Science Fiction Writing Thread

[Anonymous No.4910131]

Hello /lit/izens of the writing persuasion, which ones of you are currently working on something within the science fiction genre Who am I kidding, everyone on /lit/ is writing modernist finnegans wake likened bullshit, but might as well try

Give a summary, given an idea, talk about your work.

[Anonymous No.4910155]

>>4910131
I'm writing one about a contemporary war where the weapon is emotional abuse. I.e: people build robots to whisper insecurities into generals ears (or their children) until they off themselves or become combatively incapacitated

[Anonymous No.4910156]

I'm writing something with several species (six) in it besides human that are intelligent. One of them is another humanoid shaped being.

Two of them do not even naturally communicate with sound (one with pheromone signals, and one through a nerve bundle on the end of a tongue like limb that they connect with one another). A third used to do sound but stopped after they became a synthetic species and can now simply use data.

Four of them require roughly the same atmospheric needs (or can find a composition that is survivable for everyone with simple implants installed). One however requires a pressure suit and all their interactions with other species are done through bubble suits.

For a full list of the species (I'm describing them as close as it gets in human standards):
>Sentient flat worm colonies
>four limbed quadrupedal athropods
>amphibious three limbed headless things
>synthetics (come in numerous shapes)
>suit wearing roughly humanoid reptilians
>humans

I've always seen everyone complain about "too human" aliens. I tried to make them not, but not sure really where I stand.

[Anonymous No.4910159]

>>4910155
Sounds like Futurological Congress

[Anonymous No.4910166]

>>4910159
I was about to type "sounds like lem to me."

[Anonymous No.4910174]

>>4910155
Wouldn't it be easier to make robots that inject drugs that cause depression and suicidal thoughts?

[Anonymous No.4910176]

that gif is neat

[Anonymous No.4910178]

>>4910156
A "too human" alien is any alien that can communicate with a human, or the idea that human culture, ideas, morals etc are in anyway similar with an alien species.

[Anonymous No.4910186]

>>4910178
But that's idiotic. The struggle to survive develops culture depending on your niche in an ecosystem. You're just talking out your ass that they would develop culture complete unintelligible by humans.

Come up with something that could develop naturally as a culture that is completely disunderstandable by humans.

[Anonymous No.4910192]

>>4910178
Not how cultural development work m8. Pack mentality (which is required if you want to form culture) slots you down certain pathways for said development.

[Anonymous No.4910195]

>>4910186
You seem to be the retarded one billy. Go read Stanislaw Lem and come back for a discussion. We have a sample of exactly 1 when talking about life and intelligent life. Anything said about aliens is 100% speculation. For all we know the sun could be just as alive and thoughtful as you are.

[Anonymous No.4910207]

>>4910155
I don't see how this is more efficient than just bombing everything.

But robots that call people mean names until they die sounds funny anyway.

[Anonymous No.4910210]

>>4910186
Natural is not in it. I'm saying that they may not even develop culture, culture is a human condition.
The only way I could imagine aliens that shared common ground with humans is if they were descended from humans.

[Anonymous No.4910211]

>>4910195
> For all we know the sun could be just as alive and thoughtful as you are.
Actually we know that this is impossible. Also if Lem is who you are taking from for societal and cultural development then you're the retarded one. Out sample size is not one for special interactions, we have a sample of numerous species who all display characteristics similar to that of humans.

Chimps, dolphins, rats, crocodiles, crows. Numerous species show human like social tendencies. Try learning something from a place other than science fiction.

[Anonymous No.4910224]

>>4910211
>Actually we know that this is impossible.
Why? All those species you unfortunately mentioned developed on earth from the same start as man. Stop being retarded.

[Anonymous No.4910226]

>>4910210
What are you smoking? We look at our planet, we see that nearly every species displays similar mental characteristics when dealing with one another. It is not humans who have a condition separate from animals, life is a condition that forces you down certain alleys. We are simply a more complicated application of the system. If a species developed naturally then it will exist in an environment similar to that of species on earth.

You know why? Chemistry only works in one way for the creation of life, and can only start and develop in certain manners.

[Anonymous No.4910227]

>>4910174
No, because this can be done without anybody pressing charges. Once a drone trespasses the bounds of free speech, it becomes a police matter. The grey zone, I think, would give the story some realism.

>>4910159
>>4910166
FUCKING Lem. Beats me every time.

[Anonymous No.4910241]

>>4910207
Well it's kind of like the cold war, in the sense that outright war is undesireable.

[Anonymous No.4910242]

>>4910155
>>4910207
So it's like everyone's on 4chan?

[Anonymous No.4910243]

>>4910224
A star has absolutely nothing required to display patterned repetition. A basic requirement of any self awareness. Unless you are telling me that a plasma reaction could be sentient because "Hey, we dun kno", you're the fucking retard. You don't just paint broad penstrokes for what is considered "life" and "intelligence". There are some basic requirements that can't be escapes.

