Old Tea Leaf Reviews 6: 1986 Locus Poll Best First Novel
James Nicoll
Does anyone know why the number of Best First Novels varies so much from
year to year?
Best First Novel
1 Contact Carl Sagan
A female scientist finds herself caught up in what appears to
be the first genuine contact with aliens.
I thought this was stunningly mediocre.
As far as I know, this was Sagan's only attempt to write deliberate
fiction but I believe he had a certain amount of success in other fields to
comfort himself with.
2 Emprise Michael P. Kube-McDowell
This is the first book in the Trigon Disunity, which begins just after
a group of plucky scientists save humanity by inventing a Fission-B-Gone
device just before the oil runs out. Whoops. Civilization survives and goes
on to make contact with extraterrestrials of an unexpected nature.
I think the later books in the series are more interesting than this
one but this was interesting enough to get me to buy those later novels.
I believe his most recent book was 2002's VECTORS. His website
says that there's another book in the pipeline, THE EYES OF REASON.
3 In the Drift Michael Swanwick
This is set in a universe where Three Mile Island was a lot
more serious than it was in our world. A significant chunk of the US
got covered in radioactive debris, with both political and economic
consequences.
As it turns out, the Soviets seemingly took this as inspiration
for the next few years and unhappily for them, reactors built out of
shoddy and flammable materials are easier to make go boom than American
light water reactors.
This was competently written. I am not sure why the premise
didn't annoy me more.
Swanwick is still writing fantasy and SF and wins awards with
monotonous regularity.
This was a Ace Special.
4 The Summer Tree Guy Gavriel Kay
I've never been able to finish this.
Guy Kay is as far as I can tell fairly successful.
5 Tailchaser's Song Tad Williams
This involved a cat and is thick enough to stun a nun if thrown.
Williams is also still with us.
6 Cats Have No Lord Will Shetterly
As I recall, the reason cats have no lord in the universe is tied
into the continued existance of the universe in question. I don't remember
much about the book except that there's an amusing reference to the duel
at the Cliffs of Madness from the PRINCESS BRIDE.
Shetterly is still active as a writer, among other things.
Apparently he had a book out as recently as 2007 but not only did I
manage to miss reading it, I missed its existence until now.
7 Masters of Glass M. Coleman Easton
I did not read this.
I believe that Easton had about a half a dozen novels, all
published in the 1980s.
8 Saraband of Lost Time Richard Grant
I also did not read this.
Grant was reasonably prolific but I am unaware of any books
more recent than 1999's KASPIAN LOST.
9 Walk the Moon's Road Jim Aikin
I did not see this.
As far as I know, Aikin only had two books published, the
most recent one in 1993.
10 Infinity's Web Sheila Finch
I did not read this.
Finch is a Nebula-awarding winning author. Her most recent
novel was published in 2004.
11 The Isle of Glass Judith Tarr
Another one that I did not pick up.
Tarr is fairly prolific to this day.
12 Saturnalia Grant Callin
I missed this. I've been looking for a copy for years without
success. Note that for reasons I find sufficient, I don't buy books on-
line.
As far as I know, he only had two SF novels published, plus
a handful of short stories.
13 The Torch of Honor Roger MacBride Allen
I''m sure that I've read this. Stupid non-functional
memory.
I believe that he has been reasonably prolific since this
was published. His most recent series is the BSI: Starside, a
procedural series about cops working the interstellar beat.
14 Children of the Light Susan B. Weston
I did not see this.
I believe that this was her only book.
15 The Warrior Who Carried Life Geoff Ryman
I also missed this, although I own a copy of it. Someday
I will get to it.
Infamous in my brain as the man that inflicted the purile
and unnecessary Mundane SF movement on a long suffering world, Ryman
has achieved both longevity and critical acclaim.
16 Song of Kali Dan Simmons
Suprisingly for a book with the word "Kali" in the title, one
white man's encounter with India does not go entirely well.
I remember liking it as the time but I know that there are
some people that thought its depiction of India was racist. Those
people will be happy to know that Simmons has since been distracted
by the shadowy menace of Eurabia.
Simmons has had a fairly long career to date. His more recent
book, THE TERROR, has been getting positive reviews.
17 The Secret Country Pamela Dean
I am very embarassed to admit that although I've owned this
fo over decade, I have not yet read it.
I believe that she had six novels published between 1985 and
1998 and that a seventh is in the works.
18 Skirmish Melisa C. Michaels
Another one that I missed.
I believe that she had about a dozen books published before
2000 but nothing since.
19 The Long Forgetting Edward A. Byers
Another one that I missed (I cut way back on buying SF in
the mid-1980s).
I believe he only had two novels, published in consecutive
years.
20 The Sorcery Within Dave Smeds
I also missed this.
Smeds appears to have had ten novels to date, all of which I
have missed. The standard disclaimer about books that I have missed
(as opposed to actively avoided) applies: all it means is that I did
not read those books, nothing more.
21 The Princess of Flames Ru Emerson
I also missed this.
Emerson appears to have been reasonably prolific in the
1980s and 1990s but I don't see anything more recent than 2001.
22 Pandora's Genes Kathryn Lance
I didn't even hear about this one.
As far as I can tell, she had this book and a sequel and nothing
since.
23 Down Town Vildo Polikarpus and Tappan King
I am quite embarrassed. I know that I've read this and I think
I liked it but I have no memory of it at all.
As far as I can tell, this was the only SF novel either of
them wrote.
24 Ibis Linda Steele
Yet another book that I missed. It seems to have been Ms. Steele's
only book.
25 Staroamer's Fate Chuck Rothman
And to close things out, a book other people liked that I missed
entirely.
This appears to have been his only novel, although he was writing
short fiction at least until the late 1990s.
--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)
James Nicoll
>
> I also missed this.
>
> Smeds appears to have had ten novels to date, all of which I
>have missed. The standard disclaimer about books that I have missed
>(as opposed to actively avoided) applies: all it means is that I did
>not read those books, nothing more.
>
a lot more gracefully than I am. I've reached the Lex Luthor/Perry
White stage of decline....
Chris Thompson
>
>5 Tailchaser's Song Tad Williams
>
> This involved a cat
Lots of cats. Lots and lots of cats. And some squirrels.
> and is thick enough to stun a nun if thrown.
Are you speaking metaphorically? Because it's actually quite short.
Which is my excuse for having read it. "I'm not going to start with
one of those door-stopper trilogies, but I'll have a go with this and
see whether he's any good."
It had its amusing points, and wasn't as twee as one might fear, but
I can't say I was motivated to read more by the author, despite ...
> Williams is also still with us.
--
Chris Thompson
Email: cet1 [at] cam.ac.uk
John M. Gamble
>year to year?
>
>Best First Novel
>
>23 Down Town Vildo Polikarpus and Tappan King
>
> I am quite embarrassed. I know that I've read this and I think
>I liked it but I have no memory of it at all.
>
> As far as I can tell, this was the only SF novel either of
>them wrote.
>
Fantasy of a parallel city in city (I think the "real" city is
New York City, but my memory has barely more information than
yours). I don't think I liked it well enough to hang onto it,
which is not to say I didn't enjoy reading it at the time. If
I recall correctly, I thought at the time it could haved used
some editing down.
--
-john
February 28 1997: Last day libraries could order catalogue cards
from the Library of Congress.
Andrew Plotkin
>
> 9 Walk the Moon's Road Jim Aikin
>
> I did not see this.
>
> As far as I know, Aikin only had two books published, the
> most recent one in 1993.
He hangs around on the text adventure newsgroup -- he's released a
couple of (free) games. What this means in regards to his career, I
leave for Jim to decide.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
If the Bush administration hasn't shipped you to Syria for interrogation, it's
for one reason: they don't feel like it. Not because you're innocent.
Robert Shaw
>
>
> 13 The Torch of Honor Roger MacBride Allen
>
> I''m sure that I've read this. Stupid non-functional
> memory.
I think this was the one that had a hyperdrive which travelled
at exactly c-squared, which isn't even a speed. This, or perhaps
the sequel, also had centauroid aliens who managed to do
advanced biotechnology without any apparent infrastructure,
which seems only dubiously plausible.
The biology of the aliens was interesting though. They were
all born female, but eventually metamorphosed into smaller
flying mindless males. This had prevented them inventing
the notion of an afterlife, and made nihilism very popular.
When they discovered that humans do things differently,
most of them immediately decided to genocide us.
--
'It is a wise crow that knows which way the camel points' - Pratchett
Robert Shaw
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Nicoll) wrote:
>2 Emprise Michael P. Kube-McDowell
>
> I believe his most recent book was 2002's VECTORS. His website
>says that there's another book in the pipeline, THE EYES OF REASON.
A six-year gap.
>8 Saraband of Lost Time Richard Grant
>
> Grant was reasonably prolific but I am unaware of any books
>more recent than 1999's KASPIAN LOST.
Nine-year hiatus.
(Grant always had a self-destructive streak, though.)
>10 Infinity's Web Sheila Finch
>
> Finch is a Nebula-awarding winning author. Her most recent
>novel was published in 2004.
Four-year hiatus.
>13 The Torch of Honor Roger MacBride Allen
>
> I believe that he has been reasonably prolific since this
>was published. His most recent series is the BSI: Starside, a
>procedural series about cops working the interstellar beat.
He's also writing some non-fiction in collaboration with his father,
Tom Allen, these days. And he's the proprietor of FoxAcre Press.
>17 The Secret Country Pamela Dean
>
> I believe that she had six novels published between 1985 and
>1998 and that a seventh is in the works.
Ten-year gap, or more.
