Power through Science: more science or fiction in our novels?

 'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.'

- Arthur C. Clarke

I apologise for using such a cliché statement from the eternal Clarke, but it is true. 
It is easy to imagine some future settings in which our heroes are having the usual adventure accompanied by a plethora of events of drama, action, envy, emotions ect. The Science in the Fiction sometimes comes from just comfortably inventing technological gadgets that take care of the small, but somehow crucial details of a story. Without much consideration and/or research it is easy to fall in a trap where technological advancement serves the only purpose of facilitating how those crucial details are affecting and helping the dramatic unfolding of events to take place; and an entire universe to exist in a speculative realm. Thankfully, in my mind there is a line drawn between speculative fiction and Science Fiction. Take for instance power consumption.
Giant interstellar ships are somehow omnipresent. Huge hulks sailing the constant solar winds in open space, either through hyperspace jumps, or through some fusion reaction; non-existent alien fuels also come to mind. Quite comfortably a very crucial element of ship propulsion is taken care of by a method that will essentially provide enough power that any other form of weapon-usage becomes obsolete. A mere plasma pulse will be enough to mess up the delicate balance of a planet's geological systems. And that power is readily available to any sufficiently advanced civilizations that can operate ships, giant enough to transfer entire legions, carry innumerable nuclear heads for orbital bombardment or just casually punching anti-matter bombs from space. In the curious case of anti-matter, the very encapsulating of the material will consume enough energy in the form of electro-magnetic fields that it will not make sense to spends it all on exotic weaponry with the addition that extra energy will be needed to propel the additional weight in space.
But that would take care of so much of the drama needed in novels, would it not? The last thing I would like somebody to think of me is that I am some sort of an iconoclast that is here only to criticise endlessly the work of other people. No! I do respect anyone who had the time to sit down and write a book, a novel or an article; or whatever it is for that matter, as long as it is in proper English. I do, however, like to point out there is an increasing presence of actual nonsensical scientific development being present in the world of SciFi today. Characters casually sail the shifting seas of emotions and dramatized climaxes in a space opera where all of the most interesting concepts are somehow concealed behind the omnipresent background of anything-goes technology that is there to serve whatever needs are emerging in the minds of somehow superannuated sentient beings. Even if it is using machine guns in an universe where characters travel through hyperspace. The very fact there is such technology available implies a huge energy harnessing potential. So huge that the destruction of an entire solar system is a mere push of a button. But wouldn't that be a bit too much, too far, too final and too abrupt for the case of long pieces of novels. Yes. Perhaps too much would be decided too quickly and too much would be erased from the long pages of a book, so that the characters would be sitting there wondering whether they should just dissociate their nemesis and probably several AU(astronomical units) worth of a distance in space. 
Nanoids come to the rescue for any illness, any DNA irregularity and any need to produce a stronger physical body. As long as there is a whole theatre to be played, it is worth the inclusion. But in such a developed stage the very same nanoids become so absurdly proliferated that self replicating, extremely small swarms of bots penetrate the vast distances of space to utterly wipe out life on entire planets, produce indestructible and eternal bodies or create vast space complexes from mere space debris. 
With today's exponential growth of science, extreme enlargement of academic knowledge it is not an easy task to predict where things will be in a hundred years. Less so in two hundred, probably*.
But Science fiction can be so much more than that. In a sense there is no need for so much destruction, when the actual destruction is so devastating that entire civilizations are wiped out in an instant. Despite our proto-consciousness and huge cave-man brain there are other external factors that play a crucial role to the development of a human being. Culture, society, language, family, written knowledge and art come to mind. In a stage where so much power becomes available to a civilization the overall maturity will invariably rise and produce a specie that is more self-aware and careful of it's environment. All of this in the attempt to preserve it's existence. Because life first and foremost tries to preserve itself. No, not by war. Exactly scientific development and the availability will produce conditions in which a being will be most likely beneficial and well dis-positioned towards the outside world. Or perhaps just ignoring it altogether. After all you don't spend much time looking and dealing with ants. No offence to the insectologists.

*Asimov's Foundation series comes to mind, where mathematics is used to calculate the collective outcome of humanity's progress in the millennia to come.

Colonisation of Mars (No, I am not going Crazy)

There are four terrestrial planets in the Solar system - Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars.

Mercury is tiny, fast moving and moon-like world; barren and covered with the scars of many meteor strikes. The thinnest atmosphere there is in the System can do little to protect it from the bombardment of the space debris.

Venus is one angry goddess. Virtually a sister terrestrial planet to Earth, it has a run-away greenhouse effect. Covered with a thick carbon dioxide atmosphere with toxic layers of sulphuric acid at high altitudes, the pressure is much greater than that of Earth and temperature averages 400 Centigrades on the ground. Mapped by active volcanoes this is one inhospitable world, where even a single organic molecule won't survive.

