For Science Fiction to ‘Live Long and Prosper’

1 03 2015


I am saddened by the passing of Leonard Nimoy (alias Mr Spock) on Friday, but I know his legacy will ‘Live Long And Prosper’ (LLAP).

As a result of his portrayal of Mr Spock, a whole generation accepted that there were advantages in thinking things through logically, and there was no shame in doing so. For instance, the idea of the Vulcan nerve pinch was Nimoy’s, brought about by the thought while on set that it did not waste effort and energy, and did not have collateral damage.

What he did was to extend Arthur Conan Doyle’s use of the observational and deductive skills he gave to Sherlock Holmes. Sherlock Holmes was inspired from a real life person, Joseph Bell, who was a surgeon at the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh.

But Leonard Nimoy took the observational skills and logical deduction one stage further, and applied to how a ‘person’ would apply it to themselves to change the way they live.

The road of Joseph Bell to Arthur Conan Doyle to Sherlock Holmes to Gene Rodenberry to Mr Spock will not end here, rather it will be built upon.



I can only speculate what that future road will be, but am willing to have a go… (as I’m sure all of the named people in the road would have done had they been here now)…

As President Obama noted, ‘Long before nerdy was cool, there was Leonard Nimoy.’ This goes to show that the deductive, logical, call-it-what-you-will, way of thinking is creeping into our society. Most people have it to some extent, with a specialist minority taking it to the extreme.

Will that minority grow in number and this way of thinking become more pervasive in the rest of society? Yes, mainly because it is being taught more in schools and people interact more like this. We are definitely on an upward trend here and now.

Where will this trend lead us? Certainly NOT towards us thinking all the same and acting the same way,  because there is far too much knowledge for any one person to absorb and everyone has different talents (e.g. one person can have very good eyesight to see things others cannot while another can easily find their way through mathematical paradigms like Einstein did). What will happen is that there will EASIER INTERACTION between all people. Some people will not be able to understand how other people got to where they did, but can more easily accept what they are saying as true. It’s really all down to having a common framework, vast though it is, of doing business with other people. It’s a form of globalisation, but not as we know it, where the variety and versatility of human society will be allowed to increase.

As to where that extra versatility will come from is another matter. We are already seeing some of that taking place in the science area. There are a whole stream of developments under way. Information technology capability continues expanding at a very fast pace. Genetics and its impact on human lives is only really just starting, despite the fact we have identified the cause of many diseases having their basis in ‘faulty genes’. The UK has recently passed legislation to allow three parent families to avoid such diseases. Access to space is being pursued by various means. We now have in effect a commercial roadmap of private venture spaceplanes being developed for the rich tourist industry to be followed by the industrial mining for minerals from the Moon, Mars and asteroids, to be followed by building the infrastructure to gain access to space, e.g. space elevators, which will lead to colonisation of the planets. We have a better understanding of climate change, though more work needs to be done. This will more conservation of the pragmatic kind (we have already seen a major push to recycling in order to prevent greater pollution). The list can go on and on, but what I’ve mentioned is only the tip of the iceberg. So how are these advances, not just in science going to interact with other advances and with society?

There have been attempts to start up frameworks within which people can work. Neil Gaiman’s Hieroglyph project is an example. But these, whilst making some progress are, in my opinion, not really working.

Part of the problem is the inhibiting Intellectual Property Rights. Don’t get me wrong, I can understand why we have to them. People would not invest in research and development because they cannot see a return  without the licenses granted through the IPR system. This system will in due course be amended to make things easier, though at this stage I cannot quite see how.

Another part of the problem is the vastness of what any framework has to cover. Systems engineering has made a start in this area, but again in my opinion, has stalled. It has become stuck in the detail and minor debates of developing turn the handle processes. Whilst this is useful, it seems to have lost the development of the vision of the way ahead, and certainly the widening of the framework to cover more topics of interest. This will in due course sort itself out. It’s a case of when.

Once these and other problems are overcome, there will be a step up in research and development progress. For one thing, science and art will see greater connections between them. For another, society will change in reaction to all this. I’m not sure how yet, but this is the stuff that science fiction should be speculating about.