>18 Skirmish Melisa C. Michaels
>
> I believe that she had about a dozen books published before
>2000 but nothing since.
Eight-year hiatus. (Which is a shame, as I like Melisa. Haven't read
any of her work, though.)
>21 The Princess of Flames Ru Emerson
>
> Emerson appears to have been reasonably prolific in the
>1980s and 1990s but I don't see anything more recent than 2001.
Seven-year hiatus.
>23 Down Town Vildo Polikarpus and Tappan King
>
> As far as I can tell, this was the only SF novel either of
>them wrote.
What happened to Tappan, anyway? I haven't seen hide nor hair of him
in ages.
>25 Staroamer's Fate Chuck Rothman
>
> This appears to have been his only novel, although he was writing
>short fiction at least until the late 1990s.
Still is -- I saw his byline somewhere just a week or two back. (No,
I don't remember where, but it was current.)
Anyway, I'm noticing a pattern here -- a lot of people don't seem to
be publishing much in the 21st century. Makes me feel better about my
own track record, and that I accepted a cut in my advances in my
latest contract -- at least I can still sell books.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
The eighth issue of Helix is now at http://www.helixsf.com
James Nicoll
Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>
>Anyway, I'm noticing a pattern here -- a lot of people don't seem to
>be publishing much in the 21st century. Makes me feel better about my
>own track record, and that I accepted a cut in my advances in my
>latest contract -- at least I can still sell books.
The pattern I noticed is that I can describe people as
"prolific in the '80s" or "prolific in the '80s and '90s", which
seems to imply that careers tend to line up with decades for no
reason that I can see.
Maybe I should see how it lines up with cultural changes:
"Disco writer" [1], "Cold War Writer" [2] and so on. Those often
line up somewhat with decades.
Or the rise and fall of editors, which would make since.
Poor Pamela Sargent had Lou Aronica shot out from under her twice
while writing her Venus series, for example.
1: EG: John Varley and yes, there's a coherent model here.
2: A lot of the fun went out of Richard Hoyt's stuff once the Cold War
ended, for example.
James Nicoll
Chris Thompson <ce...@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>In article <g3e210$p5b$1...@reader2.panix.com>,
>James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>[...]
>>
>>5 Tailchaser's Song Tad Williams
>>
>> This involved a cat
>
>Lots of cats. Lots and lots of cats. And some squirrels.
>
>> and is thick enough to stun a nun if thrown.
>
>Are you speaking metaphorically? Because it's actually quite short.
Actually, I remembered it as dragging on and on. Perhaps it
was just dull.
Stephen Graham
> 2 Emprise Michael P. Kube-McDowell
>
> This is the first book in the Trigon Disunity, which begins just after
> a group of plucky scientists save humanity by inventing a Fission-B-Gone
> device just before the oil runs out. Whoops. Civilization survives and goes
> on to make contact with extraterrestrials of an unexpected nature.
>
> I think the later books in the series are more interesting than this
> one but this was interesting enough to get me to buy those later novels.
I remember being happy with the entire trilogy but few details beyond
that. I suppose it should go into the queue for a reread.
> 12 Saturnalia Grant Callin
>
> I missed this. I've been looking for a copy for years without
> success. Note that for reasons I find sufficient, I don't buy books on-
> line.
I've always been quite fond of this and the sequel, _A Lion on
Tharthee_. Now they strike me as being similar to but a bit better than
Varley's _Red Thunder_ series. Perhaps it's the somewhat similar
characters of Junior Badille (Callin) and Jubal Broussard (Varley),
though I was much less annoyed with Junior as a character than with Jubal.
Scenes from _A Lion on Tharthee_ stick with me 20 years after initially
reading it, particularly the sight-seeing expedition to the sea cliffs
and the final play/performance. It's a first-contact novel and the alien
race makes policy decisions based on plays arguing particular positions.
The question of continuing contact with humanity is one of those
policy issues, to which the human team contributes a play arguing for an
intermediate position between "kill them all" and "they're wonderful".
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Nicoll) wrote:
> The pattern I noticed is that I can describe people as
>"prolific in the '80s" or "prolific in the '80s and '90s", which
>seems to imply that careers tend to line up with decades for no
>reason that I can see.
>
> Maybe I should see how it lines up with cultural changes:
>"Disco writer" [1], "Cold War Writer" [2] and so on. Those often
>line up somewhat with decades.
I think there may be a correlation to shifts in distribution, as well.
Del Rey's development of commercial fantasy, starting in 1975,
eventually led to the market climate of the 1980s, while the rise of
bookstore chains and the collapse of the old ID mass-market
distributors reshaped the market in the early 1990s.
> Or the rise and fall of editors, which would make since.
>Poor Pamela Sargent had Lou Aronica shot out from under her twice
>while writing her Venus series, for example.
I've had editors shot out from under me a few times. I lost Deborah
Hogan midway through the "Worlds of Shadow" trilogy, which contributed
to my leaving Del Rey. I lost Judy-Lynn del Rey between the proposal
and the completed novel of _The Wizard and the war Machine_. At Tor,
Jenna Felice died and Jim Minz was poached, though to be honest I
don't remember exactly what I was working on at the time.
It's not much fun.
>1: EG: John Varley and yes, there's a coherent model here.
>
>
>2: A lot of the fun went out of Richard Hoyt's stuff once the Cold War
>ended, for example.
--
David DeLaney
>4 The Summer Tree Guy Gavriel Kay
>
> I've never been able to finish this.
Apparently you either love this trilogy or you hate it (The Wandering Fire,
The Darkest Road). I've not heard from anyone who said "meh" about it yet.
(Fantasy, set in Fionavar, the One True World, with five people from Earth
imported as a group, each ending up with a different destiny. Battling the
Big Bad UberEvil.)
> Guy Kay is as far as I can tell fairly successful.
Yes, and I'm buying his stuff still and reading it as soon as I can. Just,
you know, not always in hardback any more.
>5 Tailchaser's Song Tad Williams
>
> This involved a cat and is thick enough to stun a nun if thrown.
>
> Williams is also still with us.
His books have retained that quality as well (well, not the cat part
necessarily). Currently working my way through Shadowmarch.
>6 Cats Have No Lord Will Shetterly
>
> As I recall, the reason cats have no lord in the universe is tied
>into the continued existance of the universe in question. I don't remember
>much about the book except that there's an amusing reference to the duel
>at the Cliffs of Madness from the PRINCESS BRIDE.
>
> Shetterly is still active as a writer, among other things.
>Apparently he had a book out as recently as 2007 but not only did I
>manage to miss reading it, I missed its existence until now.
_If_ I remember right this had a sequel, The Tangled Lands; he then went off
into, I think, either Liavek novels or whatever that series was where the
elves came back and the series focussed on the city where elves and humans
both lived and there were a lot of teenagers and homeless people involved.
(I know, I know, 'be more specific'...)
Dave 'again, many of these I have no memory of' DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
DeLaney) wrote:
>James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>>6 Cats Have No Lord Will Shetterly
>>
>> As I recall, the reason cats have no lord in the universe is tied
>>into the continued existance of the universe in question. I don't remember
>>much about the book except that there's an amusing reference to the duel
>>at the Cliffs of Madness from the PRINCESS BRIDE.
>>
>> Shetterly is still active as a writer, among other things.
>>Apparently he had a book out as recently as 2007 but not only did I
>>manage to miss reading it, I missed its existence until now.
>
>_If_ I remember right this had a sequel, The Tangled Lands; he then went off
>into, I think, either Liavek novels or whatever that series was where the
>elves came back and the series focussed on the city where elves and humans
>both lived and there were a lot of teenagers and homeless people involved.
>(I know, I know, 'be more specific'...)
The Borderlands series. Shetterly definitely worked on Liavek, and I
think on Borderlands, too.
He went off to Hollywood for awhile, but I don't think much came of
that.
He also ran for governor of Minnesota and came in... fifth, maybe?
Better than one might have expected, anyway.
ronincats
> 1 Contact Carl Sagan
>
> A female scientist finds herself caught up in what appears to
> be the first genuine contact with aliens.
>
> I thought this was stunningly mediocre.
>
I would have to agree.
>
> 4 The Summer Tree Guy Gavriel Kay
>
> I've never been able to finish this.
>
> Guy Kay is as far as I can tell fairly successful.
>
> 5 Tailchaser's Song Tad Williams
>
> This involved a cat and is thick enough to stun a nun if thrown.
>
> Williams is also still with us.
>
> 6 Cats Have No Lord Will Shetterly
>
> As I recall, the reason cats have no lord in the universe is tied
> into the continued existance of the universe in question. I don't remember
> much about the book except that there's an amusing reference to the duel
> at the Cliffs of Madness from the PRINCESS BRIDE.
>
> Shetterly is still active as a writer, among other things.
> Apparently he had a book out as recently as 2007 but not only did I
> manage to miss reading it, I missed its existence until now.
>
> 10 Infinity's Web Sheila Finch
>
> I did not read this.
>
> Finch is a Nebula-awarding winning author. Her most recent
> novel was published in 2004.
I tried to read this, after buying it, several times, but something
about the prose style irritated me so much I never could get through
the first 60 pages.
>
> 17 The Secret Country Pamela Dean
>
> I am very embarassed to admit that although I've owned this
> fo over decade, I have not yet read it.
>
> I believe that she had six novels published between 1985 and
> 1998 and that a seventh is in the works.
>
I have only kept the trilogy, of which this was the first. I found the
final book disappointing.
>
> 21 The Princess of Flames Ru Emerson
>
> I also missed this.
>
> Emerson appears to have been reasonably prolific in the
> 1980s and 1990s but I don't see anything more recent than 2001.