[Anonymous No.4910245]

>>4910226
> If a species developed naturally then it will exist in an environment similar to that of species on earth.
Source, your ass. We don't even haven't reached a definition of life yet. Human and earthly life could only be created in a environment similar to ours. That doesn't rule out the endless number of other possibilities.
Facist mod making positivism and ayn rand bannable when

[Anonymous No.4910258]

>>4910243
>eleven year cycles and thousands of other cycles with deviation and god knows how many others unknown ones
>not patterned repetition.
>>4910245
>Facist mod making positivism and ayn rand bannable when
This

[Anonymous No.4910269]

>>4910243
>broad strokes
>he can't even prove his own self awareness.

[Anonymous No.4910277]

>>4910245
>We don't even haven't reached a definition of life yet.
In a philosophical sense, yes. In a scientific sense there are base requirements for life. Separate the two.

Very few elements can form the kinds of bonds required for information storage, something needed to create life. Try and define something as life that does not have internal information storage.

[Anonymous No.4910278]

>>4910226
Why are you so close minded?
>We look at our planet
But we are not talking about our planet
>Chemistry only works one way
There is a possibility that silicon based life forms exist; if they do in fact exist, the way we understand life may be fundamentally different.
>life is a condition that forces you down certain alleys
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this, but I assume you mean as something that lives (something that must labour to sustain itself), we have some sort of solidarity with all living things. This may be true, but what sets us apart as humans, what conditions (and also other living things) us is our ability to make artifice. We no longer "develop naturally", and thus neither do any of the animals in contact with us.

[Anonymous No.4910283]

>>4910277
>In a philosophical sense, yes. In a scientific sense there are base requirements for life. Separate the two.
They are the same thing.
>information
Never mentioned that. But who knows, maybe in a far flung galaxy something that things does not store information.

[Anonymous No.4910288]

>>4910258
>thinking that a plasma reaction could be sentient due to intersystem reactions

Except the sun has absolutely no mechanisms for control over it's reactions.

>>4910269
Yes, greentext. Life is not a broad definition by a scientific standard, only a philosophical one.

[Anonymous No.4910294]

>>4910288
>thinking organic reactions and Na+/K+-ATPase could create sentience
>>4910288
>Yes, greentext. Life is not a broad definition by a scientific standard, only a philosophical one.
This is what americans get for giving debate classes instead of scientific epistemology and other useful things.Step it up america

[Anonymous No.4910295]

>>4910288
To assume that something is so because we haven't observed it is very unscientific. Can we explain sunspots and solar flares entirely?

[Anonymous No.4910297]

>>4910278
>There is a possibility that silicon based life forms exist
No it doesn't if you understood basic chemistry.


>>4910283
If something does not store information, then how can it be considered an ordered molecule, a basic scientific requirement for life. Self replication, internal information store, trend towards order both basic ideas of what life is.

[Anonymous No.4910306]

>>4910278
Didn't include this in my last post, but want to address this.

>us is our ability to make artifice
This is by no means unique to humans. Many animals use tools, we merely are better at it. Chimps sharpen sticks and use them to hunt for instance.

[Anonymous No.4910308]

>>4910295
>To assume that something is so because we haven't observed it is very unscientific.
BUT SCIENCE IS LE TRUTH IT SEEKS ABSOLUTE AND ULTIMATE TRUTH WHAT ARE YOU A CREATINIOST DO YOU THINK DARWIN IS WRONG?
>, then how can it be considered an ordered molecule
I have no idea.
>basic scientific requirement for life
Source needed.

[Anonymous No.4910312]

>>4910295
>Can we explain sunspots and solar flares entirely?
Actually we do understand the mechanisms behind them and why they occur even if we can not predict when they occur.

[Anonymous No.4910317]

>>4910308
Meant to quote this positivist.
>>4910306

[Anonymous No.4910323]

>>4910312
Actually we don't and you should stop talking out of your fat american ass. Limit your stupidity to yelling to yourself about how creatinists are mean on IFLS.

[Anonymous No.4910336]

>>4910323
>hurr
It's still a matter of debate, but there is certainly a leading theory on why you ignorant twat.

[Anonymous No.4910344]

Guys, can we just talk about sci-fi instead of being retarded while trying to define life? Why does every fucking sci-fi thread have to be ruined like this?

Can we just agree that if life develops that is so unintelligible to humans that we can in know what comprehend it, that we just will probably not interact with it? Also can we agree by the fact that humans developed that human like species can develop, and this humans will probably interact with them given the chance?

[Anonymous No.4910463]

I actually have a being in my book that /lit/ seem to have an infatuation with. A being completely beyond the understanding of every other species, that must lower itself to a level comprehensible to others to merely interact with humans (the two he does in the book).

It's currently imprisoned in Andromeda, the entire galaxy essentially amounting to a trap to try and keep it in place instead of mucking about with the other roughly organic life forms (doesn't work perfectly, but he (it refers to itself with male pronouns) can't leave). Humans, and the other species in the book, were either influenced into creation by it.

It's called Red Shoe.

[Anonymous No.4911077]

>>4910463
>The entire galaxy is a trap