posted
It's about 4 thousand years since humanity developed writing. About three thousand since we noticed that sky is changing. About two thousand five hundred we began wondering about physical reason and rule of our existance. About a half a thousand since the Chinese found gunpowder. That was slow. But during the last century we discovered that people are equal (morality;). discovered democracy, discovered Pluto, Einstein thought that time isn't the same for everyone (for everyone's speed actually). Hubble found out that galaxies are running away from us. There's virtually no illness or disorder we couldn't cope with. In this view point ten years are quite a period. NASA claims their landing on Mars before 2033, ETA is convinced that Europe'll win the race (which I doubt, look at their recent achievments . Cars are going to fly in about fifty years, and antimatter is going to be supreme energy source within a hundred.
And yet in OSC's books absolutely nothing have changed. Of course, there are a hundred planets united by the Congress, and many more colonies. (f.e. Isaac Asimov invented a 20 000 000! planet empire. In more or less the same period;) Computers are faster (wow!) and spaceships accelerate closer and closer to lightspeed in the Park's Jump. After Einstein's brilliant discovery we know almost everything about our universe (excluding first nanonanonanonanonanonano seconds of Planck's era and black energy and black matter). And in three thousand years we couldn't develop anything more than the buggers did? That is weird.
I know that it's just supposed to show that the whole thing is happening far far away in late late future. But that's a bit strange, that people still work as brickmakers (Cao), and are incapable of restoring some simple nerve system (Miro). I cannot think of really good reasons why didn't he set the action of SotD in some closer future. Give me some please
OF course I love the book and it's one of very little things that concern me:)
And I suppose this topic was picked up sometimes it the past:)
Posts: 723 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll propose that people never change and cars will never fly. But as a consolation, airplanes will continue to fly.
Posts: 116 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here on Earth we've had all those thousands of years to get to the point we're at now. We had to develope the industry of our planet to make the huge strides we're making now. One arguement could be made that they are developing these 'new' planets much in the same way that cities are developed in Civilization (a PC game) before they can make a reasonable contribution to the science of their society.
You could also say that the huge influx of alien technology simply baffled the science community all that time.
Nevertheless, the strength of Mr. Card's writing lies not with the technology but the use of the technology by the great characters he writes.
Posts: 1660 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
You have to remember alot depends on the culture that lives on the planet. Even today there are people who refuse to use technology i.e. the amish.
Posts: 421 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find that this criticism comes up a lot when discussing sci-fi and fantasy worlds. People fail to realize that many civilizations throughout history went on for centuries without significant technological or social changes. In fact, the rapid advancement which we've achieved in the last 200 years or so is unprecedented. Anyway, the reason why things may not have changed very much in the Enderverse is simply because they didn't need to. People could just live comfortably throughout the hundred worlds. They say that necessity is the mother of invention, after all. So if mankind reaches a level where just about everyone's needs are met, then scientific advancement just might slow down. Also, much of mankind's efforts probably went into establishing new colonies, which would have to be built from scratch, of course. In other words, people were focusing on new frontiers. And there's also the point that we don't even really know how much or little advancement there was over the 3000 years. The only technology which is really discussed are starships and ansibles.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well no one can really tell what's going to happen so who knows how far we'll advance in 3000 years. In 3000 people may read CotM and say that it's ridiculous and is nothing like their time (as I did with Bradbury's The Martian Chronicles ) or may think it's quite similar to time (as Fahrenheit 451 becomes everyday). Plus you have to factor in that every time a new colony is started they're basically starting from scratch. While they do take some of the current technology from their time with them, it would still take over a century for them to catch up. ******************** btw, Martian Chronicles was awesome it just wasn't very current (which is understandable since it was written in the 40's).