>
This was her first book. She then wrote a fantasy series set on an
alternate fantasy world to which some Earth characters are
transported.
> 23 Down Town Vildo Polikarpus and Tappan King
>
> I am quite embarrassed. I know that I've read this and I think
> I liked it but I have no memory of it at all.
>
> As far as I can tell, this was the only SF novel either of
> them wrote.
>
I remember liking this a lot. I've pulled it off the shelf--I may
really go ahead and read this one again.
RHonda
Konrad Gaertner
>
> 6 Cats Have No Lord Will Shetterly
>
> As I recall, the reason cats have no lord in the universe is tied
> into the continued existance of the universe in question. I don't remember
> much about the book except that there's an amusing reference to the duel
> at the Cliffs of Madness from the PRINCESS BRIDE.
Enjoyable but unremarkable high fantasy. The prequel, on the other
hand, is science fiction.
> Shetterly is still active as a writer, among other things.
> Apparently he had a book out as recently as 2007 but not only did I
> manage to miss reading it, I missed its existence until now.
His most recent novel (which is/was available for free download) is
a sequel to a book that was deliberately ambiguous as to being
fantasy or non-genre.
> 17 The Secret Country Pamela Dean
>
> I am very embarassed to admit that although I've owned this
> fo over decade, I have not yet read it.
I thought the trilogy's premise was very interesting, but hated the
ending.
> I believe that she had six novels published between 1985 and
> 1998 and that a seventh is in the works.
I think she has two novels that have been in the works for several
years now. I'll read the Liavek one, but not the sequel to _Dubious
Hills_ and Secret Country trilogy.
--
Konrad Gaertner - - - - - - - - - - - - email: kgae...@tx.rr.com
http://kgbooklog.livejournal.com/
"I don't mind hidden depths but I insist that there be a surface."
-- James Nicoll
Sea Wasp
Chuck has written at least a couple novels, but I think they're
currently either electronic or POD. He's also very active in local
(Albany NY) convention activities; I think he's been running Albacon
(and WFC last year) for three, four years now.
TRIVIA: Chuck was part of a writer's group that I belonged to. This
group which had roughly 10 members (8 fairly constant) produced to my
knowledge 3 SF/F authors, despite the concentration of the group being
mainly on much more mundane fiction; the three being Chuck, myself,
and Winifred Elze (writing horror under her maiden name, because no
one would believe her married name as a horror writer: Winifred Warlock).
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
W. Citoan
>
> 13 The Torch of Honor Roger MacBride Allen
>
> I''m sure that I've read this. Stupid non-functional memory.
I read it long ago & still have it. However, even thumbing through it
doesn't bring back much recollection other than an uneasy feeling that
I don't want to read it again.
- W. Citoan
--
First say to yourself what you would be; and then do what you have to do.
-- Epictetus
Gene
news:slrng5l9q...@gatekeeper.vic.com:
>>4 The Summer Tree Guy Gavriel Kay
>>
>> I've never been able to finish this.
>
> Apparently you either love this trilogy or you hate it (The Wandering
Fire,
> The Darkest Road). I've not heard from anyone who said "meh" about it
yet.
> (Fantasy, set in Fionavar, the One True World, with five people from
Earth
> imported as a group, each ending up with a different destiny. Battling
the
> Big Bad UberEvil.)
I think "meh" is about right.
Mike Schilling
news:485ADC63...@tx.rr.com...
>
>> 17 The Secret Country Pamela Dean
>>
>> I am very embarassed to admit that although I've owned this
>> fo over decade, I have not yet read it.
>
> I thought the trilogy's premise was very interesting, but hated the
> ending.
>
>> I believe that she had six novels published between 1985 and
>> 1998 and that a seventh is in the works.
>
> I think she has two novels that have been in the works for several
> years now. I'll read the Liavek one, but not the sequel to _Dubious
> Hills_ and Secret Country trilogy.
Liavek *novel*? Oh, I see, it's not published yet.
news.iglou.com
news:g3e210$p5b$1...@reader2.panix.com...
>
> Does anyone know why the number of Best First Novels varies so much from
> year to year?
>
> Best First Novel
>
> 1 Contact Carl Sagan
>
> A female scientist finds herself caught up in what appears to
> be the first genuine contact with aliens.
>
> I thought this was stunningly mediocre.
The McGuffin as to why they didn't bring back any evidence made sense
then in a way it doesn't now.
As it is, the book is like one of those fantasies where the heroes have
this wonderful adventure but then have to forget it by fiat of the rulers of
Faerie.
>
> 4 The Summer Tree Guy Gavriel Kay
>
> I've never been able to finish this.
>
> Guy Kay is as far as I can tell fairly successful.
Another one of those books that has abundant praise and I don't seem to
get it.
I mean, the protagonists find themselves confronting a tall, slender,
mystical looking guy and a short, broad, copiously bearded guy with one eye.
The tall guy says (as I recall) "I'm the wizard Loren Silvershield, and this
is my source, Matt Soren, once king of the Dwarves."
They have absolutely no reaction.
And later on in the series, of course, there was where the one woman
found out she was Guenevere. Arthur and Lancelot are revived, and all agree
to enter into a polyamorous marriage. Just like every sixth-century
Christian would do, right?
>
> 6 Cats Have No Lord Will Shetterly
My wife moved heaven and earth to get this. When she got it, she
started looking for a book titled _Cinder-Eyed Cats_. I think she's catted
out but one never knows.
>
> 11 The Isle of Glass Judith Tarr
>
> Another one that I did not pick up.
>
> Tarr is fairly prolific to this day.
She took a turn much like Tepper. This was a pretty good one about
immortals in twelfth-thirteenth century Europe, first of a trilogy. She did
bungle the authority of the Inquisition and the witch-trials, but that seems
to be required for fantasy writers these days.
>
> 15 The Warrior Who Carried Life Geoff Ryman
>
> I also missed this, although I own a copy of it. Someday
> I will get to it.
IIRC it was about the last woman warrior of her era or something like
that.
>
> 20 The Sorcery Within Dave Smeds
>
> I also missed this.
Another pseudo-Arabian novel, where for some reason the pseudo-Arabs are
quite willing to bend the rules of their macho culture for the heroine.
> 21 The Princess of Flames Ru Emerson
>
> I also missed this.
She got into tie-ins --- my wife has a Xena tie-in novel she did.
Joseph T Major
Aaron Bergman
jdni...@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote:
> 11 The Isle of Glass Judith Tarr
>
> Another one that I did not pick up.
>
> Tarr is fairly prolific to this day.
I seem to remember that she's doing stuff for Luna under a different
name.
googles...
Caitlin Brennan. Apparently also as Kathleen Bryan for Tor.
Aaron
Rebecca Rice
> In article <g3e210$p5b$1...@reader2.panix.com>,
> James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
> [...]
>> 5 Tailchaser's Song Tad Williams
>>
>> This involved a cat
>
> Lots of cats. Lots and lots of cats. And some squirrels.
>
rik-chik-chik. It just seems like a better name for them.
The end of the book was a bit strange, I will admit.
Rebecca
David DeLaney
>d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote in
>>>
>>> I've never been able to finish this.
>>
>> Apparently you either love this trilogy or you hate it (The Wandering Fire,
>> The Darkest Road). I've not heard from anyone who said "meh" about it yet.
>> (Fantasy, set in Fionavar, the One True World, with five people from Earth
>> imported as a group, each ending up with a different destiny. Battling the
>> Big Bad UberEvil.)
>
>I think "meh" is about right.
If that's from the description, I'm really not doing it justice. It's got
a deep slathering with sensawunda, and also apparently plotting and writing
flaws that make the "ick" people say "ick" about it. I liked it a lot and
reread it every so often.
Dave
David DeLaney
>>
>> I also missed this.
>
> She got into tie-ins --- my wife has a Xena tie-in novel she did.
She also did a fantasy series about LightWeavers (or something like that),
and a couple of D&D books.
Dan Goodman
> TRIVIA: Chuck was part of a writer's group that I belonged to. This
> group which had roughly 10 members (8 fairly constant) produced to my
> knowledge 3 SF/F authors, despite the concentration of the group
> being mainly on much more mundane fiction; the three being Chuck,
> myself, and Winifred Elze (writing horror under her maiden name,
> because no one would believe her married name as a horror writer:
> Winifred Warlock).
It would be better than someone named Roberta Heinlein writing sf.
(whitepages.com says there are two people with that name, both in
Georgia.)
--
Dan Goodman
"I have always depended on the kindness of stranglers."
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Expire
Journal http://dsgood.livejournal.com
Futures http://clerkfuturist.wordpress.com
mirror 1: http://dsgood.insanejournal.com
mirror 2: http://dsgood.wordpress.com
Links http://del.icio.us/dsgood
David Goldfarb
David DeLaney <d...@gatekeeper.vic.com> wrote:
>James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>>4 The Summer Tree Guy Gavriel Kay
>>
>> I've never been able to finish this.
>
>Apparently you either love this trilogy or you hate it (The Wandering Fire,
>The Darkest Road). I've not heard from anyone who said "meh" about it yet.
>(Fantasy, set in Fionavar, the One True World, with five people from Earth
>imported as a group, each ending up with a different destiny. Battling the
>Big Bad UberEvil.)
People who love or hate something have more incentive to pipe up.
Where's the percentage in saying "meh"?
Anyway, I read this and I liked it okay but I didn't love it. I think
a lot of his later work is much better.
>>6 Cats Have No Lord Will Shetterly
>
>_If_ I remember right this had a sequel, The Tangled Lands
My recollection is that _Cats_ is fantasy, while _Tangled Lands_ is
SF in which the world of _Cats_ exists as an MMORPG.