Notice the ‘should‘ in my last statement. We have seen dystopias, climate change treatises and designer genetics, amongst other things. But I have always been left with the feeling that they are extrapolations of science imposed on how a society works together today. They are not speculating how society might change as a result of all this change in science understanding and artistic development.

What we need is more people like Leonard Nimoy playing Mr Spock and science fiction novels that show us how we as a society could live in the future. 

Science, Science Fiction and the General Election

22 02 2015

Earlier this month I had the pleasure of listening to some academics from a notable Oxford college talk about funding. What caught my attention were their comments about getting funding for postgraduate studies.

The sciences could find the funds to get gifted students to research various topics. It came from both government and direct from industry. This is a definite turn around from not so long ago, when scientific research was really scratching around for support. But it seems the government has learned that it pays dividends for the future of this country’s prosperity.

On the other hand, the funds of the postgraduate studies for the arts was said to be now dire. Very gifted students could not find the opportunities to do research. Why is there this shortage of funds for the arts? Well, I could argue that unlike the sciences, there is usually no obvious way to identify the research with this country’s future prosperity. My gut feel is that a lot of successful postgraduate courses involve developing some form of product, which could then be turned out onto the market to sell. This includes things like advancing computer graphics, designer clothes and novels. But the pure academic research into literature, or any art form that cannot see a turn around to some form of financial advantage for this country is very rarely funded.

With an election due in the United Kingdom in May this year, I thought it was time I put an argument to fund a certain area of arts-based research… namely science fiction and its relationship with science and technology.

It would be advantageous to understand how science fiction helps progress science. The relationship is far from simple as I noted in my post here. In fact, I believe there is still a lot to learn as to how that relationship works. Once we can understand those mechanisms better, we can use them to encourage more useful inventions that society needs, or in many cases, just wants. This in turn would accelerate the prosperity of this country.

If we don’t do this, then other countries will, and as a country we will be left lacking behind, picking up the crumbs from beneath the banquet table.

It sounds so simple, doesn’t it?

So why aren’t we doing it already? Is it part of those famous money-saving measures? Or could it be we just don’t have enough science-based members of parliament?

Or is it that people see science fiction has diverted too far into the realms of fantasy? So much so, that no real impact could be felt by the scientists, technologists and engineers? At least that is the perception a lot of people have.

Which is why I was heartened by the high proportion of BSFA nominated novels that had their main basis in the science of science fiction.

So the message to the person in the street – the days when fantasy still clings to science fiction are coming to an end. Fantasy and science fiction will separate to become very distinct entities. This will happen sooner if the government funds like the relationship between science and science fiction sooner rather than later. It will happen later because the continuing rush of scientific discoveries gathers pace will entice writers back to exploring the future impact of science. And believe me, there’s a lot coming of new science and technology in the pipeline…

Dwarves, a Unicorn and some Magic Dust?

19 02 2015

Well, we are still being showered by astronomical discoveries, and I’m not talking about meteor showers either!

In the constellation of Monoceros (the Unicorn, which is east of Orion, south if Gemini, north of Canis Major and west of Hydra) there is a dim star called Scholz’s Star. In fact it is so dim that it was only discovered in 2013!

It is currently about 20 light years away from us and speeding away from us. The star is a red dwarf with only 8 percent of the mass of our Sun. It has a companion brown dwarf that is about 65 times the mass of Jupiter.

So what’s the interest in this star? It’s the one that travelled through the Oort Cloud 70,000 years ago and was within 0.8 light years of our own Sun. As some news reports have it, it might have been the red star of the Neanderthals. (Does the red star remind you of an Anne McCaffrey novel by any chance? At this point thoughts of dragons also come to mind… ahem…).

Voyager_1_Goes_Interstellar-940x459-620x264Note the horizontal scale is logarithmic.

The other news is the dust cloud seen on Mars. It has the scientists baffled, at least for now. You can find a picture of it here. But it does bring interesting questions about the manned mission to Mars. Have they taken into account any damage such a dust cloud might cause to the mission? And are there any other interesting surprises lurking on the planet that we ought to beware of before we go there?

