I used to be one of those Science Fiction vs Science Fantasy guys. Honestly it only works if your familiarity with the genre is limited. Once you take in the breadth of it, there's no clear place to draw the line, and the distinction is worthless.
-
-
You have the ability to magically make wormholes, sometimes they're big ship-sized wormholes you can drive through, sometimes they're little person-sized ones you can sneak people through Everything else is mundane realistic tech
-
The thing being, of course, this isn't actually a "realistic" setting -- any more than it'd be realistic to imagine our world as being exactly like the year 1750 with the one exception of having invented diesel engines, or radio transmitters
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It's what I like about The Expanse series - if you spot them the Epstein drive (i.e. ultra-efficient propulsion) the rest is pretty realistic. And one of the main antagonists is scary precisely because it is not bound by the laws of physics the rest of the universe abides by.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Seems like the transporter is more likely that faster than light travel at this point.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is broadly what they did in Mass Effect. The "Mass Effect" can change the mass of matter without changing other properties of it and so breaks enough of physics to plausibly allow for almost anything else.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Ships in Star Trek have been both to the edge of the galaxy and the center of it, and somehow the former was physics-breaking while the latter didn't involve intense radiation and gravity murdering them.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.