--
David Goldfarb |"...I'm a member of the Centre Extremist party.
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | We have very moderate views, but if you don't
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | agree with them, we'll kill you."
Robert Carnegie
wrote:
> TRIVIA: Chuck was part of a writer's group that I belonged to. This
> group which had roughly 10 members (8 fairly constant) produced to my
> knowledge 3 SF/F authors, despite the concentration of the group being
> mainly on much more mundane fiction; the three being Chuck, myself,
> and Winifred Elze (writing horror under her maiden name, because no
> one would believe her married name as a horror writer: Winifred Warlock).
I don't suppose this situation features in an hilarious semi-fictional
biographical novel entitled _He-Witched_, at all?
Tim McDaniel
>
> I also missed this, although I own a copy of it. Someday
>I will get to it.
I'd like other people's reactions to this. There was something about
the tone, plot, and/or style that seriously wrapped my mind around an
axle. It's the only book I've finished where I told someone (my
college roommate, as it happened) that we needed to take a walk, and I
babbled while trying to decompress. Fortunately or un-, I don't
remember much details, except what happened to the child near the end
when <de-spoiler> happened.
Danielis de Lincolino
--
Tim McDaniel, tm...@panix.com
Lynn Calvin
Nicoll) wrote:
>
>Does anyone know why the number of Best First Novels varies so much from
>year to year?
>
>4 The Summer Tree Guy Gavriel Kay
Kay's first trilogy was uneven, but most of his later work is excellent,
and he mostly avoids sequelitis.
>11 The Isle of Glass Judith Tarr
I like Tarr who is even more prolific if you realize that she also writing
as Caitlin Brennan and Kathleen Bryan.
>17 The Secret Country Pamela Dean
>
> I am very embarassed to admit that although I've owned this
There was a period of time when I believe you could have sold it for a
fair sum, although not as much as the elusive third book which almost
vanished on publication.
>18 Skirmish Melisa C. Michaels
An author I wish would be republished, and publish more.
--
Lynn Calvin
lca...@interaccess.com
David Goldfarb
Lynn Calvin <lca...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>>17 The Secret Country Pamela Dean
>>
>> I am very embarassed to admit that although I've owned this
>
>There was a period of time when I believe you could have sold it for a
>fair sum, although not as much as the elusive third book which almost
>vanished on publication.
The first and second books were never all that rare or expensive.
I lost my first copies of them in a fire, and replaced them.
It was the third that was a problem. (Happily, no longer so.)
--
David Goldfarb |"Feeling smug about one's opinions is the very
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | lifeblood of the Net."
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- Dawn Friedman
Brian Rusten
> 19 The Long Forgetting Edward A. Byers
>
> Another one that I missed (I cut way back on buying SF in
> the mid-1980s).
>
> I believe he only had two novels, published in consecutive
> years.
Yep. According to ISFDB he died in 1989.
John Schilling
Nicoll) wrote:
>12 Saturnalia Grant Callin
> I missed this. I've been looking for a copy for years without
>success. Note that for reasons I find sufficient, I don't buy books on-
>line.
I was sure that I had a copy, but on checking the library it doesn't
seem to be there. Possibly there's a multinational anti-Callin
conspiracy at work here. I blame the Underpants Gnomes.
>13 The Torch of Honor Roger MacBride Allen
> I''m sure that I've read this. Stupid non-functional
>memory.
Space Nazis (well, not literally) invade Space Finland (yes,
literally), and the only people who care are the League of
Planets. A name no doubt chosen for the historical imagery
it evokes, as the extent of their caring is a nine-man patrol
ship operating with a two-man crew due to budget cuts.
Typical Extruded MilSF Product, fairly well done. Unlike
certain other authors in that field, Allen kept this series
to two books, so his heroes didn't have to actually save the
entire universe and be promoted to Saint, President, and
Admiral simultaneously.
>18 Skirmish Melisa C. Michaels
> Another one that I missed.
> I believe that she had about a dozen books published before
>2000 but nothing since.
First of a series, asteroid belter heroine vs. uncaring monolithic
Earth corporations and governments. Very much the sort of thing
C.J. Cherryh would write if we dosed her heavily with Prozac.
Meh. For some reason inexplicable to me even then, I bought and
read the sequels.
--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
*John.S...@alumni.usc.edu * for success" *
*661-718-0955 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *
Derek Lyons
>>13 The Torch of Honor Roger MacBride Allen
>
>> I''m sure that I've read this. Stupid non-functional
>>memory.
>
>Space Nazis (well, not literally) invade Space Finland (yes,
>literally), and the only people who care are the League of
>Planets. A name no doubt chosen for the historical imagery
>it evokes, as the extent of their caring is a nine-man patrol
>ship operating with a two-man crew due to budget cuts.
Not quite due to budget cuts, not League budget cuts anyhow. And it's
a one-time thing due to the plot, not planned and not Policy. As we
see in the sequel, the LPSS is like the NATO forces of the mid 90's -
token flag wavers. The Real Muscle is in the fleets of the individual
League members.
At any rate the Joslyn Marie is the only scout sent out with a two man
crew, the balance are three and four man crews.
>Typical Extruded MilSF Product, fairly well done.
Mostly because Allen seems to somewhere have had some actual military
experience or contact. He doesn't confuse a Navy with Starfleet and
avoids most of more horrific Technothriller/MilSF/Military tropes.
>Unlike certain other authors in that field, Allen kept this
>series to two books, so his heroes didn't have to actually save
>the entire universe and be promoted to Saint, President, and
>Admiral simultaneously.
The second novel (Rogue Powers) is actually one of the more
interesting First Contact novels I've ever read.
Together, they are two of my all time favorites. I still remember
just grabbing Torch more or less at random from the pile of books left
behind by the offgoing crew... (My attention was more on the stacks
of porn.)
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>John Schilling <schi...@spock.usc.edu> wrote:
>
>>>13 The Torch of Honor Roger MacBride Allen
>>
>>Typical Extruded MilSF Product, fairly well done.
>
>Mostly because Allen seems to somewhere have had some actual military
>experience or contact. He doesn't confuse a Navy with Starfleet and
>avoids most of more horrific Technothriller/MilSF/Military tropes.
Not first-hand experience, but he was living in Washington DC at the
time and does know how to do research.
Moriarty
> In article <g3e210$p5...@reader2.panix.com>,
>
> James Nicoll <jdnic...@panix.com> wrote:
> >15 The Warrior Who Carried Life Geoff Ryman
>
> > I also missed this, although I own a copy of it. Someday
> >I will get to it.
>
> I'd like other people's reactions to this. There was something about
> the tone, plot, and/or style that seriously wrapped my mind around an
> axle. It's the only book I've finished where I told someone (my
> college roommate, as it happened) that we needed to take a walk, and I
> babbled while trying to decompress. Fortunately or un-, I don't
> remember much details, except what happened to the child near the end
> when <de-spoiler> happened.
I also don't remember much about it but I didn't have the reaction you
did. I never re-read it or read anything else by the same author,
which must say something I suppose.
-Moriarty
William December Starr
l...@sff.net said:
> [Will Shetterly] also ran for governor of Minnesota and came
> in... fifth, maybe? Better than one might have expected, anyway.
Was that the same election that Jesse Ventura won?
--
William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
William December Starr
"news.iglou.com" <jtm...@iglou.com> said:
>> 4 The Summer Tree Guy Gavriel Kay
>
> Another one of those books that has abundant praise and I don't
> seem to get it.
>
> I mean, the protagonists find themselves confronting a tall,
> slender, mystical looking guy and a short, broad, copiously
> bearded guy with one eye. The tall guy says (as I recall) "I'm
> the wizard Loren Silvershield, and this is my source, Matt
> Soren, once king of the Dwarves."
>
> They have absolutely no reaction.
As I recall they'd just attended a lecture by the tall guy, given
under his guise as an our-world well-respected expert in, um,
something, so maybe a bit of slack-cutting for eccentricities
seemed in order.
> And later on in the series, of course, there was where the one
> woman found out she was Guenevere. Arthur and Lancelot are
> revived, and all agree to enter into a polyamorous marriage.
> Just like every sixth-century Christian would do, right?
I could be misremembering but... I think the three of them had
been reincarnated and reunited a bunch of times in the intervening
centuries, with unhappy or worse endings every time, so by this
time they were a bit more open to taking a different approach to
the problem.
Additionally, even sixth-century Christians might bend a little
when the woman that they both love tells them that no, she isn't
going to choose one over the other this time.
William December Starr
jdni...@panix.com (James Nicoll) said:
> Does anyone know why the number of Best First Novels varies so
> much from year to year?
These are from Locus and based in their readership's voting, right?
Perhaps they compiled the list based on books getting at least m
votes relative to the number of people participating, rather than
simply taking the top n vote-getters.
William December Starr
Rob...@shavian.fsnet.co.uk said:
>> 13 The Torch of Honor Roger MacBride Allen
>
> I think this was the one that had a hyperdrive which travelled at
> exactly c-squared, which isn't even a speed. This, or perhaps the
> sequel, also had centauroid aliens who managed to do advanced
> biotechnology without any apparent infrastructure, which seems
> only dubiously plausible.
TORCH had the "speed of light squared" drive, but it nmust have been
the sequel that had the aliens. The first book was purely humans vs.
humans, assuming one believes that space Nazis qualify for the term.
Wayne Throop
: TORCH had the "speed of light squared" drive,
Oh... foo. Ah well, he can always fix it up like George O. Smith.