I did postulate one such surprise in my short story, A Fate of Dust, and it’s one that might just be feasible too, at least on a smaller scale.


C.A.T.-iverse and another-verse

15 02 2015


With the news breaking that Iain M Banks had asked Ian MacLeod to carry on his culture series after he died (though whether Ian will take up that mantle is another matter), I started wondering about science fiction authors and the series they generated.

Apart from the Culture series, there’s Alastair Reynolds’ Revelation Space series, Isaac Asimov’s Foundation and Robot series, Larry Niven’s Ringworld series, Anne McCaffrey’s Talent and Dragons of Pern series, Arthur C Clarke’s Rama series, Frank Herbert’s Dune series and so the list goes on…

Most of these series have been written in sequence. Usually the first makes a big splash and the sequels are disappointing by comparison. I suspect it’s because in a lot of cases there are no really new ideas being added to the series for the second and subsequent novels. And again with a few exceptions, an author tends to major on one series only. It’s as if they have put everything into the one universe and stopped there.

But what makes a good series?

Well if you look at the list I’ve come up with, they’ve all got seriously new (at the time the first in the series was published) concepts.

So why have I got two series on the brew writing-wise?

Well one you all know about…

catcoverneptunesangelcoverlargeGuard Cat Full Detail











There is a fourth story not yet published (for good reason I hasten to add) called Space Blind. And of course the precursor to all these was Agents of Repair published in Jupiter issue 29.

But I’ve been recently working hard on another series. Well it turned out to be another series. It all started with a description of a moon, which grew into a novel, which I could not get any agents or publishers interested in. [That’s not strictly true, but you wouldn’t believe me if I told you…].

Anyway, I had a Eureka / lightbulb moment and decided I would rewrite that novel. But to gain confidence that what I was thinking of would work, I wrote a lead in novelette with a completely new lead character.

Then I had an idea for a standalone short story and looked round for a character… and that lead character fitted perfectly into the part. Two stories, same lead character… this is starting to look like novel to me – a precursor to the one I’m writing.

So now I have three novels to write –

  1. C.A.T. (and his nine lives… excuse while a chortle at my own pun — but the stories above all happen before the novel starts – now you know where Space Blind is heading)
  2. Combining the two precursor stories into a new novel (the novelette left a nice loose end for me to carry on writing the novel, into which I could fit that short story)
  3. Rewriting my old novel.

Obviously novels (2) and (3) are the start of a series, and C.A.T. can easily be developed into a series.

For reasons too convoluted to go into, the first quarter of the novel I’m rewriting is effectively being written from scratch… a whole eight chapters.

Now here’s the thing… I know the first chapter is good given the comments I’ve had from a couple of friends. The second chapter is better than the first, and crazily enough I’m now only half way through the first draft of the third chapter and I already know it’s better than the second.

What’s going on here? This novel rewrite is getting better and better. I also know that when it comes to writing the chapters for the second quarter, I’ll be using the best chapters from the old novel (some of which got me shortlisted for the Janklow and Nesbit prize).

I’m seriously scared I might have something really wonderful and inspiring on my hands. And it’s certainly a novel I don’t want to spoil by rushing it. Even so, I’m sure as heck excited by it.



It’s all a matter of speed….

13 02 2015

Scientists in Scotland have shown how to slow the speed of light in vacuum. See here for details.

What? Wait a mo… slow the speed of light in VACUUM!

And they did it by ‘changing the shape’ of the photons…. but, But, BUT THAT MEANS…

OK…. before I do a logic dump on this blog, let’s do a science fiction list of stories where the speed of light has changed.

Let’s try Vernor Vinge’s Fire Upon the Deep, which won the Nebula in 1993. This identifies four zones. The inner two zones of our galaxy cannot initiate faster than light travel, whilst the outer two can. This is more about the effects of what can and cannot be done about travelling faster than light, than changing the speed. So this really does not change the speed the light.

