NaNoFiMo- 2010 & beyond

[orrenm]

The only problem with entanglement is that information is being sent faster than the speed of light. I didn't read that article but from memory wasn't there a problem with the two particles reflecting the EXACT change. I gotta look.

 

Unfortunately, once they start using mathematic terms, I glaze over and lose the plot. But I think it can reflect exact change, but the specific details that it can transmit are extremely limited (like basically, on or off).

 

But faster than light is so needed in Science Fiction. The distances in space are just too great for our meager life spans. I wonder if immortals would even have faster than light in their fiction.

 

You know, I think it's more than simply the amount of time, but also how it's spent. For example, if you hate doing math, do you feel better about an hour and a half math test because it's only taking 90 minutes, and you may live 90 years? An immortal may not "need" faster than light travel to visit a system 1000 light years away, because they will live the trillions of years it would take to get there. But is that really how the immortal would chose to spend all those years? The immortal may still dream of faster than light travel because artificial gravity, stale air, bad food, cramped quarters, and soul-sucking boredom may not be the ideal way to spend ten trillion years, even if the "supply" of years is infinite.

 

Orren

[thealtruismsociety]

Unfortunately, once they start using mathematic terms, I glaze over and lose the plot. But I think it can reflect exact change, but the specific details that it can transmit are extremely limited (like basically, on or off).

 

 

 

You know, I think it's more than simply the amount of time, but also how it's spent. For example, if you hate doing math, do you feel better about an hour and a half math test because it's only taking 90 minutes, and you may live 90 years? An immortal may not "need" faster than light travel to visit a system 1000 light years away, because they will live the trillions of years it would take to get there. But is that really how the immortal would chose to spend all those years? The immortal may still dream of faster than light travel because artificial gravity, stale air, bad food, cramped quarters, and soul-sucking boredom may not be the ideal way to spend ten trillion years, even if the "supply" of years is infinite.

 

Orren

 

True but if you didn't have to worry about getting there in a hurry, the ships built could be mini worlds in and of themselves, they wouldn't even have to go fast. I can see what your saying as well, boredom does seem to be immortalities Achilles heel.

[Fizchick]

He put it in the Sharing section, Fizchick (under Using Storyist).

 

Thanks! Found it!

 

now for a little time to read and process...

[Steve E]

Believe it or not, but that's almost pulled out of recent headlines!

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/science/...13lhc.html?_r=2

 

Orren

If God hates Higgs particles then why did he make them?

Ah. Who can know the mind of God.

 

As for FTL travel, I like the hyperspace approach: move extra-dimensionally to an alternate universe that's a pocket universe. (Our universe is expanding so it was smaller in the past. Find a young, small alternate universe, with much less mass so it's cooler.) Traveling a little ways in that universe results in a big translation of position when the ship reenter this universe.

 

Another approach is the Lorentzian traversable wormhole (inflated by the application of negative energy density to a five-dimensional membrane at the quantum foam level--no kidding) where a person could theoretically walk between star systems because any direct observer would observe the traveler moving only at walking speed (thank you for that loophole Dr. Einstein).

 

Hmm. Maybe I could use a LTW to enter a space station in a pocket universe, where each room could take you to a different world. I think there may be a story there.

 

Sci-Fi: Literature's most perfect food.

-Thoth

[thealtruismsociety]

If God hates Higgs particles then why did he make them?

Ah. Who can know the mind of God.

 

As for FTL travel, I like the hyperspace approach: move extra-dimensionally to an alternate universe that's a pocket universe. (Our universe is expanding so it was smaller in the past. Find a young, small alternate universe, with much less mass so it's cooler.) Traveling a little ways in that universe results in a big translation of position when the ship reenter this universe.

 

Another approach is the Lorentzian traversable wormhole (inflated by the application of negative energy density to a five-dimensional membrane at the quantum foam level--no kidding) where a person could theoretically walk between star systems because any direct observer would observe the traveler moving only at walking speed (thank you for that loophole Dr. Einstein).

 

Sci-Fi: Literature's most perfect food.

-Thoth

 

My scientists quote at the end can be easily changed to be the same, but exclude God. That may be confusing the statement.

[Steve E]

My scientists quote at the end can be easily changed to be the same, but exclude God. That may be confusing the statement.

It all boils down down what you, the author, want to say.

- Thoth

[orrenm]

If God hates Higgs particles then why did he make them?