One can hope, anyways. As long as one doesn't read any of the sequels,
I imagine.
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Sea Wasp
> : wds...@panix.com (William December Starr)
> : TORCH had the "speed of light squared" drive,
>
> Oh... foo. Ah well, he can always fix it up like George O. Smith.
> One can hope, anyways. As long as one doesn't read any of the sequels,
> I imagine.
What's the problem with this? It's just a number. Decide on units,
square the speed of light, there's your drive's speed. So for cgs it'd
be roughly 9x10^20cm/sec, which is pretty durn quick.
Now, that won't be the square of the speed of light in OTHER units
(the degenerate case being where your units are "the speed of light",
so it's 1 squared = 1 versus whatever else you use), but you'll
certainly get a number out of it that you can use.
Rebecca Rice
concubine?
Rebecca
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Starr) wrote:
>In article <b0bl545pmaf4mukoe...@news.rcn.com>,
>l...@sff.net said:
>
>> [Will Shetterly] also ran for governor of Minnesota and came
>> in... fifth, maybe? Better than one might have expected, anyway.
>
>Was that the same election that Jesse Ventura won?
Darn good question. I don't remember. I don't think so, though.
James Nicoll
Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>On 23 Jun 2008 00:28:26 -0400, wds...@panix.com (William December
>Starr) wrote:
>
>>In article <b0bl545pmaf4mukoe...@news.rcn.com>,
>>l...@sff.net said:
>>
>>> [Will Shetterly] also ran for governor of Minnesota and came
>>> in... fifth, maybe? Better than one might have expected, anyway.
>>
>>Was that the same election that Jesse Ventura won?
>
>Darn good question. I don't remember. I don't think so, though.
I believe that Shetterly ran in 1994.
--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)
Gene
@sgeObviousinc.com:
> Now, that won't be the square of the speed of light in OTHER units
> (the degenerate case being where your units are "the speed of light",
> so it's 1 squared = 1 versus whatever else you use), but you'll
> certainly get a number out of it that you can use.
Or you could pick a certain number of digits, and roll a d10 for each digit,
also giving you a number that you can use. Or you could use your social
security number, in units of km/sec. And all of these ideas really work, if
you are willing to totally ignore physics!
Derek Lyons
Re: Torch of Honor
>The first book was purely humans vs.
>humans, assuming one believes that space Nazis qualify for the term.
Y'know, I never thought of them Nazi's. But then I've never used
'Nazi' as a lazy synonym for [facist|socialist|totalitarian|well, at
any rate not democratic].
If anything, given the taste of the Central Guardians for controlling
information, Hero Projects, slave technical workers, and a grand
backstabbing bureaucracy.... I'd think of them more in terms of Space
Stalinists. (Though I don't recall a cult of personality around any
central Leader off hand.)
Wayne Throop
: What's the problem with this? It's just a number. Decide on units,
That turns out not to be the case.
"There's" your drives *square*-of-speed, which is not a speed.
I'm sorry if you hadn't heard, but "speed" is not "just a number",
ie, not a unitless number. Squaring a speed doesn't get you a speed.
Never did, never will.
Further, even if you decide to ignore that fact, the fact that you can
*decide* on the results you want, by deciding on the units you want
to use, should clue you in to the fact that you aren't actually saying
anything when you say "the speed is the square of the speed oflight".
You might think that if you are just explicit, and say "the speed is the
square of the speed of light in farquads per bleen", but in that case
while you've maybe escaped being numerically vacuous, you're still just
being self-contradictory since farquads-squared per bleen-squared isn't
a speed.
That's just the way it is. Numbers that have units are not "just
numbers".
In a story, if somebody said "this spacedrive has a speed of the square of
the speed of light" I'd expect somebody in the story to remark upon it.
Because even if they decide to mangle the language it meant "the number
you get when you square the-number-stripped-of-units of lightspeed in
some well-known units, in those same well known units", I'd expect them
to say that it's a remarkable coincidence, and wonder if maybe God has a a
sense of humor or something. Because it'd be even odder than a platypus.
I'm sorry but "square of a speed" is just horrid mush, worse than
vibrations and crystals and auras in the new-age-nonsense sense. If the
people in the story are aware they are being whimsical or farcical,
and the narrative makes this clear, it'd probably be minimally OK.
But not if they were all dead serious about it. As silly as somebody
being all serious about quantum bogodynamics. As lame as somebody saying
"this freeze ray removes half the heat" while meaning that it results
in a temperature half the original temperature in farenheit.
Which is pretty blame lame.
To cut a long rant short (or... shorter anyways), I can imagine it
being used effectively, as a form of flip humor. But I doubt anybody
actually has, though George O Smith retconned it as such.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> : Sea Wasp <seawasp...@sgeObviousinc.com>
> : What's the problem with this? It's just a number. Decide on units,
> : square the speed of light, there's your drive's speed.
>
> That turns out not to be the case.
> "There's" your drives *square*-of-speed, which is not a speed.
> I'm sorry if you hadn't heard, but "speed" is not "just a number",
> ie, not a unitless number. Squaring a speed doesn't get you a speed.
> Never did, never will.
Sure it does. You just square the speed. If I'm going 60 MPH, I square
that, I'm going 3600 mph. I KNOW I'm arriving at a speed from this. This
is the whole POINT of the multiplication. Thus the units are removed
during multiplication, and the correct units put on after the
multiplication is done.
>
> Further, even if you decide to ignore that fact, the fact that you can
> *decide* on the results you want, by deciding on the units you want
> to use, should clue you in to the fact that you aren't actually saying
> anything when you say "the speed is the square of the speed oflight".
>
> You might think that if you are just explicit, and say "the speed is the
> square of the speed of light in farquads per bleen", but in that case
> while you've maybe escaped being numerically vacuous, you're still just
> being self-contradictory since farquads-squared per bleen-squared isn't
> a speed.
>
> That's just the way it is. Numbers that have units are not "just
> numbers".
Sure they are. Speed of light is some number with units. Remove the X
per Y, as you no longer need that. Multiply that number times itself,
give it appropriate speed units, and Robert is your father's brother.
Rich Horton
wrote:
>That turns out not to be the case.
>"There's" your drives *square*-of-speed, which is not a speed.
>I'm sorry if you hadn't heard, but "speed" is not "just a number",
>ie, not a unitless number. Squaring a speed doesn't get you a speed.
>Never did, never will.
>
>Further, even if you decide to ignore that fact, the fact that you can
>*decide* on the results you want, by deciding on the units you want
>to use, should clue you in to the fact that you aren't actually saying
>anything when you say "the speed is the square of the speed oflight".
>
>You might think that if you are just explicit, and say "the speed is the
>square of the speed of light in farquads per bleen", but in that case
>while you've maybe escaped being numerically vacuous, you're still just
>being self-contradictory since farquads-squared per bleen-squared isn't
>a speed.
>
>That's just the way it is. Numbers that have units are not "just
>numbers".
To illustrate further: you say your spacedrive goes the square of the
speed of light. Oh, I say, 1 light year per year squared, eh? That's,
erm, let me check my numbers ... 1 light year per year (or, actually,
1 ly2 per y2 but you know where I'm going) ... not much faster than
the speed of light, hmmm.
Worse, perhaps you are really measuring speed of light as parsecs per
year, and at least the person claiming they have a drive that goes the
square of the speed of light is less likely to be lying or violating
relativity. (Ignoring, again, the squaring of units thing.)
Rich Horton
<sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> Sure it does. You just square the speed. If I'm going 60 MPH, I square
>that, I'm going 3600 mph. I KNOW I'm arriving at a speed from this. This
>is the whole POINT of the multiplication. Thus the units are removed
>during multiplication, and the correct units put on after the
>multiplication is done.
But I say you're not going 60 MPH, you're going 95 KPH. So when you're
going the square of that speed, you're going 9000 KPH or so, that is
to say, 5600 MPH.
5600 MPH isn't very close to 3600 MPH. But we both squared the same
speed. Why the difference?
The best you can do in such a situation is to say, "Curiously enough,
my space drive goes about the square of the speed of light expressed
in miles per second, in miles per second, but that's just a
coincidence."
William December Starr
Sea Wasp <seawasp...@sgeObviousinc.com> said:
> Now, that won't be the square of the speed of light in OTHER units
> (the degenerate case being where your units are "the speed of light",
> so it's 1 squared = 1 versus whatever else you use),
It's even better than that: consider what happens if you decide to
use a unit such that the numerical part of "the speed of light" is
less than one...
David DeLaney
>> That turns out not to be the case.
>> "There's" your drives *square*-of-speed, which is not a speed.
>> I'm sorry if you hadn't heard, but "speed" is not "just a number",
>> ie, not a unitless number. Squaring a speed doesn't get you a speed.
>> Never did, never will.
>
> Sure it does. You just square the speed. If I'm going 60 MPH, I square
>that, I'm going 3600 mph. I KNOW I'm arriving at a speed from this.
Actually, you aren't; the units square too. Which is the point. If you
square 60 miles per hour, you get 3600 square miles per square hour.
>This is the whole POINT of the multiplication. Thus the units are removed
>during multiplication, and the correct units put on after the
>multiplication is done.
Then it's not "multiplication" or "squaring"; it's some other operation which
involves stripping units off, and which won't appear in whatever actual
physics equations are behind this.
"Unit analysis will SAVE YOUR LIFE" - Paul Primeau, chemistry teacher at
Gilmour Academy
>> That's just the way it is. Numbers that have units are not "just
>> numbers".
>
> Sure they are.
Nope. "Just numbers" have no units; the only exception is 0, which can have
any units you like because it cancels them out. Anything with units isn't
just a number, it's a number plus a measurement of some sort.