How about Poul Anderson’s Brain Wave? This is about Earth moving out of an inhibiting field to allow  certain ‘electromagnetic and electro-chemical processes to speed up. This could be taken as increasing the speed of light. But the book concentrates on the effects on intelligence.

There was also a short story C-Change by Charles Sheffield, published in the Probability Zero column of Analog November 1992, or so I’ve been told. I don’t know what the story is about.

[Many thanks to all who pointed me in the direction of these stories.]

I’m sure there must be others… surely there must be… anyway, there are implications about the fact that the speed of light can no longer be proven to be constant at a distance. That means light could be travelling at a slower speed elsewhere in our universe, or even as closer to home, within our galaxy.

Right it the speed of light is slower, what does it mean for black holes and event horizons and all that sort of thing? It means black holes will be bigger.

Now, if we observe these larger black holes caused by the slower light speed, but still believe or assume that the speed of light is as we experience it locally at the faster speed… then we would deduce that the black hole has more mass than it really does. This of course means that our universe would have more mass than it really does.

Does this remind you of another problem? The missing dark matter. If we assume this problem is due to the variation in the speed of light, it would mean that there are places where the speed of light is faster than what we know it as. So that means there must be a mechanism to alter the speed to light to go faster… um… maybe we can travel to the stars faster than we think we can now… um… who’s going to write the science fiction story that does that?


QED – Quid est dixit!

8 02 2015

I came across an interesting article regarding the question: ‘Is scientific proof a story?’ You can find the article here.

It reports on a discussion panel between Marcus du Sautoy, Ben Okri, Roger Penrose and Laura Marcus.

I must be one of the very few people who has a foot in both the mathematics and writing fiction camps. (I’ve got Master of Arts in both… yes I did say Arts and I did say both!)

The panel came to the consensus was that narrative and proof were not, after all, the same thing. 

I beg to differ. The development of fuzzy logic in mathematics, led by Lotfi Zadeh in the sixties, is a way of describing ideas and concepts that do not have a precise meaning and how they can interrelate to each other. For instance what one person describes as big, another person will describe as medium. The english language is made of hundreds of thousands of works that have such an imprecise meaning, as well as ones that have a precise meaning. It is quite feasible to view the language as one very large system of fuzzy logic.

So a narrative can boil down to a proof by fuzzy logic. And like all proofs they can be right or wrong. It was interesting to note that Ben Okri said that literary creativity is highly rigorous (which in a sense aligns with my point about language being a fuzzy logic). You know what? He’s right. Literary creativity boils down to being right or wrong. (It’s also one of the reasons why it takes me so long to write a story.)

Where does science fiction come into this picture? Science fiction uses science as a basis for its narrative. Science has some of the feel of mathematics with all its proofs to it. It also has a foot in the literary creativity camp. You would think that the disciplines required for both these camps would make it easier to move from one to the other.

Not really. Why? Because the discipline of literary creativity is different from that of mathematics. Or putting it another way, mathematics has not yet come up with the theorems to describe ‘the logic’ behind literary creativity.

C.A.T. jumping in here… why do you people think I can exist? 

And the Rings have it….

3 02 2015

Even more excitement from the astronomy circles…. they’ve found a planet outside the Solar System that has very large rings around it. A kind of super Saturn. More details here.

The planet is larger than Jupiter, which I suspect means that it will one day in the very distant future become a brown dwarf star. But what intrigues me is how can the rings get so far out from the planet and in total contain so much mass. There must be some interesting physics going on here. Of course, if work is done to discover the reasons behind all this, it might shed some light on the ring systems in our Solar System (and yes I have designs for one particular set).

Just to give you some idea… Ron Miller pulled together this artist’s impression…




Wow! You see what I mean about the questions I’m asking! And answering those questions could lead onto interesting stories.

Talking of rings, in a sense I’ve had my own ring published… or at least my short story Air of Freedom has been published in Jupiter 47:


And what a cover! Thank you Ian!

… and no you’ll have to find out what kind of ring I mean by getting the story… it’s not what you eould expect. Oooooh the excitement….


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 252 other followers