What kind of syfy are you?

I think it depends on the world. There may be quite a range of differences even within the 'Earth-like' bracket. For example, how might things change for worlds with 0.5g? What would evolved plants and animals on such a world by like? What about those with 1.5g? How about ELWs with 6 atmospheres? You are going to need a rebreather there, and woe betide you if you get stuck out in a thunderstorm. The sound waves would blow out your ear drums.

There is also the question of terraformed worlds vs natural Earth-likes. Terraformed should be easier to live on. Natural Earth-like worlds could be lethal given you would have zero immunity to things in it's biosphere. But then you might be just a lethal to things in that biosphere for the same reasons (plus we are humans, and tend to kill everything we meet). But I expect a very healthy dose of handwavium in this regard and people will be just fine. At least we can envisage these issue... unlike the 'Martians' in War of the Worlds, who can cross space, but 'forgot' about biohazards of an alien biosphere.

As for legs, it will be Stargate and it's 101 magical temperate planets with 1g, perfect atmospheres, 1 au distance from stars etc etc...
 
I think it depends on the world. There may be quite a range of differences even within the 'Earth-like' bracket. For example, how might things change for worlds with 0.5g? What would evolved plants and animals on such a world by like? What about those with 1.5g? How about ELWs with 6 atmospheres? You are going to need a rebreather there, and woe betide you if you get stuck out in a thunderstorm. The sound waves would blow out your ear drums.

There is also the question of terraformed worlds vs natural Earth-likes. Terraformed should be easier to live on. Natural Earth-like worlds could be lethal given you would have zero immunity to things in it's biosphere. But then you might be just a lethal to things in that biosphere for the same reasons (plus we are humans, and tend to kill everything we meet). But I expect a very healthy dose of handwavium in this regard and people will be just fine. At least we can envisage these issue... unlike the 'Martians' in War of the Worlds, who can cross space, but 'forgot' about biohazards of an alien biosphere.

As for legs, it will be Stargate and it's 101 magical temperate planets with 1g, perfect atmospheres, 1 au distance from stars etc etc...
It could be argued that anything that humans couldn't survive on with only standard levels of clothing needed for living on Earth and filters for allergens etc is insufficiently Earth-like to qualify.
 
Impossible to know, especially if we are using "syfy" as reference.

In general, nowadays Science Fiction focuses on the technological part of the future while leaving cultural, economic, and social aspects barely scratched or becoming something that we already know. For example, in ED we have governments that work pretty much like 21st governments: Democracies run by corporations, royal autocracies with symbolic parliaments, and union of states that together make a super-power but no one is sure how is working.

Battletech is another universe that comes to my mind, it started like a medieval feudal space opera that featured giant robots instead of knights on horses and wearing shining armor. It was interesting but nowadays the story is almost a generic sci-fi with monarchies.

This goes for the classics as well, Ray Bradbury's "Martian Chronicles" feature Martians that live in a fantasy environment and fantastic technology, but their families look a lot like a 50's American family with a male breadwinner and a female housewife. Isaac Asimov's "Foundation" has galactic empires and mind reading and manipulating mutants 20,000 years from now, but families still follow the nuclear model.

There are exceptions, like Huxley's "Brave New World" where all people are "created" and conceived to fulfill specific roles in a hierarchical caste system where everyone is happy to be on their place and is actually unable to work outside of that specific place, but that kind of "universes" are not pretty as we feel them unfamiliar and unsetting.

Now, technological advancements generally shape and it is shaped by social needs and it is allowed by economic circumstances. For example, 50 years ago, in what Hobsbawm would call "The Golden Decade of Capitalism" the greatest accomplishment of the human race in machine-technological terms was achieved, the landing on the moon. Back then, people imagined that we would have colonies on Mars by now. But 40 years of economic uncertainty and crisis have us on the stage of "We could be going back to the moon in the next 10 years... Maybe!". In 1977 smallpox was eradicated from the face of the earth and by 2020 they expected to have eliminated polio, measles and whooping cough, instead, about 800,000 kids still die of diarrhea and the Americans have to pay $275 USD for one vial of insulin. Not to talk about to the whole anti-vax, flat-earth, and climate change deniers.

So, how is going to be the world in 3305? Heck, that would need an incredible exercise of imagination, worth of writing a book about.
 