In comparison our own world - Earth, should have really been called 'Oceania', occupies the Goldilocks's Zone - the thin band of space, not too close and not too far away from the Sun where biology can function. It is an established fact in science today, that where life can arise it arises. We are no accident.

And finally the Red Planet.

Mars' radius is approximately twice as small as than of Earth. It's gravitational field is roughly a third of a g. It's atmosphere is almost entirely made from carbon dioxide and it's pressure is a one percent of Earth's at sea level. The most dramatic known terrestrial formations occur here. The Olympus Mons is the tallest volcano in the Solar system. The Valles Marineris - the largest canyon; the biggest desserts, virtually covering all land stretching from South to North pole, scarred by ancient river beds. Mars is a huge world with no oceans and it's land surface is only slightly less than Earth's total dry land area.

The rich history of Mars speaks of times when the atmosphere was thicker and there were oceans of liquid water. Unfortunately the rsmaller planet cooled quicker - comparable to our own, weakening it's magnetosphere and allowing the Sun's deadly radiation to bathe it with rays that stripped away the layers of gases covering the planet. Additionally weaker gravitational field helped to let part of the Martian proto-atmosphere escape into space and so the planet's surface is frozen over the course of billions of years. It's once active volcanoes seized to thunder and Mars gradually fell into geological silence, although geologists themselves say that in terms of longevity in their discipline that happened 'yesterday'. The temperature of modern Mars can go as high as twenty Centigrades on the equator during high summer, or as low as minus hundred fifty three on the poles during winter. During perihelion(the period closest to the Sun) the planet is swept by global dust storms.

Scientists still hope to find life on Mars. In the deeper, still hot depths of the planet. Or at least signs of ancient life locked into fossils.

But to achieve any of these feats we will need to send more than just robotic rovers with limited functions to the surface of Mars.

There is a lot of merit for the Earth-based civilisation of humans to establish bases on Mars. In the long run those will grow to full fledged and self sufficient colonies, but will start off as can habitats dropped from low Martian orbit; mostly scientific in purpose. 

The famous Space Exploration Initiative of the eighties estimated a cost of over $450 billion but Doctor Robert Zubrin famously reduced that price tag to merely fifty billion.

The reason behind it is that the ninety day report from NASA came up with a plan to establish a moon base first and then an orbital construction deck and from there build a large inter-planetary cruiser capable of supporting larger populations.

A more modern and realistic Mars Direct plan (after many modifications) established a different approach. An unmanned habitat, carrying only enough propellant to escape Earth, would be send first. All scientific equipment and means to survive the time spent on Mars would be loaded on board. Another vehicle, again carrying only enough propellant to escape orbit will deposit a small Ascent Vehicle(capable of escaping Mars orbit). A propellant production plant would be housed on the AV(ascent vehicle) plus a large container of hydrogen from Earth. That plant would start producing methane from the Martian atmosphere together with the hydrogen, producing fuel for the trip back and drinkable water as a side product. A third vehicle would be launched that will not land on the Martian surface but will orbit the planet in a Lagrangian point. It will be the Earth return Vehicle, waiting for the ground crew to arrive from the Martian surface. The cycle is repeated, but this time the first habitat is manned by crew. Telemetry would have already established the safety of both the production plant on the ground and the orbital return station in space. If there are any faults, measures can be taken beforehand. 

After landing and performing the scientific tasks the crew would use the small ascent vehicle, which would be loaded with enough propellant to make it back to Earth. That will connect with Earth return vehicle in high orbit, transfer the propellant and launch on a trip back home. The whole operation would last roughly nine hundred days. In the mean time another round of the same cycle would be launched. After each cycle there would be more space available to take various and useful equipment to the growing Mars base, essentially building a small camp on the surface that can start the extraction and production of some more varied fuels and substances that will allow the full exploration of Mars to be carried out in due time. After many cycles the self subsistence of the base will have grown and it will have slowly transformed into a colony, deriving ever more useful materials from the environment; gradually growing plants under domes; extracting water and do an all-around Martian trip with special ground vehicles. There are more than a few technicalities concerning all of this, but the most important one is 'Why do it all?'.

Educability, innovation and improvisation are arguably the most important perks we have in terms of survival as a specie. Collectively we have created a civilisation that has an ever more growing accessible data-base of information. Although abject poverty still exists, the range of people who have their basic needs met is increasing, even of somehow slowly in recent years. The modern phenomenon of global GDP rising, private wealth concentrating with paces faster than the growth of economy is indeed disturbing, but there is space for optimism. 

The technical development needed for the growth of space programs has been theoretically established, but many obstacles have stood in its proliferation. The most obvious is lack of political leadership, pessimism and funds diversion. The technology spawning from it will not only create more jobs but it will introduce economising measures and modern approaches to using resources as well as applied and industrial sciences that will help the growing economy worldwide. The modern chemical rocket, for instance still uses the same methods of propulsion since World War II but their costs can be driven down by newly developed technologies. In time the least useful way of propulsion (the same chemical engines we use today) will be replaced by faster, cheaper and more economical vehicles that use fuel more efficiently and carry us farther for less. 

