> we can control gravity without using a
> centrifuge. I think this is more unlikely than FTL travel 

Given these are both based on relativity, why would one be more likely than 
the other?

> .... apart from growing to full human-size from cat-size within days without
> apparently ingesting any organic matter? 

Surely the people on the ship had to eat. Maybe it found the food stores?

> Event Horizon has some great SF in it, 

I have no idea why everyone liked that movie. I thought it was awful.

Also: Equilibrium.
Also: Mission to Mars (altho the movie itself was not that great)


> it makes absolutely
> zero sense to me to be sending a *manned* craft for such a mission.

Except that when the fate of the entire world hangs in balance, having 
people there who can make decisions rapidly might be the difference between 
8 people dying and extinction of the race.  Assuming they even were supposed 
to die.


There's lots of good books like this, including Niven's Known Space series 
(of course, there's FTL and teleportation there and such, but it follows 
rules), lots of the stuff by Robert Forward, Vernor Vinge, Robert Sawyer, etc.

I mind less having things like FTL than I do that they follow rules that are 
well spelled-out, as if they're actually scientific principles. Otherwise, 
it's just magic mcguffins in disguise.  Indeed, excellent science fiction is 
that which you could say the plot is driven by the rules the extreme science 
fiction follows.


-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message