>Speed of light is some number with units. Remove the X
>per Y, as you no longer need that.
Then it's not the speed of light any more; it's just a number. It can't _be_
a speed without the units, just like it can't be a velocity without a
direction.
>Multiply that number times itself,
>give it appropriate speed units,
There aren't any. The appropriate units are now (speed)^2.
You can have someone saying that that's what they're doing, but all that does
is make it VERY apparent that either a) they don't know what they're actually
talking about and are trying to technobabble, or b) the laws of physics and
math in that universe are so different from ours that no other calculations
will come out normally either...
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Robert Carnegie
> Or you could pick a certain number of digits, and roll a d10 for each digit,
> also giving you a number that you can use. Or you could use your social
> security number, in units of km/sec. And all of these ideas really work, if
> you are willing to totally ignore physics!
Faster-than-light drive engineers generally have to do that anyway...
How about - the drive propels you at c in the spatial /and/
parachronic dimensions simultaneously, so after say one hour you've
travelled to the opposite corner of a square whose edges are parallel
to each dimension's natural vector. Thus the speed of light squared.
Of course the parachronic effect is only reversible by converting your
spatial differential into... but I needn't go on, clearly you are
satisfied ;-)
Gene
$76g$1...@registered.motzarella.org:
> Sure they are. Speed of light is some number with units. Remove the X
> per Y, as you no longer need that. Multiply that number times itself,
> give it appropriate speed units, and Robert is your father's brother.
Why is that better than using your social security number?
W. Citoan
Because it doesn't facilitate identity theft...
- W. Citoan
--
It matters not now long we live, but how.
-- P.J. Bailey
Gene
news:slrng60jbr...@wcitoan-via.verizon.net:
>> Why is that better than using your social security number?
>
> Because it doesn't facilitate identity theft...
My social security number, in km/sec, works out to 0.0639 parsecs/hour. I use
parsecs/hour because as Kim Kinnison explained, parsecs/hour in the Lensman
universe is analogous to driving around the US in terms of miles/hour back
when Doc Smith was writing. So just think of it as creeping along at 0.0639
miles/hour, or 344 feet per hour.
Steal away.
W. Citoan
ObFL: "That's a joke... I say, that's a joke, son."
Derek Lyons
Nobody seems to have considered that "cee squared drive" might be just
a nickname. We called our reactor the 'teakettle'...
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
And surely Thorin Stronginthearm is my father's brother.
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Paul Ian Harman
news:g3e210$p5b$1...@reader2.panix.com...
> 23 Down Town Vildo Polikarpus and Tappan King
>
> I am quite embarrassed. I know that I've read this and I think
> I liked it but I have no memory of it at all.
Wow. One I've actually read! Although I can't remember much about it either.
Something about an underground/secret world, and I think there was a steam
train in it, for some reason.
Paul
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
The obvious answer is that using my SSN would make it a lot easier for
nasty people to steal my identity.
Brett Paul Dunbar
Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> writes
> Sure they are. Speed of light is some number with units. Remove
>the X per Y, as you no longer need that. Multiply that number times
>itself, give it appropriate speed units, and Robert is your father's
>brother.
Mother's brother surely?
Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, the 3rd Marquess of Salisbury [1] was A J
Balfour's [2] maternal uncle. Balfour's mother was Salisbury's sister
Blanche. Probably the most widely held theory about the phrase Bob's
your uncle is that it refers to Bob Salisbury [3] appointing his nephew
Secretary of State for Ireland in 1887. The other main theory relates it
to a saying "all is bob", which means "everything is good".
[1] Prime Minister 1885-1886, 1886-1892, 1895-1902.
[2] Prime Minister 1902-1905.
[3] Using your forename and your title in place of your surname is
not unknown amongst peers. Two of the three hereditary peers
whom sit as MPs do it, John Sinclair, the Viscount Thurso is
known as John Thurso and Michael Kerr, the Marquess of Lothian
is known as Michael Ancram (Viscount Ancram was his courtesy
title). The third is Douglas Hogg, the Viscount Hailsham, who
uses his name. Thurso is the only one to have sat in the Lords,
both the other two inherited their titles after most of the
hereditary peers were removed.
--
Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm
Livejournal http://brett-dunbar.livejournal.com/
Brett Paul Dunbar
To email me, use reply-to address
Michael Stemper
>On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 16:37:52 +0000 (UTC), jdni...@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote:
>>12 Saturnalia Grant Callin
>
>> I missed this. I've been looking for a copy for years without
>>success. Note that for reasons I find sufficient, I don't buy books on-
>>line.
I just read it about two months back. It's not great literature, but
I'll certainly read it again.
There are, as I recall, two main threads developed:
1. Puzzle story: If you've discovered some alien artifacts that appear
to be designed to provide some information on locating other stuff,
how did they code them?
2. Personal growth story: A middle-aged, somewhat reclusive academic
decides to get up and start doing something new with his life. He
doesn't just enter a new field and have everything drop into his
lap; he busts his butt to obtain proficiency.
The first time that I read this, I only noticed thread 1. My latest
read gave me thread 2, possibly because I'm now at a point in my life
where I can identify with middle-aged guys.
>I was sure that I had a copy, but on checking the library it doesn't
>seem to be there. Possibly there's a multinational anti-Callin
>conspiracy at work here. I blame the Underpants Gnomes.
Callin's work does seem to be scarce on the shelves, as does Allen's:
>>13 The Torch of Honor Roger MacBride Allen
I've read two "Hunted Earth" books, which unfortunately seems to be
all that there are. I'd buy at least two more of these.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him talk like Mr. Ed
by rubbing peanut butter on his gums.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
That's all there are because Roger and his publisher were not happy
with one another. I know he had at least one more planned.
Wayne Throop
: Brett Paul Dunbar <br...@nospam.demon.co.uk>
: Mother's brother surely?
That's why I'd normally say "Robert is a sibling of one of your parents".
Commits fewer assumptions, and is more highfalutinsoundin.
Wayne Throop
: "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com>
: Sure it does. You just square the speed. If I'm going 60 MPH, I
: square that, I'm going 3600 mph.
The operation you've described is not "squaring a speed", any more
than the operation of doubling a farenheit temperature is "doubling the
heat". If you square 60 mph you get 3600 square miles per hour per hour.
The operation of "take 60 mph, ignore the mph, square the resuling unitless
number, and slap mph units back on the result" is not "squaring a speed".
Never was, never will be.
Of course, you can simply declare that you're using the same words to
mean a different thing. Shrug. It's just a very ... unuseful and
cognitaviely discordant word choice, typically diagnostic of confusion
or disability. Doubly so in the usage "square of the speed oflight"
since that doesn't even have units. Triply so since even if you take
some units to be implied for some reason, it also falsely implies that
there's some physical significance to the peculiar operation of "strip
units, square, and slap on units", when in fact there is not.
So of course, just like Humpty Dumpty, you can mean anything you want
by the words you utter. If you want to miscommunicate, or give the
impression that you are confused or disabled, or only communicate with
persons of similar confusion and/or disabiliity. As others are free to
point out the infelicities in your word choice, at some boring length.
Or put it this way. Keeping the units straight is not just conventional
stuffy fussbudgetry. It's actually a useful way to avoid muddy thinking,
and the errors attendant thereto. Being sloppy about it is the reverse.
David DeLaney
>>all that there are. I'd buy at least two more of these.
>
>That's all there are because Roger and his publisher were not happy
>with one another. I know he had at least one more planned.
He also had The Depths of Time/The Ocean of Years/The Shores of Tomorrow,
which was enjoyable to read and involved (gasp) time travel on a massive
scale...
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> In message <g3pc5p$76g$1...@registered.motzarella.org>, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E.
> Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> writes
>> Sure they are. Speed of light is some number with units. Remove
>> the X per Y, as you no longer need that. Multiply that number times
>> itself, give it appropriate speed units, and Robert is your father's
>> brother.
>
> Mother's brother surely?
No, my mother's brother was either David or Philip, not Shirley.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> Or put it this way. Keeping the units straight is not just conventional
> stuffy fussbudgetry. It's actually a useful way to avoid muddy thinking,
> and the errors attendant thereto.
When you're doing real calculations on real things, instead of
handwaving bullshit into existence, yes.
As far as I can tell, the work in question is handwaving bullshit into
existence, and the units just get in the way and so must be disposed of.
David DeLaney
>: "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com>
>: Sure it does. You just square the speed. If I'm going 60 MPH, I
>: square that, I'm going 3600 mph.
>
>The operation you've described is not "squaring a speed", any more
>than the operation of doubling a farenheit temperature is "doubling the
>
>Or put it this way. Keeping the units straight is not just conventional
>stuffy fussbudgetry. It's actually a useful way to avoid muddy thinking,
>and the errors attendant thereto. Being sloppy about it is the reverse.
Note that the square of the speed of light DOES appear in at least one
familiar-to-nearly-everyone place: the conversion factor between energy
and mass. It's quite possible that someone was using that as a label for
something happening IN the drive, and someone else misheard it and thought
that applied to its speed ... or that the author in question, not knowing
much math or physics, had this misconception themselves. But c^2 isn't a
speed, it's (among other things) a ratio of energy to mass.
Default User
> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:54:36 +0200 (CEST),
> > > I've read two "Hunted Earth" books, which unfortunately seems to
> > > be all that there are. I'd buy at least two more of these.
> >
> > That's all there are because Roger and his publisher were not happy
> > with one another. I know he had at least one more planned.