Not only will newer technologies (scram jets, ion drives, ect.), that have been on the scientists' drawing boards be cheaper but it will help to reinvigorate against the stagnation that is slowly creeping back into our society. However, the initial costs would be high - money wise. An interesting point to mention is that during the eighties of the last century some forward looking scientists were expecting the modern smart phone to become available. They were making prognoses that Mars would be visited by humans by 2010, and bases be established by 2020. None as of yet.

Tight schedules save money and close deadlines could possibly drive innovation; they are hard work either way - for researchers, engineers, scientists, politicians and taxpayers alike. A lot of development is needed to efficiently bring down costs for space travel and the initial research will come at a high price. The technology thus produced will be initially expensive, but over time it will bring vast economical savings. It has become thus possible to postpone the otherwise useful technological progress in time as the task at hand is viewed in light of utmost importance and the long term benefits are lost in the hindsight of events. Space programmes have already sufficiently suffered from over bureaucratising their operations. Like the Apollo missions, for instance. It is likely that the same mistake will not be made again.

So apart from developing technology, innovation and producing cheaper and more efficient devices that will help industrial progress around the globe in time, what else is there in the colonisation of Mars?

The red planet is richer in some important elements and minerals than the scavenged for thousands of years Earth. Some of the fundamentally needed materials for our civilisation are readily available on Mars and present in the soil. The prices for extraction of those materials will be, surprisingly, lower than that on Earth, because the infrastructure on Earth is already developed on mid second millennium and is oriented towards a different kind of industry than that of modern Earth. This means that modern Earth is not as efficient at using it's resources and that future Mars settlements will be established based on economy that uses advanced technology. For instance geothermal power will probably be omnipresent on the red planet and settlements will be developed around geothermal-rich sites for economising energy. Mars-produced solar panels(silicon is readily available there) will be deploy-able and also exportable. The initial conditions of scarcity will drive the population of Mars towards innovation and progress rather than bureaucracy and stagnation. It is likely that Martian technology and social order will renovate that of Earth and the examples of the forefront of exploration will serve to rejuvenate the old world. Just remember the example of the UK during the seventeenth century and that of the US during nineteenth. Both societies bet heavily on development and science and not only did it serve to secure them number one position in the world but also in a human generation the technology created proliferated around the world. The colonisation of the new world had approximately the same costs for Medieval Europe as the colonisation of Mars today has for humanity but that not only did not stop the propagation of exploration but it rewarded those willing to invest. Looking from today's point of view, the mistakes of Napoleon and Tsarist Russia concerning the growing new America are viewed in light of lack of foresight. Will the same lack of foresight be evident in our society from the point of view of future humans two hundreds years in the future? 

Another, perhaps not so famous aspect is that it is much easier and cheaper to reach the asteroid belt from Mars. Obviously a lot less time and fuel are needed to fly regularly there and initially ships with a lighter and cheaper build will be used to frequently fly and deliver high grade minerals and ores(of higher quality than those of Earth) from the belt into the much thinner atmosphere of Mars. There they can be processed and delivered to Earth in ready to use forms, which would probably be quite good for trade, as Earth will be able to supply goods that will not be available for production on Mars for a long time. The flybys will probably include the Moon, which is also cheaper to reach from Mars, again because of its thinner atmosphere. The Moon, like our red cousin, is rich in some highly useful materials and elements and an established Mars infrastructure will bring down the prices of exploitation of our satellite.

  

The sensation and idea of unlimited and unexploited vistas of resources and worlds out there will reinvigorate society and serve to promote a more civil behaviour between human beings. It is not that Earth is incapable of supporting its population but the idea and possibility of new homes will serve to alleviate social ailments on our home and help produce a more polite globalisation. Perhaps failure to colonise Mars will serve to betray the very spirit of life itself and the need of it's propagation. It is running against the natural curiosity of our kind.

After having some conversations around I found out that people are bringing up the issue of space radiation as an obstacle to space flight. Reaching Mars in shielded habs(habitats), that have already been developed by NASA, will not expose human beings to essentially more radiation than that of Earth. It is to be noted that our bodies do need some amount of natural radiation to perform healthily. Not higher doses than those we experience on Earth, mind you! Cosmic rays are the constant background space radiation, but what about solar flares? The habs can be arranged in such a way that the crew can take shelter in the centre of the hab, surrounded by all the supplies, equipment and thick walls of the rooms and outer shields. This will negate the incidence of the Sun naturally releasing jets of particles.  

After the first few tuna can habs have been landed and several scientific sites have been establishes, more tuna cans can be brought in and connected via inflatable corridors. Mostly scientific operations will be carried out and frequent but limited rover distances will be covered on a regular basis(limited driving distances). Propellant will be chemically produced in situ(on site) and drinkable water will be purified and reused. Hydrogen will be the only needed component to bring from Earth to make both of those possible and through water electrolysis Hydrogen can be recycled and used more efficiently.

