History Main / MohsScaleOfScienceFictionHardness

7th Jun '17 7:53:13 AM girlyboy
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Example: a character is shown a machine for traveling into the past and asks, "How does it work?"

to:

Example: a character is shown a time machine for traveling into the past and asks, "How does it work?"



* '''In medium SF:''' "You sit in this seat, set the date you want, and [[Film/BackToTheFuture drive to 88 mph]]."



* '''In really hard SF:''' "It doesn't. Time travel to the past is impossible." [[note]]General Relativity allows for solutions for Kerr black holes where closed timelike curves, and therefore time travel, are possible. It is expected that a proper theory of Quantum Gravity will remove this possibility.[[/note]]
14th May '17 10:15:07 AM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


# '''Mohs/WorldOfPhlebotinum:''' The universe is full of AppliedPhlebotinum with more to be found behind every star, but the Phlebotinum is dealt with in a [[MagicAIsMagicA fairly consistent fashion despite its lack of correspondence with reality]] and, in-world, is considered to lie within the realm of scientific inquiry. Works like Creator/EEDocSmith's ''Literature/{{Lensman}}'' series, ''Anime/NeonGenesisEvangelion'', ''Series/StarTrekTheOriginalSeries'', and ''Franchise/StarCraft'' fall in this category.\\

to:

# '''Mohs/WorldOfPhlebotinum:''' The universe is full of AppliedPhlebotinum with more to be found behind every star, but the Phlebotinum is dealt with in a [[MagicAIsMagicA fairly consistent fashion despite its lack of correspondence with reality]] and, in-world, is considered to lie within the realm of scientific inquiry. Works like Creator/EEDocSmith's ''Literature/{{Lensman}}'' series, ''Anime/NeonGenesisEvangelion'', ''Series/StarTrekTheOriginalSeries'', and ''Franchise/StarCraft'' ''VideoGame/StarCraft'' fall in this category.\\
4th May '17 8:13:52 AM thecnoNSMB
Is there an issue? Send a Message


''Note 7:'' When adding this trope to a work page, [[Administrivia/TypeLabelsAreNotExamples don't simply put down the number and leave it at that]]. This would require a troper to visit this page to learn more about it. That's fine if the troper is interested, but if they are already working down the work's page (and only at the M's), they probably don't want to wander off on a WikiWalk. You can say the number, but please go on a bit explaining what the number is. For instance:

to:

''Note 7:'' When adding this trope to a work page, [[Administrivia/TypeLabelsAreNotExamples don't simply put down the number and leave it at that]]. This would require a troper to visit this page to learn more about it. That's fine if the troper is interested, but if they are they're already working down the work's page (and only at the M's), they probably don't want to wander off on a WikiWalk. You can say the number, but please go on a bit explaining what the number is. For instance:
4th May '17 8:13:25 AM thecnoNSMB
Is there an issue? Send a Message


''Note 7:'' When adding this trope to a work page, [[Administrivia/TypeLabelsAreNotExamples don't simply put down the number and leave it at that]]. This would require a troper to visit this page to learn more about it. That's fine if the troper is interested, but if who is already working down the work's page (and only at the M's) who probably doesn't want to wander off on a WikiWalk. You can say the number, but please go on a bit explaining what the number is. For instance:

to:

''Note 7:'' When adding this trope to a work page, [[Administrivia/TypeLabelsAreNotExamples don't simply put down the number and leave it at that]]. This would require a troper to visit this page to learn more about it. That's fine if the troper is interested, but if who is they are already working down the work's page (and only at the M's) who M's), they probably doesn't don't want to wander off on a WikiWalk. You can say the number, but please go on a bit explaining what the number is. For instance:
4th May '17 8:07:28 AM thecnoNSMB
Is there an issue? Send a Message


''Note:'' The works mentioned below are sheerly for illustrative purposes -- please add new examples to the subpages.

to:

''Note:'' The works mentioned below are sheerly solely for illustrative purposes -- please add new examples to the subpages.
26th Jan '17 1:24:02 AM Xtifr
Is there an issue? Send a Message


# '''Mohs/SpeculativeScience:''' Stories in which there is no "big lie" -- the science of the tale is (or [[ScienceMarchesOn was]]) genuine speculative science or engineering, and the goal of the author to make as few errors with respect to known fact as possible. The first two books in Robert L. Forward's ''Rocheworld'' series and Creator/RobertAHeinlein's ''Literature/TheMoonIsAHarshMistress'' fall in this class.\\

to:

# '''Mohs/SpeculativeScience:''' Stories in which there is no "big lie" -- the science of the tale is (or [[ScienceMarchesOn was]]) genuine speculative science or engineering, and the goal of the author to make as few errors with respect to known fact as possible. The first two books in Robert L. Forward's Creator/RobertLForward's ''Rocheworld'' series and Creator/RobertAHeinlein's ''Literature/TheMoonIsAHarshMistress'' fall in this class.\\
21st Jan '17 3:22:19 PM Xtifr
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* '''In hard SF:''' "A good question with an interesting answer. [[{{Infodump}} Please have a seat while I bring you up to speed]] on the latest ideas in quantum theory, after which I will spend a chapter detailing an elaborate, yet plausible-sounding connection between quantum states, the unified field theory, and the means by which the brain stores memory, all tied into theories from both UsefulNotes/AlbertEinstein [[SmallReferencePools and]] StephenHawking."