Posts: 93 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Two thoughts, first off when establishing a brand new planet you would be forced back to the early days of agriculture and living of the land. This does not leave alot of space for new and exciting technology. The only places technology would move on is on the older planets and maybe it didnt spead very far. Maybe if you went to earth you would see flying cars and beam me up scotty. My second thought is that Mr. Card wanted his stories to be more about the characters and their lives than about a really spiffy sci-fi book. Alot of technology would have changed alot of things that were necassary to the plot line. Posts: 832 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yo, I remember that in SotD the mentioned that they were flying in a hovercar/jeep. So they do have flying cars and also Asimov's Galactic Empire took a couple dozen thousand years. Remember that The date in Asimov's Foundation is 30,000 After the founding of the empire while there was also thousands of years when the empire wasn't founded.
Posts: 1567 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, computers have a kind of advanced hologrpahic dispplay more advanced and far more afordable then what Ender and his jeesh were using in the 3rd Bugger war and remember that Ender needed help using his computer? He didn't know how it worked.
Posts: 1567 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I was going to mention that stuff too. There are hover-cars on Lusitania, and the fact Ender couldn't do basic stuff on a computer means that they must have changed quite a bit from his day. Also, although Jane is one of a kind, apparently semi-intelligent (but still not really sentient) computer programs also exist. I think that Olhado thought that Ender was using such a program, and said something about it being illegal to tie-up the system with them, or something like that. Speaking of Olhado, his eyes are another example of tech advancement.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
uuuuhhh... not nessasarily today they can make it so that blind people can see in 256 shades of grey. Though its expensive and not exactly risk proff surgery as Olhado and his eyes seem to be. And you cant exactly record anything with the eyes for the blind.
Posts: 1567 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: And yet in OSC's books absolutely nothing have changed. Of course, there are a hundred planets united by the Congress, and many more colonies. (f.e. Isaac Asimov invented a 20 000 000! planet empire. In more or less the same period
Note, though, that FTL travel is possible in the Foundation books. It takes hundreds to thousands of years in Card's books just to get places. This means that there is an inevitable slowdown of civilization due to relativistic travel, largely equivalent to the effects of "soma" posited in his Hot Sleep stories.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
There were changes, yes. But not too sophisticated. Civilisation is developing technology in a non-linear way (is my word creating correct?). I tried to show that beginnings were really slow. First stone, bronze, iron, steel. Now some more complex materials, and in future perhaps smart materials (Civ Call to Power) or nanorobots (Ben Bova: "Battle for moon" "Dawn of moon" etc.) But ut took humanity much less time. Bronze working if I arent much mistaken in Italy is 2500-1500 b.c. Than similar period of iron. Nothing changed in a art of battles during 3000 years. Grasp a spear or a sword and stabb, and cut, and kill. Perhaps the Greek were a bit better organised (phalanx) and so were the Romans. Since we found gunpowder a lot changed in 500 years. Only yesterday Korea announced they successfuly finished their a-bombs. Now soldiers arent looking into the of the person they kill. Hardly ever they even actually see them. Just firing a tomahawk from 2000 miles with deadly accuracy. If humanity colonises a planet you think it is indispencible to terraform it before starting new research. I am sure that it'll take at least 200 years before first non-scientific facility will be built on Mars or Moon or Eros or Ida or whatsoever. ISS's only function is scientific reaserch (let alone prestige), and so will be any other extraterestrial outpost. A ship with colonists landing on a new planet will have their science on a level they left Earth. And there'll be parting of the ways, for such ansibl we sadly do not have. Bean wrote something about it in "Ender's Shadow".
But Quimby2999 mentioned "Martial Chrinicles". Although obsolete(?) (archaic, non-actual) it suggest that people of Mars stopped their scientific development and lived in peace with animals and so on. I think it is possible. But not untill something terrible happens (worse than Bugger Invasion )
Posts: 723 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: About three thousand since we noticed that sky is changing.
5500+ years is more like it:
3500 B.C. Building of Newgrange, Ireland: http://www.knowth.com/newgrange.htm earliest construction of Stonehenge I underway. Stonehenge site , shows that Stonehenge I can be used to predict eclipses.