As time passes more water can be extracted from the environment via the baking of soil, microwave extraction by moving platforms or the placement of large plastic domes to condense the trapped moisture from the ground, heating it with reflective mirrors. This will provide more resources for fuel production and will allow the extra energy to be invested in the extraction of materials from the environment such as iron, aluminium and silicon as they require heat for the chemical purification. Metals can be smelted via a solar foundry(lenses focusing sun rays) on the equator at first as it will be highly economical. Martian steel could be produced, which because of the gravity will be as light as aluminium on the ground and could possibly be exported or used to construct underground homes for the human population. Those will be build from brick, made with Martian clay and Martian water and the whole building will look like an underground mall - vast cellars lit with solar power. The low surface temperature will impregnate the clay walls with moisture, locking them in permafrost which will pressurise the building and provide radiation protection.

As power production increases a different type of propellant will be extracted - ethylene. It can be used to produce polymer plastic. From that, unpressurised domes for growing plants can be made, or the clay underground buildings can be reinforced additionally against depressurization. The gas can also be used for ripening plants. Carbon dioxide is readily available in the atmosphere and it will provide heating via greenhouse effect for the growing agriculture. Biomass from plants can be used to feed animals, fertilisers or for growing mushrooms, which are extremely good at transforming mass into proteins. They also don't need light and much warmth. After some time larger structures with exported Plexiglas from Earth can be build, using Martian plastic, steel and brick to create overground pressurised transparent living domes for the people - some hundreds of metres across.  

Geothermal wells will become number one source of power for a time being at least, as they are economical and provide a steady and reliable source of heat and electricity. In comparison on Earth we have already chosen the location of our cities, therefore negating some of the economising effects of geothermal power, that is otherwise readily available here. Future Mars infrastructures will be more efficient at using next generation technologies. This will not happen before the whole planet has been travelled, mapped and studied extensively. The gravity on Mars can assist with that as an interesting type of jet propelled rovers - performing rocket jumps and driving together will cover vast amounts of land. Different kinds of planes can acutely make use of the unique Martian environment, but those will be used to fly over hemispheres because of the thin atmosphere. The lower electron density of the higher layers of the atmosphere will allow telecommunications using more basic text messages, voice recordings and picture sending. But the same short AM waves can be used to study the ground for underwater aquifers or geothermal wells of interest. Old style navigation, akin to the Polynesian sea navigators could be used to brave the vast desserts of Mars efficiently. The sun and two moons, Phobos and Deimos will provide an adequate guide for the wayfarer of the arid plains.  

Deuterium or heavy Hydrogen is more abundant on Mars than on Earth and a future economy based on fusion power will ensure prises for the rare fuel will be higher than that of gold, kilogramme for kilogramme. An infrastructure for export/import will be vital to a growing economy and the two worlds will become locked in a trading triangle including the Moon. Earth vehicles will need to be heavily equipped for return to a denser atmosphere and burn up more fuel because of higher gravity so a large orbital trade station will be established. All of these technologies will serve an useful purpose in the far future, ensuring the development of the Solar human civilisation and will lay the foundation of the travelling out of the Solar System's boundaries.

A large satellite may be constructed in space, some one hundred twenty five kilometres across, no more heavy than the largest ships that sail our oceans at the moment. It will not move but rather be a statite - a focusing mirror that will reflect sun light on the south pole of Mars, releasing the sequestered carbon dioxide there. It will bring an increase of atmospheric pressure and extra greenhouse effect for the planet. In addition some gases can be released to further the effect of the warming climate. In due time the giant mirror can be focused at the north pole, releasing the water that is locked there in permafrost and giant blocks of ice. Mars will have it's first ocean in a long time. The initial water flow will react with the soil and release the locked oxygen. Brute force engineering, primitive cyanobacteria and denytrifying microorganisms will start to provide small amounts of Oxygen and Nitrogen as well. It will take millenia to introduce a breathable atmosphere but as technology advances and population increases the effects will become exponential.

The future social organisation of Mars will probably have more work available than hands present and will need every man possible. Workers will be treated well and paid highly and the future technocratic order will be on the look-out for innovation. It is quite possible that Martian technology will reach Earth and in turn revolutionise society back here. 

If confided to the borders of Earth humanity will possibly perish in a intellectual back-lash long before the limited lifespan of our planet expires.

Some Future Trends

SWARM ROBOTICS - they 'think' and agree collectively on how to do things and what to learn. More intelligent in large numbers than as individual compounds of polymers. They see and distinguish colours and decide together where to move and how to adapt. A perfect tool for bringing order in their environment. Cheap, small hulls - mouse sized to bee sized, they can help with various activities or be weaponised. Their manufacturing could perhaps be more simple if they just 'pop' out of a template and are quickly updated with simple learning software.

ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK (ANN)- these small collection of neurons, typically not more than a thousand, can have basic learning human processes and develop data recognition patters over time. When integrated into powerful processors they can solve task very quickly. One such use would be in the monitoring and creation of meta data. Increasingly our devices transmit data so there is a vast and in explorable sea of bits flying around the web. That data can be intercepted and indeed ours e-mails can be read and so on. Because ANN has data recognition patters on more sophisticated levels than just recognizing individual words it can be more useful in the interception of particular activities(terrorist messages, for example; although somehow utopian). ANN is a beginning stage, currently used by corporations to navigate and translate the changing trends on the market and become better prepared as to what will be the next big 'hit'. A further development of ANN is a cyborg(cybernetic organism), which furthers the number of neural connections and so moves along the scale from insect learning to actively conceptualising. ANN will be used to process a large amount of data in the future, because the current conventional ways take too much time.

ROBJECTS - it is an extremely delicate process to design a humanoid robotic body, so robots of the future will generally look like tools and objects with highly specialised functions. A flying tool box, a moving ladder, a talking fridge that does the ordering, a 'smart' lawnmower that can trim trees and so on. They are not conscious and are not AI but are specialized tools that need little input as long as they work within a specified, and often narrow frame. With the advent of energy generation which comes inadvertently with scientific development we will be able to power up a cornucopia of robotic objects around us that are doing task on the background. Any menial job that could be done by a human will be possibly handled by a robject.

REPLICATOR - goes back to vN or von Neumann. It is a device that can place constituents in space bit by bit and arrange them into the requested form. Tools and houses alike can be 'pooped' at a tremendous rate, boosting economy and sky-rocketing production. Two methods are available: top down - printing and assembling the parts of an object literally 'piece by piece', and bottom up approach - which is growing one part until it constitutes the whole. Somehow similar of an organic body, bottom up approach can grow matter out of just a single 'part'. Molecular self assembly and self organization akin to those of our own bodies may design grand structures, likeable only to those of the termites'. It is important to note that if we increase a termite colony proportionately so that a termite matches human size, the construction will dwarf anything that we, or any other organism has come up with.

TELE-OPERATED ROBOTS and VR(virtual reality) - Tele-operated robots is to be the first step towards true and autonomous AI. They will be stronger, faster and will give subjective experience of what it is to be like if you had such a body. Developing immersive VR technology and increased transfer data rate will make that possible through goggles, gloves, sensors and a menagerie of gadgets attached to the body. It is somewhat an interesting dichotomy as even today there are people who would rather enjoy their virtual selves more than their 'mundane everyday'. With the incremental immersion a subjective sensation that is not akin to humans will be made 'experience'-able for humans and it is likely that there will be those that would prefer the state of this reality to that of the 'real'.

STIGMERGIC HUMANS - radio transmitters translating brain activity into waves to be picked up by others and re-translated into nerve-stimulating impulses. Stigmergy is not in itself hive mind and can be observed in simpler organisms such as bees, termites, ants, who are collectively capable of creating highly organised societies but are individually quite primitive. In the case of humans, say, one might transmit to the collective whole a sense of sexual pleasure and fulfilment that one is having, therefore giving a wide-spread satisfaction to the group and in return receive processed data, by somebody who had done hard work of analysing scientific findings, for instance. Extrapolations are endless. In fighting units one will be fed data of position and conditions of his fellow combatants and will in a tactic fashion asses the best place to hide or advance to. In simple words - neural pulses are transformed into bits, travelling via the wireless and translated back into neural information stimulating the neurons, producing chemicals accordingly in the brain, activating sensual centres and delivering data.

SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY - What can most shortly be expressed as reprogramming of the code of life - DNA/RNA. It is possible to turn genes off and for instance no longer have to store long term energy in the fat cells, effectively riding society of diabetes and heart attacks. Another possible feature is to reprogram micro organisms to work in our favour, constructing foods or structures that are of benefit to us. One such example could be filling holes in buildings by simply injecting organisms that start producing the corresponding molecular matrix and eventually fill the gap and strengthen the structure. Yet another possibility is to reproduce cells of the human body, by growing them artificially outside of the body. Being scraped from the throat they undergo DNA reprogramming (adding genes more often than not) and are injected back into the organism, being recognised by the body and used accordingly in the regeneration process of various organs - lungs, hearts, livers ect. Or using 3d printing technique, to produce an extracellular organic matrix then populating it with modified stem cells, extracted from the body of the host. By renegotiating the genome sequence of the stem cells they are changed into the constituents of an organ, ready to populate the 'sponge' and grow into a functional organ.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE - an entity is truly intelligent only when it is possible to understand what you want and need at the moment. Witnessing our fellow humans, that may be an inappropriate explanation but... At the moment there are computers reading huge chunks of the available data base. Soon they will effectively encompass the whole of human knowledge in the form of a cloud. It won't be able to give you a compressed summary, though, but rather a large source of data to consult with. Every related topic and paper on a given issue in almost an instant. It won't be able to give you a subjective processed summary, or rather it won't be able to deliver you things on the fly that are relevant to the situation. The better your question, the narrower the answer will be. Only when emotions kick in and empathy shapes thought in ways similar to those of the caveman will an AI be able to discern what is relevant. Even though global data base is available at the moment, robots will only perform menial duties in the years to come. A large portion of the assessment will still be done by humans. Robots will take over jobs on the low end of the ladder.