>
> He also had The Depths of Time/The Ocean of Years/The Shores of
> Tomorrow, which was enjoyable to read and involved (gasp) time travel
> on a massive scale...
Used as simulated FTL though.
Brian
--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)
Derek Lyons
Or, more likely, the Author just wanted to get on with the story and
never for a moment believed folks would actually take him at his word
twenty years later.
Wayne Throop
: Or, more likely, the Author just wanted to get on with the story and
: never for a moment believed folks would actually take him at his word
: twenty years later.
If so, it's a remarkably pessimal way to "get on with the story",
ecept insofar as one can simply ignore it. And if one could, then
why bother with it in the first place.
Wayne Throop
Then it's handwaving remarkly ill-thought-out and fuzzy-minded bullshit
into existance, rendering the handwaves somewhat spastic and ill-coordinated.
Remarkably so, and so I remark upon it.
"Non sequtur. Your facts are un-co-ordinated." --- Nomad
Pfttt. Biological units. Wadayagonado?
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> : "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com>
> : As far as I can tell, the work in question is handwaving bullshit into
> : existence, and the units just get in the way and so must be disposed of.
>
> Then it's handwaving remarkly ill-thought-out and fuzzy-minded bullshit
> into existance, rendering the handwaves somewhat spastic and ill-coordinated.
> Remarkably so, and so I remark upon it.
>
>
> "Non sequtur. Your facts are un-co-ordinated." --- Nomad
"You have made an error! You did not discover your error! You have made
TWO errors! You did not correct your error! You have made THREE errors!
Execute your prime function!"
>
> Pfttt. Biological units. Wadayagonado?
"Exterminate!"
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
James Nicoll
Derek Lyons <fair...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>Wayne Throop wrote:
>>
>>> Or put it this way. Keeping the units straight is not just conventional
>>> stuffy fussbudgetry. It's actually a useful way to avoid muddy thinking,
>>> and the errors attendant thereto.
>>
>> When you're doing real calculations on real things, instead of
>>handwaving bullshit into existence, yes.
>>
>> As far as I can tell, the work in question is handwaving bullshit into
>>existence, and the units just get in the way and so must be disposed of.
>
>Or, more likely, the Author just wanted to get on with the story and
>never for a moment believed folks would actually take him at his word
>twenty years later.
>
Smith, who made exactly the same mistake in one of the Venus Equilateral
stories.
--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)
Derek Lyons
>In article <48638e2d....@news.supernews.com>,
>Derek Lyons <fair...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>"Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Wayne Throop wrote:
>>>
>>>> Or put it this way. Keeping the units straight is not just conventional
>>>> stuffy fussbudgetry. It's actually a useful way to avoid muddy thinking,
>>>> and the errors attendant thereto.
>>>
>>> When you're doing real calculations on real things, instead of
>>>handwaving bullshit into existence, yes.
>>>
>>> As far as I can tell, the work in question is handwaving bullshit into
>>>existence, and the units just get in the way and so must be disposed of.
>>
>>Or, more likely, the Author just wanted to get on with the story and
>>never for a moment believed folks would actually take him at his word
>>twenty years later.
>>
> Units problems are noticable at the time. Just ask George O.
>Smith, who made exactly the same mistake in one of the Venus Equilateral
>stories.
It's not a units problem, it's just the name of a piece of equipment.
Robert Carnegie
Well, look. You have to /have/ a superdrive in an interstellar
adventure story that isn't going to take way longer than is cool, you
have to at least /hint/ at science rather than magic behind it, but
it's a waste of effort making it convincing, because according to /
real/ science there's no such thing. (Did you ever /see/ Einstein and
Rosen play pontoon? It was pitiful.) So every word about how the
superdrive works is potentially a word wasted, which the publisher and
the reader are /paying/ for.
Erik Trulsson
If the goal is avtually to handwave bullshit into existence, then squaring
the speed of light is indeed a quite useful operation. Useful in the sense
that it makes both the handwaving and the bullshit very obvious.
--
<Insert your favourite quote here.>
Erik Trulsson
ertr...@student.uu.se
Derek Lyons
Precisely. And unlike (say), Star Trek or the CoDominium books the
details of how the drive works are irrelevant to the story - so we
have a 'and the door dilated' moment tossed in with a throwaway
reference to the drives name.
Which people here are making entirely too much of.
Mark Zenier
David DeLaney <d...@gatekeeper.vic.com> wrote:>>> That turns out not to be the case.
>>> "There's" your drives *square*-of-speed, which is not a speed.
>>> I'm sorry if you hadn't heard, but "speed" is not "just a number",
>>> ie, not a unitless number. Squaring a speed doesn't get you a speed.
>>> Never did, never will.
>>
>> Sure it does. You just square the speed. If I'm going 60 MPH, I square
>
>Actually, you aren't; the units square too. Which is the point. If you
>square 60 miles per hour, you get 3600 square miles per square hour.
If you feed "speed squared" into a calculator that does dimensional
analysis (a recent version of the gnu version of the unix units program,
for example) you find that the ouput is defined as Joules/Kilogram,
ie. energy (density?).
#units --verbose
1948 units, 71 prefixes, 28 functions
You have: (1 m/s)^2
You want: ?
Gy gray
Sv sievert
energy c^2
gray J/kg
rad 1e-2 Gy
rem 1e-2 Sv
rep 8.38 mGy
sievert J/kg
tnt 4.184e9 J/ton
You have: (1 m/s)^2
You want: energy
(1 m/s)^2 = 1.1126501e-17 energy
(1 m/s)^2 = (1 / 8.9875518e+16) energy
You have:
Interesting, absorbed dose (of radiation) has the same units.
Mark Zenier mze...@eskimo.com
Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com)
Michael Stemper
>In article <48638e2d....@news.supernews.com>, Derek Lyons <fair...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>"Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
[a speed equal to the "square of the speed of light"]
>>> When you're doing real calculations on real things, instead of
>>>handwaving bullshit into existence, yes.
>>Or, more likely, the Author just wanted to get on with the story and
>>never for a moment believed folks would actually take him at his word
>>twenty years later.
>>
> Units problems are noticable at the time. Just ask George O.
>Smith, who made exactly the same mistake in one of the Venus Equilateral
>stories.
And had to have the protagonists doing some serious ducking and weaving
in the next story, making excuses for why they made such a bone-headed
statement. I've always thought that the letters column in whatever mag
initially published that story must have been printed on asbestos.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
The FAQ for rec.arts.sf.written is at:
http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper/sf-written
Please read it before posting.
Gene
@news.supernews.com:
> Precisely. And unlike (say), Star Trek or the CoDominium books the
> details of how the drive works are irrelevant to the story - so we
> have a 'and the door dilated' moment tossed in with a throwaway
> reference to the drives name.
It's not an "and the door dilated" moment, it's an "and the door belched"
moment. Stops everything in its tracks, and requires an explanation.
Michael Stemper
>>Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>>> "There's" your drives *square*-of-speed, which is not a speed.
>>>> I'm sorry if you hadn't heard, but "speed" is not "just a number",
>>>> ie, not a unitless number. Squaring a speed doesn't get you a speed.
>>> Sure it does. You just square the speed. If I'm going 60 MPH, I square
>>>that, I'm going 3600 mph. I KNOW I'm arriving at a speed from this.
>>
>>Actually, you aren't; the units square too. Which is the point. If you
>>square 60 miles per hour, you get 3600 square miles per square hour.
Another way to look at this is area/time/time. This unit could make
sense as the derivative of the rate of urban sprawl.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
91.2% of all statistics are made up by the person quoting them.
Taki Kogoma
allegedly proclaimed to rec.arts.sf.written:
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>>Well, look. You have to /have/ a superdrive in an interstellar
>>adventure story that isn't going to take way longer than is cool, you
>>have to at least /hint/ at science rather than magic behind it, but
>>it's a waste of effort making it convincing, because according to /
>>real/ science there's no such thing. (Did you ever /see/ Einstein and
>>Rosen play pontoon? It was pitiful.) So every word about how the
>>superdrive works is potentially a word wasted, which the publisher and
>>the reader are /paying/ for.
>
> Precisely. And unlike (say), Star Trek or the CoDominium books the
> details of how the drive works are irrelevant to the story - so we
> have a 'and the door dilated' moment tossed in with a throwaway
> reference to the drives name.
>
> Which people here are making entirely too much of.
Clearly, the 64 million credit question is: Can the drive under discussion
allow a ship to make the Kessel Run in less than twelve parsecs?
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk (Known to some as Taki Kogoma) quirk @ swcp.com
Just an article detector on the Information Supercollider.
Wayne Throop
: Precisely. And unlike (say), Star Trek or the CoDominium books the
: details of how the drive works are irrelevant to the story - so we
: have a 'and the door dilated' moment tossed in with a throwaway
: reference to the drives name.
:
: Which people here are making entirely too much of.
Hm. But if you want it to be a throwaway reference, why name the
drive something that raises more questiosn to any thinking reader
rather than the number it sweeps under a rug?
Sigh. OK, so you're saying it's akin to complaing about the overuse
of "turbo" or "nano" or even "hi-fi". Just grit teeth and soldier on.
And I could maybe even see it if the *name* of the drive was "the
c-squared drive". Might not object any more than to "quantum II
hyperdrive", or many another name. But naict from the upthread reference,
this was saying that the *speed* the drive acheives was "the speed of
light squared". And I don't think poinging out the infelicities of that
is "making entirely to much of" it. If anything, I'm being to gentle
with the concept.
Now Ned, them whores are going to tell different lies than you. And
when their lies ain't the same as your lies... Well, I ain't gonna
hurt no woman. But I'm gonna hurt you. And not gentle like
before... but bad.