 

Maybe God liked them upon creation? God is...well...God, you know. God has the prerogative to change her mind.

 

Ah. Who can know the mind of God.

 

Apparently, every fundamentalist Preacher, Imam, Rebbi, and so on, who insists that they have a direct line to Heaven and know the absolute truth and are more than happy to kill you or let you kill yourself to prove it.

 

As for FTL travel, I like the hyperspace approach: move extra-dimensionally to an alternate universe that's a pocket universe. (Our universe is expanding so it was smaller in the past. Find a young, small alternate universe, with much less mass so it's cooler.) Traveling a little ways in that universe results in a big translation of position when the ship reenter this universe.

 

Is that how hyperspace works? I never knew! I probably don't read enough classic sci-fi.

 

Another approach is the Lorentzian traversable wormhole (inflated by the application of negative energy density to a five-dimensional membrane at the quantum foam level--no kidding) where a person could theoretically walk between star systems because any direct observer would observe the traveler moving only at walking speed (thank you for that loophole Dr. Einstein).

 

Wow. That's a lot deeper than I go into that sort of explanation. You know, I was reading a Ray Bradbury essay, where he said that ultimately, he considers himself a fantasy writer. The reason being, he never really bothered himself with getting the science as exactly plausible as the extant theories would allow. I would agree with that statement. I did a fair amount of research for this novel, because I wanted to have a solid background in the science, to use real constellations and facts and figures intelligently, but the truth of it is, the science isn't the main thing, it's the "grease" that allows the story to flow through the cylinders so to speak, it is not the story itself. So I create a fantasy based in a science-y background. But that's okay, I like fantasy.

 

Hmm. Maybe I could use a LTW to enter a space station in a pocket universe, where each room could take you to a different world. I think there may be a story there.

 

As long as you don't see yourself at different ages, you're okay.

 

Orren

[thealtruismsociety]

@Orren, Fantasy disguised as Sci FI is cool in my book, look at Star Wars, the most successful version of that idea ever made!

 

Question in this short story I have this passage.

 

"He had started this company more than 10 years ago with one expressed purpose; to find a way to travel through time. "

 

Now I usually avoid putting a hard date down on anything I write, I don't want to DATE the story. Is this acceptable? I figure if I don't date it a year from now, or 100 years from now, the story will seen just as relevant.

[orrenm]

Orren Fantasy disguised as Sci FI is cool in my book, look at Star Wars, the most successful version of that idea ever made!

 

I agree!

 

Question in this short story I have this passage.

 

"He had started this company more than 10 years ago with one expressed purpose; to find a way to travel through time. "

 

Now I usually avoid putting a hard date down on anything I write, I don't want to DATE the story. Is this acceptable? I figure if I don't date it a year from now, or 100 years from now, the story will seen just as relevant.

 

There's nothing wrong with doing it the way you are doing it. I've seen it done that way, and you're right, it keeps your story "near future" at any given moment in time, it doesn't date it.

 

But don't feel that "hard dates" make your story "irrelevant" even as they are past. Orwell's 1984 is still considered a "futuristic dystopian classic" even though at this point it's "future" is almost 27 years ago. The novel/movie "2001: A Space Odyssey" were in no way cheapened or invalidated by the fact that it's 9 years past and we can't suspend people's animation or get anywhere near Jupiter. And I've no doubt that the movie "Blade Runner" will still be a dystopian sci-fi classic long after it's 2019 date has past.

 

I would say that a novel (or movie) in effect creates its own internal fictional timeline, and as long as your story retains its relevance to the human condition, choosing to set a "hard date" will not affect that, one way or another.

 

FWIW, I set my novel in 2025 Earth. I am not worried that the "real" 2025 won't look like my fictionalized version (in fact, I"m sure that in some ways, it won't). Nor am I worried that if my novel takes on a life of its own, setting a hard date will in anyway way come back to haunt the novel.

 

Take care,

Orren

[thealtruismsociety]

Also do you think me naming each minute is extraneous?

[Steve E]

Maybe God liked them upon creation? God is...well...God, you know. God has the prerogative to change her mind.

An interesting theological question. If God is omniscient then why would he ever change his mind? It would imply that he had deliberately done the "wrong" thing in the first place. And and omniscient God wouldn't do that...unless he's a mischievous omniscient God.