FUNCTIONAL ELECTROENCEPHALOGRAM - method of translating neural brain waves into electric waves; monitoring and recording them. fMRI scans give insights to the brain functions or more precisely which part of the brain is active based on what operation is performed or what emotions are felt. In the future these waves can be transmitted to robots and directions can be given only by a thought. For instance - robotic chairs for cripples, which are connected to transmitters(placed non-invasive) in the brain pick up signals for directions and execute them, transferring their otherwise immobile patron. These signals can also be transmitted brain-to-brain and a person sitting in one room can receive signals to move their hand involuntarily by somebody else via WiFi. As the technology proliferates it will become possible to make the famous telepathy accessible. Chips are going to become omnipresent. Signals from our brain will be send all across our environment and our surroundings will be manipulated, without us having to use physical movements. Curtains on the wall, the kettle, the phone, the television ect. will all become recipients to our commands. The technology poses some interesting and dangerous interpolations in the face of mind control. Although extremely immoral and twisted use of this technology will allow for mind controlled humans. Another use will be sharing brain power. When you're asleep, for instance, you will literally 'lend' your computational power to another person and help them in the solution of a hard task. Such as solving n-dimensional mathematical theorems of string theory, perhaps.

Escapism or Fiction

Today some of the affluent people are ready to adopt a poor man's attitude. They're ready to dress and act like one; think and swear like one as long as they have a face they can safely present to the public. Still, to say that there is no inequality in society is to deviate from the truth one hundred and eighty degrees. Concentrated wealth has pushed scientific progress, investing large amounts of money into it. One should always remember, though, that the best science has to offer has come from people with pure love for knowledge. People who were ready to think outside the boundaries of nation, religion and regardless of the tribulations of their current times were fully devoting to their work and passion. The greatest strength of the genius had always been humility.

Perhaps there is a lot of aggression suspended in today's, so called, fifty lower percent(most of us here). There is this constant push towards measures of equality in the space of spirituality and religion, and how we should address the exploited, unemployed and employed alike. In reality - generally people who are not quite at the bottom to be frank. The worlds GDP divided by the total population equals about 800 euros a month income per capita. Just think what kind of life you would have to lead if you had about 800 euros a month living wage. Perhaps it would be a perfect more-to-the-left on the political scale setting where prices are regulated, rent and mortgage are perfectly fitted towards the world's fiscal policy, but to even mention these things in that order is to begin writing speculative fiction that is heavy on the romantics side. Observing an affluent family I've had the opportunity of being a guest to, I can say that wealth can also be enriching to society. Not just to the individuals that benefit materially from it. Wealth can also be an agent of cultural enrichment that is not necessarily confined in small pockets and isolated from the public. For instance the house of that family is constantly open to accommodate their guests(myself not necessarily included!); children's classes, workshops, debates and dialectics, gatherings for discussions over tea and large banquets have been held there, providing an experience that is more on the intellectual side of things, rather than the hedonistic. Before somebody points a gun at me I need to say that I am well aware of the obscene differences in income in the world and am in no wise a defender of the abided enrichment of some of the very few privileged individuals out there. Corporate policy of buying freedoms and preferential treatment from governments is one of today's biggest obstacles to progress. And not only progress in terms of money, but intellectual progress as well. Let us just remember that during the Renaissance in Europe intellectuality was a mass phenomenon with people willing to discuss science, poetry, music, art and share their writings and indulge in each other's creative attempts. Life was still hard, but a there was a rash difference between the Dark Ages and Enlightenment.

But the fact that a rich man might be mistreated only because of the amount of money he possesses is also an inequality in a sense. To cut somebody from a group is to propel that somebody in search for social inclusion. Or in simple words: if a rich man is treated badly because of his affluence, then he will necessarily seek the company of other people that will share his status. And that does not bold well for the general society. A good majority of affluent people have worked hard for their status and have often times borrowed sums for education; to start businesses and so on. They are knowledgeable, classy and pragmatic. They have an enriched culture. I am not discussing morality here. In a perfect setting every rich man will have adopted the approach of that family I mentioned earlier. Sharing their house for children's classes, feasts and whatnot. That helps to alleviate so much of the sensation of difference. And it helps to define what one wants of life.

Really? Yeah really!