to:

* '''In hard SF:''' "A good question with an interesting answer. [[{{Infodump}} Please have a seat while I bring you up to speed]] on the latest ideas in quantum theory, after which I will spend a chapter detailing an elaborate, yet plausible-sounding connection between quantum states, the unified field theory, and the means by which the brain stores memory, all tied into theories from both UsefulNotes/AlbertEinstein [[SmallReferencePools and]] StephenHawking.Creator/StephenHawking."
21st Jan '17 3:21:01 PM Xtifr
Is there an issue? Send a Message


# '''Mohs/OneBigLie:''' Authors of works in this class invent one (or, at most, a very few) counterfactual physical laws and writes a story that explores the implications of these principles. Most works in Creator/AlanDeanFoster's ''Literature/HumanxCommonwealth'' series, the Ad Astra board games and Creator/RobertAHeinlein's ''Literature/FarnhamsFreehold'' fall in this category, as do many of {{Vernor Vinge}}'s books.\\

to:

# '''Mohs/OneBigLie:''' Authors of works in this class invent one (or, at most, a very few) counterfactual physical laws and writes a story that explores the implications of these principles. Most works in Creator/AlanDeanFoster's ''Literature/HumanxCommonwealth'' series, the Ad Astra board games and Creator/RobertAHeinlein's ''Literature/FarnhamsFreehold'' fall in this category, as do many of {{Vernor Vinge}}'s Creator/VernorVinge's books.\\
21st Jan '17 1:43:45 PM BreadBull
Is there an issue? Send a Message


''Note 4:'' Sometimes a study hits the news that, if confirmed, would reassign many works on the scale. For example, [[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/8782895/CERN-scientists-break-the-speed-of-light.html the September 2011 OPERA experiment which measured faster-than-light travel by neutrinos]] might have moved works whose Mohs/OneBigLie was FTLTravel into the Mohs/SpeculativeScience category. There are three reasons to be cautious about doing so: first, because mass media reporting of scientific results is often inaccurate due to the difficulty of presenting technical results to a non-technical audience; second, because revolutionary new results (and results in the ''news'' are generally new) are far more likely to be overturned than they appear (indeed, the OPERA anomaly was [[http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/02/breaking-news-error-undoes-faster-light-neutrino-results caused by faulty equipment]]); and third, for purposes of the Scale, the yardstick of scientific plausibility is what the science said ''at the time the work was written'', not what [[ScienceMarchesOn scientists discovered later]].

to:

''Note 4:'' Sometimes a study hits the news that, if confirmed, would reassign many works on the scale. For example, [[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/8782895/CERN-scientists-break-the-speed-of-light.html the September 2011 OPERA experiment which measured faster-than-light travel by neutrinos]] might have moved works whose Mohs/OneBigLie was FTLTravel into the Mohs/SpeculativeScience category. There are three reasons to be cautious about doing so: first, because mass media reporting of scientific results is often inaccurate due to the difficulty of presenting technical results to a non-technical audience; second, because revolutionary new results (and results in the ''news'' are generally new) are far more likely to be overturned than they appear (indeed, the OPERA anomaly was [[http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/02/breaking-news-error-undoes-faster-light-neutrino-results caused by faulty equipment]]); and third, for purposes of the Scale, the yardstick of scientific plausibility is what the science said ''at the time the work was written'', not what [[ScienceMarchesOn scientists discovered later]].
later]]. If the story in question was based on a scientific model that, while now discredited, was widely accepted in its day, it still qualifies as "hard" science fiction because the author [[FairForItsDay did his best]] ''[[FairForItsDay with the information available at the time]]''.



''Note 7:'' Keep in mind that ScienceMarchesOn when categorizing older works. If the story in question was based on a scientific model that, while now discredited, was widely accepted in its day, it still qualifies as "hard" science fiction because the author [[FairForItsDay did his best]] ''[[FairForItsDay with the information available at the time]]''.

''Note 8:'' When adding this trope to a work page, [[Administrivia/TypeLabelsAreNotExamples don't simply put down the number and leave it at that]]. This would require a troper to visit this page to learn more about it. That's fine if the troper is interested, but if who is already working down the work's page (and only at the M's) who probably doesn't want to wander off on a WikiWalk. You can say the number, but please go on a bit explaining what the number is. For instance:

to:

''Note 7:'' Keep in mind that ScienceMarchesOn when categorizing older works. If the story in question was based on a scientific model that, while now discredited, was widely accepted in its day, it still qualifies as "hard" science fiction because the author [[FairForItsDay did his best]] ''[[FairForItsDay with the information available at the time]]''.

''Note 8:''
When adding this trope to a work page, [[Administrivia/TypeLabelsAreNotExamples don't simply put down the number and leave it at that]]. This would require a troper to visit this page to learn more about it. That's fine if the troper is interested, but if who is already working down the work's page (and only at the M's) who probably doesn't want to wander off on a WikiWalk. You can say the number, but please go on a bit explaining what the number is. For instance:
21st Dec '16 3:16:32 PM ShaSam
Is there an issue? Send a Message
This list shows the last 10 events of 414. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.MohsScaleOfScienceFictionHardness