 

Apparently, every fundamentalist Preacher, Imam, Rebbi, and so on, who insists that they have a direct line to Heaven and know the absolute truth and are more than happy to kill you or let you kill yourself to prove it.

I think you're being too hard on homicidal religious types. Just let them kill each other, go to Heaven, and ask God personally who is right. (I have a hunch it's the Jainists.) BTW, I don't think you'll find a Hasidic Rebbe, or a rabbi of any sect, who claims to have a direct line to Heaven as the concept of Heaven is not part of the Jewish faith. A direct line to YHVH is another matter entirely.

 

Is that how hyperspace works? I never knew! I probably don't read enough classic sci-fi.

It's one version of how it might work. You realize this is all just math-backed theoretical modeling, right? If you're really interested, drop the classic sci-fi and pick up a few books on quantum field theory, M theory, and the works of Albert Einstein and (Dutch theoretical physicist) Hendrik Lorentz. Good stuff. (It's sick, I know, but I love higher math.)

 

Wow. That's a lot deeper than I go into that sort of explanation. You know, I was reading a Ray Bradbury essay, where he said that ultimately, he considers himself a fantasy writer. The reason being, he never really bothered himself with getting the science as exactly plausible as the extant theories would allow. I would agree with that statement. I did a fair amount of research for this novel, because I wanted to have a solid background in the science, to use real constellations and facts and figures intelligently, but the truth of it is, the science isn't the main thing, it's the "grease" that allows the story to flow through the cylinders so to speak, it is not the story itself. So I create a fantasy based in a science-y background. But that's okay, I like fantasy.

Ray Bradbury (who turned 90 last August) is a wonderful writer but it's obvious that he didn't work too hard on his fact checking. If you want great hard sci-fi writers who use their science as infrastructure rather than just "grease" check out Isaac Asimov, Larry Niven, Jerry Pournelle, and of course, Sir Arthur C. Clarke.

 

As long as you don't see yourself at different ages, you're okay.

Ah. See? I knew you read Clarke (or at least saw the movie).

- Thoth

[thealtruismsociety]

I'd add David Brin to the list of great Hard Sci Fi writers.

[thealtruismsociety]

Also do you think me naming each minute is extraneous?

 

And if so, would it be better to use #, I wanted to denote each minute though.

[Steve E]

... Fantasy disguised as Sci FI is cool in my book, look at Star Wars, the most successful version of that idea ever made!

I prefer to read the hard stuff but I love watching fantasy, especially since CGI has improved so much. BTW: George Lucas once said in an interview that he put every thing he ever loved in the space operas of his youth into Star Wars. I guess he must hate teleporters.

 

Now I usually avoid putting a hard date down on anything I write, I don't want to DATE the story. Is this acceptable? I figure if I don't date it a year from now, or 100 years from now, the story will seen just as relevant.

I think Orren makes a great point about how a book (1984, 2001, etc) can become timeless despite it being set in a particular time. 'Nuff said.

 

Replicant Party Dolls on sale this XMas at a Blade Runner retail store near you.

-Thoth

[Steve E]

Also do you think me naming each minute is extraneous?

And if so, would it be better to use #, I wanted to denote each minute though.

I think it's a matter of style.

Your own tastes should rule here.

 

Oh, yes. David Brin, definitely. His Uplift trilogy was terrific.

-T

 

BTW: Where did da wimmin' go?

[thealtruismsociety]

Hey I put a PDF up of the new draft if anyone wants to see that changes. I think it's pretty tight now, but might need some help.

[orrenm]

If God is omniscient then why would he ever change his mind?

 

Next time God and I talk, I'll be sure and ask.

 

BTW, I don't think you'll find a Hasidic Rebbe, or a rabbi of any sect, who claims to have a direct line to Heaven as the concept of Heaven is not part of the Jewish faith. A direct line to YHVH is another matter entirely.

 

I dunno, I grew up with a Jewish concept of Heaven, called the Olam Ha'ba. It might not be an exact duplicate of the cloud-and-harp pop culture Christian view, but it's certainly of a similar cloth: http://www.jewfaq.org/olamhaba.htm

 

There is also Gehenna, or purgatory, where you see what your life could have been.

 

There is not a Jewish "Hell" per se. There is Sheol, the realm of the dead, but it's not really a burning pit with a devil in charge.

 

If you want great hard sci-fi writers who use their science as infrastructure rather than just "grease" check out Isaac Asimov, Larry Niven, Jerry Pournelle, and of course, Sir Arthur C. Clarke....Ah. See? I knew you read Clarke (or at least saw the movie).