As often is the case with Hegel's philosophy, or the doctrines of the eastern religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism or Dzen-Buddhism the negative in the world is needed to define the positive. They're really one. Or in different words - the positive cannot exist without the negative. Or the negative helps to outline the positive. In classical Greek drama the Good is having about two thirds of the total time on stage, while the evil has about one third. And quite often evil is transformed at the end. The negative flows into positive. One necessarily wonders - Why all the suffering, then? Not being completely ignorant of the lowly conditions of a significant number of human beings out there, I would like to point out there is a large amount of people self-inflicting sadness upon themselves, none the less. People with resources choosing to devote their mental bandwidth with plethora of possible ideas, not necessarily contributing to some betterment of society. Religion is one such thing. In the, what may appear as slightly dogmatic, doctrine of Baha'u'llah, there is a specific period ascribed to his dispensation on Earth. Just knowing about that eradicates any fundamentalist inclinations from every devout follower of that Faith. Just think about how many religious conflicts have been started with the excuse that a certain prophet had been final, complete;an agent of absolution! So in this case the negative can be described as the necessary ending of the dispensation(that much needed force of destruction) and the positive in the coming of the next prophet plus the absence of fundamentalist inclinations. Two thirds plus one third. Not a bad deal, one might say.

Relative to science fiction? Why not?!

There is an utopian and dystopian approach to writing some of the piecies. With the utopian being some kind of world where there no longer is the need for money(Yes I would love to live there). Some kind of a social heaven, where everything is taken care of by humane science, space travel is equalled to taking a cab and teleportation is possible. And the dystopian being the post modern society, controlled by corporations, oppressed without even realising it and AI taking over, casually dropping anti-matter warheads with mathematical precision. OK these are just two general and very quirky examples, but regardless, the general frame is there. Are any of these likely if the future is rooted in the world of today? I think neither. In fact it is more likely that inequalities will be carried in the future and science itself will not be crucial to alleviating the curse of class segmentation. Morality is the one and only integral to just society. It is perhaps time to say that differences in income do not necessarily have to breed inequality or social tension. Remember that wealth has played it's part in progress. Prosperity, though, should not be attributed only to or identified solely with wealth. It is only when carried to an excess that differences in income, transforms into inequality and continuing down the road through class segmentation, end into oppression. In a way, difference in income contributes to turbulence and progress; lack of extremes and excessed constitute justice and strong moral social foundation. Looking at today's world that might already be a fictional society.

Anyone remember Far-Scape?

Not very scientific, but regardless, the romanticism of it all was the thing that kept it going. A lost human being hurled to the far corners of the universe(or galaxy). Reuniting himself with alien humanoid species on a ship of their own. Speaking common language; having common sensations; feeling for themselves communally. They have differences, but by overcoming them they build a motley crew, who never the less is sticking together and even end up falling in love with each other. Even without having any special abilities and the ETs necessarily being more developed, our human protagonist is accepted for who he is and the adventure continues as they don't submit to any particular existing form of governance but rather seek their own way, overcoming multiple villainous schemes. Some of the characters and situations are quite cliché, but it ended breeding a lot of attention from the public. People loved it. But I wonder: what if the story was about a pirate ship on Earth. During the fifteenth century sailing the seas and picking up different races of humans and overcoming various difficulties, building a strong team and so on. Would then that series have been so popular? Is the lacking scientific explanation and sudden change of scenery to a world so far away, so necessary to produce strong romantic feelings in the audience? Or is it the freedom given to the characters? I think, subtly, most of us dream of a better world out there. But regardless, in science fiction, the science should never be omitted. Social transformation and change are difficult to simulate or predict, but it's much sought after by the public. It is easy to dream after a world where everything is taken care of, but it is hard to imagine how the English language would have evolved in a century, for instance. Both are cases of science fiction. But one is generally much more easy to fall towards to. Star Wars is, they say, highly unlikely. But there is something in the richness of the characters and the adventure in the throughout the universe that keeps people coming back for more. The evil alien leader appears here and there, sending his blood thirsty throngs to fight humanity, but it is much more rare to see an actual dissection of an alien body done in seeking understanding of this new encounter. The second one is more likely and harder to imagine.

Society with diversity but without excessive inequalities calls for imagining morality on a global level that is attributable to the wider public. But how, then, would the villain look and behave? What would be the drive behind the story? Would there be a need of a villain? Remember that the negative is necessarily needed to be connected with suffering and pain. Would it be recognized by the public, if there was no particular 'bad' character in a piece of SciFi, necessarily opposing the protagonist; or our team of do-gooders being able to exist outside of an organized social system. The classical approach is put on your mask and fight evil around every corner. It could also be that in science fiction it will be scientific to describe society that is guilty of it's own suffering, through lack of understanding and inclusion and the fiction part is handled by the attempts done by the society to include stronger moral foundation. Science will only be able to help, but it will be morality that will have the final say.

On Science Fiction.

