was that a nuclear device going off in the atmosphere would cause a nuclear reaction in the nitrogen that makes up most of the air we breathe. We now know that to create a sustained nitrogen reaction would require a much hotter and very precisely controlled detonation - a control level we aren't even close to developing.

But if this ship and crew are so advanced...

Going back to the breathable liquid issue, I think it's a nice idea. However, it'd be better if the majority of the ship were filled with normal oxygen. A starship isn't always changing velocities, most of the time it travels at a constant speed.

My point is that the crew shouldn't need that liquid most of the time; they'd only enter some kind of pods filled with this breathable substance whenever the ship has to accelerate or deaccelerate. After that they could return to breathing regular oxygen.

Besides, if you think about it, the liquids would last longer if only restricted to this pods and used in specific situations as I've mentioned above. That's critical, especially if you consider the length of the voyage itself.

Btw- I am surprised noone mentioned "nova bombs" yet. Blow up the systems sun(s) and the planets go too. Of course, scientific realism is again a toughy here...
Or the more moderate version found in larry Niven's ringworld: make the sun flare in the direction of your enemy.

I'm trying to commit genocide, not geocide. The planet must be intact and able to support life sometime in its future.

Going back to the breathable liquid issue, I think it's a nice idea. However, it'd be better if the majority of the ship were filled with normal oxygen. A starship isn't always changing velocities, most of the time it travels at a constant speed.

I could argue that. When is a ship not accelerating or decelerating? A wormhole is just an opening in space, so it doesn’t actually pull a ship through. Thus, the ship would have to accelerate through it. Assuming the ship "lands" in the outskirts of a system, it would have to accelerate even further in order to make it to the planet in anything short of years. About halfway to the target goal, the ship would have to decelerate or risk missing the target.

I'm trying to commit genocide, not geocide. The planet must be intact and able to support life sometime in its future.

Using solarflares would actually do that, and it is scientifically feasible.
Downside is that it isn't that original - but then again, neither are nukes.

I had an idea! Instead of firing small nukes out of the coil guns, why not tungsten rods? If I could accelerate them fast enough (say, .40c) with the coil guns, they would have a huge impact! No doubt large enough to eliminate a city.