 

Just 2001 the movie, I'm afraid! I've read a number of Asimov short stories, one Niven short story, but not any novels. Nor have I read the other authors, although I've heard of them. They shall find their way into my future reading list! (Currently, I'm still trying to finish Vernor Vinge's A Fire Upon The Deep).

 

Orren

[Steve E]

Next time God and I talk, I'll be sure and ask.

Really? You're not going to just speculate about God's thoughts like we were doing before? Okay. If you get an answer about Higgs, let me know. Scientists are waiting patiently.

 

I dunno, I grew up with a Jewish concept of Heaven, called the Olam Ha'ba....

Interesting. But it seems a little "left field" to me. (No offense meant. Backing away, smiling.)

 

I guess religions can evolve just like everything else.

-Thoth

[Fizchick]

Holy doodle... where does the time go?

 

I went to a copy writing workshop at the beginning of the month and got swept away into the void... there were 3 headed pink goats that rang like gongs...

 

but still, I have gotten to plug along on the book in the wee hours and am doubting myself a little and would love some opinions...

 

I started out with a bit of a plan, but have been letting my panster self keep going... and let the story unfold...tell itself to me... and it's going along well... BUT.. I have this nagging voice that wants me to go back and read it and do a little more character work now that they have shown up and revealed themselves...

 

keep going? stop and take inventory?

 

both?

What works for you?

 

Thanks!

[Steve E]

Holy doodle... where does the time go?

I went to a copy writing workshop at the beginning of the month and got swept away into the void... there were 3 headed pink goats that rang like gongs...

 

but still, I have gotten to plug along on the book in the wee hours and am doubting myself a little and would love some opinions...

 

I started out with a bit of a plan, but have been letting my panster self keep going... and let the story unfold...tell itself to me... and it's going along well... BUT.. I have this nagging voice that wants me to go back and read it and do a little more character work now that they have shown up and revealed themselves...

keep going? stop and take inventory?

both?

What works for you?

I'm an inveterate tweaker, Fizzy. I always go back to tweak the story or work out my character sheets. Yes, this really slows me down, which is why I enjoy NaNoWriMo so much: just start writing down and push through until I finish my first draft. It can be agonizing but it is also very satisfying when I'm done—until I have to start on the second draft. Then it's all about tripping over contradictions and falling into plot holes big enough to swallow a three-headed goat.

 

But that's just me. You have to find out what works for you.

 

"The flowers that grow in the Spring, tra-la, are crushed under two feet of snow."

-Thoth.

[Fizchick]

I'm an inveterate tweaker, Fizzy. I always go back to tweak the story or work out my character sheets. Yes, this really slows me down, which is why I enjoy NaNoWriMo so much: just start writing down and push through until I finish my first draft. It can be agonizing but it is also very satisfying when I'm done—until I have to start on the second draft. Then it's all about tripping over contradictions and falling into plot holes big enough to swallow a three-headed goat.

 

Thanks for sharing your process. I am a bit of a voyeur to the creative process of others...how we create what we create... the journey to the end...the behind the scenes of show...

 

But that's just me. You have to find out what works for you.

 

Absolutely! and the gift of hearing of others opens me to what I might not have been open to or know about that can inspire my own process evolution.

also, getting to know what might not work, and being able to decide if that is a failure I might want to risk/try/defy...

 

Have you dug out yet?

as a former Northeaster, I do miss seeing the snow a little.

We are planning on visiting it some time for a day this winter.

 

warmth to you, Fiz

[orrenm]

Thanks for sharing your process. I am a bit of a voyeur to the creative process of others...how we create what we create... the journey to the end...the behind the scenes of show...

 

Here's my general workflow:

 

1) Start with a basic plot outline. And I mean basic—I have 12 plot points for the entire novel, and the entire third quarter of the novel gets one plot point. Also, fill out character sheets.

2) Do research. As much research as I think I need to make it seem plausible. For my current novel (science fiction) that meant a lot of research, since I'm crap at science and while the book isn't hard science, I wanted to really know the playground in which my novel is playing, even if I could have written with less background.

3) Set a writing goal for myself in words/week. My goal has basically been around 2,000 words/per week. And I've been doing pretty well; I started writing about the beginning of August, and I'm about 38,000 words into it right now. I'd like to be finished this summer, so I'll see if I can pick up the pace, but I have this tendency to keep myself insanely busy at all times...