Two very different opinions are echoing in my mind at the moment. One of them is Michio Kaku's words 'Science brings prosperity', the other is a close friend of mine, who said 'Science is driven only by desire to control'. Looking around my room today I see a kind of a scholarly cell that has become universal in its function, that is to say is used in more than one ways with(thankfully) relative satisfaction. And science had a lot to say in compressing large amounts of actual space into a tablet, laptop, smartphone and a broadband router. So an immediate conclusion is that science has kept me better connected to the knowledge base out there as well as with other human beings. And it has also provided means of entertainment not only through the easy access to media, but also by easy-to-reach inspiring ideas around which books, games and movies are based.

To say that I have a deep fascination with science fiction is to generously describe me as ...well...'generous' - I still haven't read a piece of SciFi that I can honestly say that I truly love. I like some ideas, but I never felt absolutely immersed or particularly impressed by the worlds drawn in the pieces of work I've read. Not too 'science'-y, not too 'fiction'-y; quite 'drama'-y, though. And here is the slight irony! As I myself am writing SciFi as we speak, probably no body would like what I write - hahaha, who's the loser?! But there is light in the tunnel! I've grown a bit and I, not only see, but also appreciate the hard work needed to produce a whole book, with all the characters and scenarios and 'turn-around's and the plethora of details needed to finish a piece, be it a SciFi or whatever other book. Sometimes I can even see where the author might have struggled for words, where their writing had come to a halt, and leaning back on the chair, hand on their mouth, serious and calm gaze staring into the wall, thinking about how to pick it up again. For that, every author deserves support!

What somebody might call 'critical thinking' to me shapes itself as a dialectical 'other' voice in my mind. It is thinking if the presentation of a certain technology - non-developed at the moment, would be feasible, realistic, economic and properly simulated. A little example. Humanoid robots have been, are and will be popular in SciFi. But modern science says that, even if we had true independent AI (which we don't), humanoid bodies are not exactly easy to engineer. In fact to construct a humanoid is to take away from a very specific physical task, that a particular robot could have been adept at doing and introduce a multitude of tasks that the robot would be mediocre at best. Out of pure pragmatics humanoid bodies are initially highly unlikely, either as mindless and obedient, all-sufficient servants or as temples of independent and unique consciousness. A much more likely scenario would be to house that independent thinking mind into ... any form given, and then realistically lay down the facts and limitations of homo-sapience in a reciprocal conversation. And if we could please, with the help of your computational power and critical thinking, construct a body YOU would feel comfortable with.(Sorry Chappy, I still like you!) Singularity, after all, can have many faces.

What immersion in hardcore modern science does, is that it provides a point of origination to a very wide framework, in which a mind can simulate at will. We do need a solid ground to begin with, though.(Is somebody pointing a gun at me already?) Drama can exist in any fictional situation, but to create drama that exists in properly simulated world in the future, requires acquiescence of facts and insights that are coming from researchers on top of the tide of R&D in academic communities. In a recent work of SciFi I have read, there is an extreme focus on sentient robots depicted as sex machines and all the other technologies just stand in the background unaddressed. Sexual Connoisseurship is what is attributed to them most often and scenarios presenting sexual acts(be them rapes or whatever...yes the robots get raped) fill a significant part of the text. In other words, to have proper sex, we - the hairy monkeys, have invented consciousness and brought it into submission with short circuits that will fry the hardware of we are not obeyed. Such a cowardly act!(I am wondering if this is what it takes to sell the book, though?!...)

But to get back to the very beginning - 'Science brings prosperity' vs 'Science is here to control us'.

I have positioned myself safely in between these two, almost opposite sides. I can definitely see where each point is coming from and I agree with each one of them in a way, perhaps making making myself comfortable in the process? But I truly see the meaning of them both. Science also makes SciFi very interesting and challenging! I mentioned earlier the word simulation. Our brains are actually so good at it. A tool that has served us well in our evolution. The schedules, the buses, the education, the shopping, the planning, the organising, the reviewing, the writing, the conversations we sometimes have with ourselves(if you don't, you must be one of those lucky 0,001%) and so many more activities. We are just good at placing ourselves in a different situation and ponder on the outcomes. Anxiety control can be an issue. But it is, never the less, a fictional simulation(beware). And without solid base in the form of external facts and limits, be it humans, time, ideologies, religion, rules ect. our simulation can be harmful to us. A tool well used is a tool well placed. You don't stick a handle into the screw, in other words.

So Science Fiction as a simulation of what the world would be if... And the "simulation" bit is already handled by the "fiction" in the name. That would leave 'science' to be defined. The predictable, measurable, reproducible, factual, testable on demand. This is the point of origination that the simulation would be right to have. What is today, projected into the future, develops into something different over a period of time, during which the "fictional" had happened. The 'Science' then would include human morality, nature, cosmic principles of behaviour. Further - nature, ideology, technology, religion, all rooted in the 'right now'.  And the beauty of expression needed to glue it all in one continuous flow - start to finish. These sound like quite the prerequisites for writing a piece of SciFi already!! But at the root of it all lies deep curiosity and fascination with knowledge.