Last edited:
One of my favourite aspects of yesteryear’s (mostly pulp, popular) science fiction is how grossly overoptimistic it is with its timelines.

PULP SCIENCE FICTION:
“It is the year 2020 and humanity united under one government has colonised most of the galaxy. Telepathy and time travel are common, and every citizen nearing his death is uploaded to the cloud”.

REALITY:
“It is the year 2020 and apple has released a new, slimmer keyboard. Rumour has it still sucks”.
 
One of my favourite aspects of yesteryear’s (mostly pulp, popular) science fiction is how grossly overoptimistic it is with its timelines.

PULP SCIENCE FICTION:
“It is the year 2020 and humanity united under one government has colonised most of the galaxy. Telepathy and time travel are common, and every citizen nearing his death is uploaded to the cloud”.

REALITY:
“It is the year 2020 and apple has released a new, slimmer keyboard. Rumour has it still sucks”.
That's true of great sci-fi too, like the masterpiece 2001 referenced in your avatar. The great technological advancement of the late 90s early 2000s was the ability to slowly download images of naked people over your land-line. :D
 
That's true of great sci-fi too, like the masterpiece 2001 referenced in your avatar. The great technological advancement of the late 90s early 2000s was the ability to slowly download images of naked people over your land-line. :D
True, absolutely. Still, Clarke was relatively “hard” in 2001 (pardon the pun, Arthur), since other than Aliens as an external unknowable force, the human technology was within a plausible range and relevant to the reality of the turn of the millennium - between concepts of light cryogenics, conventional nuclear propellants for intra-stellar space travel and an international moon base. HAL turned out to be the one, major wishful thought, when examined in retrospect, compared to whatever Siri, Alexa or some prototype neural networks all the big boys are assumingly working on, can only begin to brush these days.
 
That's true of great sci-fi too, like the masterpiece 2001 referenced in your avatar. The great technological advancement of the late 90s early 2000s was the ability to slowly download images of naked people over your land-line. :D
Yet the internet was something that was never really thought of in sci-fi before it really took off.

I imagine most science fiction authors accept that when the time rolls around they'll be hopelessly out, the thing is not to be too short-termist, i.e. put it far enough in the future so that when it turns out wrong you won't be there to realise :) The real point (other than a bit of good space opera swashbuckling fun) is coming up with an idea and exploring the consequences of it.
 
Yet the internet was something that was never really thought of in sci-fi before it really took off.

I imagine most science fiction authors accept that when the time rolls around they'll be hopelessly out, the thing is not to be too short-termist, i.e. put it far enough in the future so that when it turns out wrong you won't be there to realise :) The real point (other than a bit of good space opera swashbuckling fun) is coming up with an idea and exploring the consequences of it.
Kind of, but I think Arthur C. Clarke was somewhat close. There was a publication by him for TIME LIFE that was something like "Man and Space" or "Humans and Space" that he wrote in 1972 and he imagined that thanks to satellites we could communicate with each other with small devices all across the world (Cellphones already existed, but they were far from being mainstream), theorizing that we could get news minutes after the events occurred. He even thought that could lead to some kind of direct democracy where all people from a country or even the world could be consulted in important matters and vote directly to pass or not certain law or action.

The last part has not happened and he was very interested in the prospect, but the rest was very close to the smartphone world that we have today.
 
As a vision for something other then Earth likes
terraformable worlds before the process is complete
I suggest the Suits episode of the series Love Death and Robots.
 
Yet the internet was something that was never really thought of in sci-fi before it really took off.

I imagine most science fiction authors accept that when the time rolls around they'll be hopelessly out, the thing is not to be too short-termist, i.e. put it far enough in the future so that when it turns out wrong you won't be there to realise :) The real point (other than a bit of good space opera swashbuckling fun) is coming up with an idea and exploring the consequences of it.
Regarding the internet, two significant words: William Gibson.
He kind of predicted the internet in the 80ies, pretty much coined the sci-fi sub genre known as cyberpunk, with his seminal Neuromancer, of which global cyberspace network (aka the internet), surfing and hacking are the focal points.

Deus ex, cyberpunk 2077 and all the rest of the transhumanistic, dark, earth-bound sci-fi are largely his grandkids. If you never read any of his works, you’re in for a serious treat, one of the most unique and influential sci-fi authors, highly recommended.
 
Top Bottom