 

Here's a more specific "individual writing session" workflow:

1) Start writing

2) Do additional research as necessary

3) When I reach a good stopping point for the session, count up my words, note what I want to do tomorrow.

4) The next writing session, start by editing what I'd previously written. That helps me get back into the mindset of what I was writing previously.

5) Go back to step #1.

 

When I finish a chapter (my chapters are generally 1500-3500 words), I edit the chapter as a whole, including changing character sheets, etc. as necessary. The outline of the story rarely ever changes, but I fill in a lot of the gaps, change where things are going, etc. And sometimes entire characters or sub-plots are added or deleted. So my writing process consists of a lot of simultaneous editing, but it also means that I am not one of these writers who goes through a dozen drafts. My previous novel, The Deviant went through a total of four drafts, with the second and fourth drafts being "release candidates" that were edited by professional copy editors (the fourth draft is the completed novel). I predict that this novel will not go through four drafts; probably two or three, tops.

 

Orren

[Steve E]

Thanks for sharing your process....

You are welcome. Let us know what you finally decide upon, Fiz.

 

Have you dug out yet?

Not really. For some reason hundreds of vehicles (i.e., buses, trucks, EMS, and cars) had been caught unawares by the storm and got stuck and then abandoned. That slowed things down a lot since a street has to be cleared of big metal obstructions before it's cleared down to the asphalt. That takes time. Normally this can all be done in 36 hours (max) but at the moment the city is "blessed" with more plows than drivers. EMS and Police vehicles get priority. That's done. Primary and secondary roads are mostly cleared. Tertiary roads are about half done. Total cost so far: ~$20M. Give it another two or three days.

 

...as a former Northeaster, I do miss seeing the snow a little.

We are planning on visiting it some time for a day this winter.

The snow can be pretty. But it's probably worth mentioning that 500 people were trapped on NYC's A Train overnight without light or heat and temperatures in the train plummeting down to 15˚F. Hundreds of XMas travelers were trapped at airports since no planes were coming in or going out. And dozens of people died for want of medical assistance. But, yeah, it's pretty. We'll save some for you. (Fluffy white snowball coming your way, Fiz.)

 

warmth to you,...

And you. (I think I may have caught a stomach flu.)

- Thoth

[Fizchick]

Here's my general workflow:

...(as above)....

 

 

When I finish a chapter (my chapters are generally 1500-3500 words), I edit the chapter as a whole, including changing character sheets, etc. as necessary. The outline of the story rarely ever changes, but I fill in a lot of the gaps, change where things are going, etc. And sometimes entire characters or sub-plots are added or deleted. So my writing process consists of a lot of simultaneous editing, but it also means that I am not one of these writers who goes through a dozen drafts. My previous novel, The Deviant went through a total of four drafts, with the second and fourth drafts being "release candidates" that were edited by professional copy editors (the fourth draft is the completed novel). I predict that this novel will not go through four drafts; probably two or three, tops.

 

 

ahhhhh. such good juicy insight to your process.

I especially like the part about going back and editing the previous day to get into the rhythm of the current... thanks for that... gonna give that a try....

such a newb.

[marguerite]

Yes, I do that too (edit to get back in the swing of things). I also edit in the evenings by taking notes on my ePub/iBooks file and entering the corrections the next day. The rest of Orren's process seems more organized than I can manage. At best, I have a vague idea of the book as a whole and a clear sense of what I want to do in the next chapter or, if I'm lucky, subplot. Even those things tend to change as I write, but I have to get that far before I can make myself start.

 

I do use the character, setting, and plot sheets extensively for early idea development and later, during editing. Otherwise, my respect for the truth compels me to admit that I use the sheets primarily as forms of distraction and procrastination, as I am gearing myself up to write. Only later do I get focused on updating the sheets chapter by chapter.

 

So my process might be described as:

1. Dream up a rough plan for what to do in the next section, including consideration of how those decisions affect other parts of the plot and characterization and whether they create major holes or inconsistencies.

2. Edit the text immediately before that, which is usually the most recent text.

3. Try to get into a zone where the new scene flows onto the page, more or less along the pre-planned lines (but I don't worry too much if it doesn't).

4. Stare at the results with a puzzled expression, then edit as needed to make it fit with the rest.

5. Repeat, from #3 if possible.

Best,

M