2500 B.C. Pyramids in Egypt Maes Howe While it's not possible to date the naming of the planets, all the naked-eye visible planets (except one (Neptune?) that is just barely visible) have many ancient names, with the earliest predating 3500BC, I would guess.
Just nit-pickin'...
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the last 3,000 years, the world and human affairs have changed so much that it would be almost incomprehensible to somebody from that era.
Let's imagine a science fiction writer in 1000 B.C. Let's suppose he knew exactly what things would be like, and wrote a story accurately portraying life at ~2000 AD. This would not be a good story to his peers. It would be too removed from the reality that they know.
I believe that Card is not trying to prophecy the state of the future in his books -- he is trying to tell a compelling, moving story.
On a similar topic, let me recommend Vernor Vinge's A Fire Upon The Deep , which uses a novel way of avoiding the technological singularity. Vinge believes that in order to have the technology necessary for a good old-fashioned Space Opera, there will have been a technological breakthrough that would alter human endeavors past recognition.
So, to sum up, I think you are correct in saying that OSC's portray of 3000 years in the future is inaccurate. But I don't care. Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Porter, thanks a lot for the linkage to the Vinge and technological singularity article on wiki. I hadn't realized Dr. Vinge wrote any non-fiction on the coming technological singularity,I was just familiar with his fiction, which is outstanding. I'll try to read technological singularity,(c) 1993 by Vernor Vinge, later today, if I have time. First two paragraphs, what an arresting claim to start an essay with!
quote: Within thirty years, we will have the technological means to create superhuman intelligence. Shortly after, the human era will be ended.
Is such progress avoidable? If not to be avoided, can events be guided so that we may survive? These questions are investigated. Some possible answers (and some further dangers) are presented.
The main focus of Across Realtime (which includes "True Names", a short story and the Hugo-nominated novels The Peace War and Marooned in Realtime) is the coming technological singularity and how people will try to deal with it.
"True Names" is considered a classic in the field:
quote: Vinge came to prominence in 1981 with his novella True Names, which is one of the earliest stories to present a fully fleshed-out concept of cyberspace ... "True Names" (short story) takes place in a world on the cusp of the singularity. The Peace War shows a world in which the singularity has been postponed by the bobbles, while Marooned in Realtime follows a small group of people who have managed to miss the singularity which otherwise encompassed Earth.
A Deepness in the Sky , the prequel to A Fire Upon the Deep, is also fabulous. I am glad Dr. Vinge retired from teaching at UC to concentrate on writing, as he doesn't put out enough of his great fiction.
posted
I was just recently introduced to Vinge's fiction. I read Fire Upon the Deep, followed it up with Deepness in the Sky, both of which I loved. I am reading The Peace War right now.
For another great book that deals with technological singularity, try Greg Bear's Blood Music.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was having a discussion the other day with my friend, we were debating over the "limits of science", or more accurately, "the limits of technology" and it got me thinking. I personally feel that there is no limit to technology. My premise for this is my feeling that technology is born out of human thought. As human thought progresses, so does technology, and vise versa. we are not limited by it, we create it. There may be technologies out of reach right now but there is nothing that is Impossible. "If humans feel that a technology is within reach they achieve it, like it's damn near instinctive" how many times has something been "Impossible" and then become possible with the commitment of time and human thought. Only by the limits of the human experience will our intellectual development reach an end and even that can be overcome by means we cannot see at present. For good or bad humans will always progress upward and outward, fearing nothing but failure, but even failure has it's up side. Many advancements in human technology have been born out of mistakes. Only when we shake loose our fear of failure are we free to truly be limitless as a people.
Posts: 484 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It was said best in Men in Black when he said the speach on parkbench about how five hundred years ago every one "knew" the earth was flat, etc. Rules are rules because they are meant to be broken. I think it was Thomas Edison who when asked about the hundred or so times he failed at making a lightbulb he said something along the lines of "failures, their not failures I have discovered one hundred things that do not work." Fear to discover is what limits us, not the universe itself. Also does anyone think the fact that its such a small world now is limiting scientific progression. I mean now that everybody is on the same page no one is reading other books. People excel the fastest when isolated and we have eliminated that with all the current technological advancements. Like the somec in worthing its limiting the advancement of the species.