--- Little Bill Daggett
Wayne Throop
: It's not an "and the door dilated" moment, it's an "and the door belched"
Indeed. Though you might get away with that with no particular
explanation, on grounds of metaphor. "And as he approached, the door
belched forth a lawyer", or the such.
Wayne Throop
: Interesting, absorbed dose (of radiation) has the same units.
Which makes a certain amount of sense, since it's a ratio between
energy and mass. So, "dose of radiation" in terms of energy deposited
per unit mass of victim seems not-unreasonable.
David DeLaney
>: mze...@eskimo.com (Mark Zenier)
>: Interesting, absorbed dose (of radiation) has the same units.
>
>Which makes a certain amount of sense, since it's a ratio between
>energy and mass. So, "dose of radiation" in terms of energy deposited
>per unit mass of victim seems not-unreasonable.
Heh. So perhaps it's actually a label for just how dangerous working near
the drive _is_?
Derek Lyons
>: fair...@gmail.com (Derek Lyons)
>: Precisely. And unlike (say), Star Trek or the CoDominium books the
>: details of how the drive works are irrelevant to the story - so we
>: have a 'and the door dilated' moment tossed in with a throwaway
>: reference to the drives name.
>:
>: Which people here are making entirely too much of.
>
>Hm. But if you want it to be a throwaway reference, why name the
>drive something that raises more questiosn to any thinking reader
>rather than the number it sweeps under a rug?
>
>Sigh. OK, so you're saying it's akin to complaing about the overuse
>of "turbo" or "nano" or even "hi-fi". Just grit teeth and soldier on.
Pretty much, because that's exactly the situation.
>And I could maybe even see it if the *name* of the drive was "the
>c-squared drive". Might not object any more than to "quantum II
>hyperdrive", or many another name. But naict from the upthread reference,
>this was saying that the *speed* the drive acheives was "the speed of
>light squared". And I don't think poinging out the infelicities of that
>is "making entirely to much of" it. If anything, I'm being to gentle
>with the concept.
Except that _nowhere in the text is the precise or even wildly general
speed achieved given_. The whole "the speed of the drive is the speed
of light squared" thing is a creation of this group from whole cloth.
Robert Carnegie
> But if you want it to be a throwaway reference, why name the
> drive something that raises more questiosn to any thinking reader
> rather than the number it sweeps under a rug?
Not every science fiction writer is shooting for thinking readers. It
comes out of emm cee squared, it sounds sciencey, job done, go find
them bug-eyed monsters.
Maybe it stands for Creative Commons.
Robert A. Woodward
fair...@gmail.com (Derek Lyons) wrote:
Are you referring to _The Torch of Honor_ by Roger MacBride Allen?
If so, you are wrong. This sentence comes from page 29 of the
February 1985 Baen edition: "Faster-than-light drive moves a ship
at the square of the speed of light" (I remember noticing this at
the time). Later in the same paragraph, it is mentioned that the
time to go from the Solar System to Proxima Centuri was 105 seconds.
--
Robert Woodward <robe...@drizzle.com>
<http://www.drizzle.com/~robertaw>
Wayne Throop
: Are you referring to _The Torch of Honor_ by Roger MacBride Allen?
: February 1985 Baen edition: "Faster-than-light drive moves a ship
: at the square of the speed of light" (I remember noticing this at
: the time). Later in the same paragraph, it is mentioned that the
: time to go from the Solar System to Proxima Centuri was 105 seconds.
Hm. That seems a bit off. That's something like .03 lightyears/sec, or
a bit more, which doesn't seem to be the square of anything interesting
in mi/sec or km/sec. I guess it's maybe within a factor of 2 in km/sec,
though. Hrm. I suppose we could deduce what length units must be
used, if we assume it's "per second". Or rather, somebody who's less
sleepy than I am right now might.
Mark Stephen
> Sea Wasp <seawasp...@sgeObviousinc.com> wrote in news:485F7948.8080104
> @sgeObviousinc.com:
>
>> Now, that won't be the square of the speed of light in OTHER units
>> (the degenerate case being where your units are "the speed of light",
>> so it's 1 squared = 1 versus whatever else you use), but you'll
>> certainly get a number out of it that you can use.
>
> Or you could pick a certain number of digits, and roll a d10 for each digit,
> also giving you a number that you can use. Or you could use your social
> security number, in units of km/sec. And all of these ideas really work, if
> you are willing to totally ignore physics!
>
The units are the problem: you end up with an *area* accelerating.
This sounds rather like the bloater drive from _Bil, Galactic Hero_.
Anthony Nance
Sol to Prixima Centauri in 105 seconds is roughly 235,000,000,000 mi/sec
which doesn't seem conducive to any units we have laying around. I'm not
familiar with the book in question, but if there's some unspecified
accel/decel time, you could probably use that to do all kinds of fudging
to get to lots of different units. That is, whatever this speed means,
if it isn't instantaneous or constant, you have wiggle room.
Tony
Anthony Nance
>>In article <slrng60g8...@gatekeeper.vic.com>, David DeLaney <d...@gatekeeper.vic.com> wrote:
>>>Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>Wayne Throop wrote:
>
>>>>> "There's" your drives *square*-of-speed, which is not a speed.
>>>>> I'm sorry if you hadn't heard, but "speed" is not "just a number",
>>>>> ie, not a unitless number. Squaring a speed doesn't get you a speed.
>
>>>> Sure it does. You just square the speed. If I'm going 60 MPH, I square
>>>>that, I'm going 3600 mph. I KNOW I'm arriving at a speed from this.
>>>
>>>Actually, you aren't; the units square too. Which is the point. If you
>>>square 60 miles per hour, you get 3600 square miles per square hour.
>
> Another way to look at this is area/time/time.
As we edge ever closer to hectares/(fortnight)^2
- Tony
Wayne Throop
::: February 1985 Baen edition: "Faster-than-light drive moves a ship at
::: the square of the speed of light" (I remember noticing this at the
::: time). Later in the same paragraph, it is mentioned that the time
::: to go from the Solar System to Proxima Centuri was 105 seconds.
: na...@math.ohio-state.edu (Anthony Nance)
: Sol to Prixima Centauri in 105 seconds is roughly 235,000,000,000
: mi/sec which doesn't seem conducive to any units we have laying
: around. I'm not familiar with the book in question, but if there's
: some unspecified accel/decel time, you could probably use that to do
: all kinds of fudging to get to lots of different units. That is,
: whatever this speed means, if it isn't instantaneous or constant, you
: have wiggle room.
The interesting thing is, if you want to go *really* fast, just
tell the drive you want it to be using centimeters per year,
or somesuchunits. To slow down, larger distance units and smaller
time units. Lightyears per year to get AFAL, lightyears per second
to get STL.
I suppose that's where non-metric units would be of use, since there
are so many choices, you could fine-tune the speed, maybe. Of course,
if you choose fathoms, you can only to away or towards the earth, and
choosing leagues means you can only go perpendicular to the line connecting
you and earth. Which you might think would be a bad thing, and restircting,
but for fathoms at least, it'd be a navigational aid if you get lost.
Anthony Nance
You know, I am really really enjoying the idea of a drive where
you change speeds by change units; and with each slightly deeper
thought and extrapolation, I enjoy it more. Where has this been
done in fiction, whether serious or not?
Tony
David DeLaney
>Wayne Throop <thr...@sheol.org> wrote:
>> I suppose that's where non-metric units would be of use, since there
>> are so many choices, you could fine-tune the speed, maybe. Of course,
>> if you choose fathoms, you can only to away or towards the earth, and
>> choosing leagues means you can only go perpendicular to the line connecting
>> you and earth. Which you might think would be a bad thing, and restircting,
>> but for fathoms at least, it'd be a navigational aid if you get lost.
>
>You know, I am really really enjoying the idea of a drive where
>you change speeds by change units; and with each slightly deeper
>thought and extrapolation, I enjoy it more. Where has this been
>done in fiction, whether serious or not?
Mmmm... Michael Moorcock's later works have a scale-changing drive for the
ships the characters are using; Blood and Fabulous Harbors, if I recall right?
d...@tao.merseine.nu
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 19:45:11 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
><sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> Sure it does. You just square the speed. If I'm going 60 MPH, I square
>>is the whole POINT of the multiplication. Thus the units are removed
>>during multiplication, and the correct units put on after the
>>multiplication is done.
>
> But I say you're not going 60 MPH, you're going 95 KPH. So when you're
> going the square of that speed, you're going 9000 KPH or so, that is
> to say, 5600 MPH.
>
> 5600 MPH isn't very close to 3600 MPH. But we both squared the same
> speed. Why the difference?
>
> The best you can do in such a situation is to say, "Curiously enough,
> my space drive goes about the square of the speed of light expressed
> in miles per second, in miles per second, but that's just a
> coincidence."
Quoting Roger MacBride Allen, pg 33 of my copy of Allies and Aliens,
which is Baen's combined Torch of Honor and Rogue Powers, slightly
revised by the author in 1993:
The faster-than-light drive moves a ship at the square of the speed
of light. It's usually referred to as C^2, pronounced "cee-squared",
even though it isn't /really/ the speed of light squared -- that's a
meaningless expression. The speed of light is 186,000 miles per
second, or 300,000 kilometers per second -- or one light-year per
year.
The C^2 drive is called that because it gives an effective velocity
of about 89,000,000,000 kilometers a second, which is close enough
to the square of the metric expression of the speed of light.
So.
-dsr-
--
http://tao.merseine.nu/~dsr/eula.html is hereby incorporated by reference.
When freedom gets lots of exercise, it protects itself.