Space/Science — HabitableZone

Space/Science » in reply to Idiotic Heinlein parallels...

The future doesn't end up as a science fiction clone.
Jacob Samorodin — (archived)

>Sleek spacecraft, looking like V2 rockets with wings, landing
on the 'moon's' surface [an imaginary moonscape of jagged mountains].
> Or a Titan landscape with blue skies.
> Bradbury's Mars basically an updated version of Edgar Rice Burrough's
Mars with canals.
> Heinlein's 'more realistic' space science-fiction is indeed filled
with erroneous presumptions.
> Andre Norton's science fiction visions are interstellar for the most part,
and often ludicrious as far as known physics are concerned.
My point?....Science fiction views of the future in space have tended to be off base or unlikely...When was the last time an astronaut
got blasted to the moon in a giant cannon and his flesh survived intact?...Or when have you ever seen a piece of Cavorite?
Or why wasn't there a real HAL computer in 2001?
Get the picture?

So where does that leave the future?
ANSWER:
Perhaps the "future" will look after itself.....or one mightier than the cosmos, an intangible intelligent being [an science-fiction concept in itself] will guide it.
Where does that leave you?
It depends...How much money do you have? Or how much are you willing to spend on what the future offers in space, as far as private
space projects are concerned?
cheers.

Jacob

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (39 posts)