Posts: 832 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well i too am somewhat surprised that so little changed. I mean NASA has nlue prints for an antimatter spacecraft and predict that we'll have antimatter spacecraft that can send us to mars in a month on 10 miligrams of antimatter. Yet in 3000 years they still use computers that are somewhat the same size as we have now? f anyone has read "Feed" by M.T. Anderson, it's set about 200 years in the future, all computers are implanted in the brain at birth and people are connected to the net everywhere, everyone lives in bubbles because the air outside is fairly poisoneous, the natural water(i.e. lakes, oceans) is so toxic that whales have to be wrapped in plastic coating at birth to survive, and school is run by corporate america. It seems so realistic to me that i wont be surprised at all if everything actualy turns out that way. Why so little in the Ender books changed in 3000 years is beyond me.
Posts: 67 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
We have no idea what type of tech they have back on earth. We only see what happens on a few worlds. Besides, it barely matters in the context of this story.
Posts: 421 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Besides, it's pretty silly to say "this sci-fi novel's portrayal of what things will be like in 3000 years is all wrong! This other one is much more likely." We can't guess what advancements will be made in the next 3000 years based on the last 3000 years. We can't even do so accurately for the next 30 years! That's how we end up with all that funny sci-fi that has us living on Mars and having robots in 1999 just because we made it to the moon in 1969. Colonizing over 100 planets without the luxury of faster than light travel is impressive enough.
posted
In "Martian Chronicles" written in fifties only a few families survived atomic war and found shelter on Mars in 2023 or something:)
Posts: 723 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Ender books aren't about technology, but rather the people who happen living with it. But things DO change. In Xenocide, Val was able to send her essays and read the comments related to them. Before messages weren't really sent to ships travelling at relativistic speeds. From Speaker on, Jane sets up full audio and visual ansible conversations for everyone who needs to chat. In SOTG, Peter and Ender used a audio only, time delay conversation to conserve bandwith.
Look at Milagre. It's a community of 16000 humans on an entire planet, most of whom are there to lead religious lives. Out of all of them, there are what, four experimenting scientists? The most important of them is trying to stop them all from dying of viral attacks in their food. Anisbles would have carried engineer's designs of cool gadgets, but Milagre doesn't have the population to support a major consumer economy. Survival, not economic progress is the name of the game.
Also, you have to be CAREFUL about how detailed you describe technology in a sci-fi book. The more you say, the bigger risk you run of saying something that will be proved wrong within the next ten or fifty years. In a late 2004 Uncle Orson review, OSC mentions how Asimov has some character who sits down with his slide rule to figure out some problem in his FUTURISTIC Foundation trilogy. Oops.
One of the best things about Ender's Game was the way it handled future technology. I've never read the "original" edition of the book, so I don't know how different it is, but I was SO impressed how a 1985 had the characters treat their technology scarily close to the way we use the internet today.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It dosen't matter when you live, the simplest technology is often the best. Bricks will never go out of fashion as they will always be useful. Why make a super technological, expensive sidewalk when you could use inexpensive durable concrete?
Posts: 163 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why do they put moving sidewalks in airports? Because they can do things that concrete ones cannot.
Posts: 1002 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This leads to a thought I had the other day. Almost everything you can think of has advanced in the last two thousand years except one thing: Tattoos. Yes they have expanded the delivery method but were still just shooting ink into the skin. Think, if one of us figured out a better way to create pictures on the human body we would be rich! Maybe one that didn't get ugly with age or would be permanent but easily removed if you wanted it gone. We could all be filthy rich! If any of you think of a way to do any of this I want a cut for the idea. Personally I have no tattoos or plans to get any but you have to agree theirs a market and imagine the market jump if you invented the "permanent but removable" tatoo!
Posts: 832 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
while 3,000 years total have passed you have to remember, everyone's been going all around on journeys of their own. For people to get to all of the 100 worlds must have taken a LONG time because of relativity. So while 3,000 years have passed literally, much less has passed for culture.
Posts: 19 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not that big a difference. The Buggers were relatively close to earth. IIRC, the distance to Shakespear colonoy was 50-60 years.
Posts: 1002 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personal computers have been around for over 20 years and most of us are still using Microsoft's OS. The reason we are still tied to Microsoft is because of the need of computers to still interface with older computers. This is an excellent analog to the colonies that are being established as time passes. The ansible can never be updated.
I'd call faster than light travel a development. And I think in the next book the degree to which change is possible will be explored.
posted
Not only are their already flying cars, and very advanced computers, but you have to take into account the fact that when a colony is formed, they dont take huge machines with them. They take some flora and fauna from Earth, and themselves, and make a living. They dont drop down huge machines and economies. Its the equivalent of colonization of the America's, just on an intergalactic scale.
Posts: 12 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the only certain thing about the future is that no one knows what it will actually be like. We can't even predict the weather accurately for the next 48 hours! Trying to predict what life will be like 48 years from now is virtually impossibe, let alone 3000 years. Which is also the great strength about writing sci fi set in the future, you can be free to pretty much imagine the possibilities and make them fit your story
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hope we never get flying cars. We don't need one-ton flying death machines, where you also have to worry about up and down and engine failure means a gravity lesson.
Posts: 169 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't see how you can claim we know almost everything about our universe at present. Certainly we have theories, and presumeably there is evidence to support those theories, but when man hasn't even set foot on another planet I hardly think we know all that much about our universe.
There are countless examples of sci-fi writers being too conservative in some estimates (or failing to predict a particular technology) while being wildly optimistic and equally wrong in other areas. Robert Heinlein 'predicts' a manned expedition to Venus (which has breathable atmosphere) in the 1970's in Space Cadet but predicts a different future which has crystal clear videophone technology while at the same time relying on computers that still use punched cards in "We Also Walk Dogs".
While our enthusiasim for the future and hi-tech gadgets may be what draws many of us to science fiction, I believe the best sci-fi writers know how to tell a good story. I can postulate a galaxy with a larger empire with more incredible technology than Asimov, that doesn't mean I will ever be near the author he was.
I could go on, but since this is a post and not an essay I'll quit boring everyone.
Posts: 61 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I hope we never get flying cars. We don't need one-ton flying death machines, where you also have to worry about up and down and engine failure means a gravity lesson.
What if people had said that about airplanes? Actually, I imagine that some people did, but what if everyone had listened to them?
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pilots are more qualified for flight than your average ADD bum (myself).
It's one thing to fall to your death in the name of science, but when billions of people are doing it with devloped machines because they're tired/drunk/stupid then it's different.
posted
But I imagine that in the future flying cars would be designed to be at least as easy to operate as cars. Their function would probably be mostly automated... I watch/read too much sci-fi, don't I?
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just saw a really cool amphibious car in the Te Papa Museum in Wellington. Faster than you could believe on land and sea. Not much room for luggage, though.
All this progress in the past hundred years, and yet people still pick their noses inside their cars as if nobody could see inside.
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
In my opinion, there's just too many dangerous variables to go along with the flying cars. If a car's engine malfunctions the car stops and you can get it serviced. But if your flying vehicles engine stops you go crashing towards the ground. Who do you blame when someone dies?
A flying bus system? No problem. The pilot can go through all sorts of training and certification.
If flying cars were available to the public, I would hope that the engine mechanics are filled with backup systems and failsafes and the license process made very formidable (Must be 28 to 60. Past vehicle problems on your police record? Disqualified).
Posts: 169 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
. Cars are going to fly in about fifty years, and antimatter is going to be supreme energy source within a hundred. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
