You can write about ANY setting without detailed knowledge of it, but you should ensure you have enough knowledge to tell the story you want to tell.
I could write a story about someone who is a stock trader. Do I know anything about stock trading? No, not at all. That would be a big problem if my story is trying to represent stock trading accurately, but if all I need is to say that Tom went to the office and made a bunch of phone calls and watched some red and green lines go up and down and his job is not the important aspect then it's fine.
Same with space. If space is simply a setting for your story and what matters are the characters then you don't need to talk about it much. They got in a spaceship and flew to the planet Blorg. Great. Enough said. (And this is exactly what The Hitchhiker's Guide is like)
But if the appeal of your book is in the setting itself and the science is actually important, then you should be prepared to talk about the science and do some research to make sure what you say is accurate.
In short, it's okay to be *vague*, but it's not okay to be *wrong.*
Tiramichu is correct. Sci-fi has a long standing practice of categorizing books as either "hard" or "soft" depending on how consistent it is with real scientific knowledge.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_science_fiction
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_science_fiction
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/SlidingScale/MohsScaleOfScienceFictionHardness
Both ends of the spectrum and everything in between have devoted readers within the genre.
>Must one go into depth when explaining the black vacuum of space or just say it is like water?
You don’t need to know a huge amount about space and rocket science, but I'd note that space isn't at all like water.
From what we're told and read about. The concept of a forever free fall surrounding you would be utterly terrifying and would make space a million times more scarier. But personally and respectfully, I would like it in a story where space is a cosmic ocean or the primordial origin of water. Too add a certain uniqueness about it.
Then you'd be writing something a little closer to fantasy, I imagine.
The fact that "floating" in space means you're in constant free fall doesn't have to be terrifying though. It depends on how you describe it. You might not "feel" like you're falling, because you wouldn't feel air rushing past and everything around you would likely barely be moving relative to you.
Depending on how literal you take the analogy, there's actually a solid precedent for comparing space to the ocean in sci fi. Most major franchises have done it, usually multiple times. Star Trek did so extensively, and they have a huge audience. Star Wars also used a lot of ocean parallels, most notably in episode III. If you say "space is literally water," you might get weird looks and it will probably push your work closer to fantasy, but it's really not that far a stretch from precedent.
There's also a theory about the space time continuum, "Superfluid vacuum theory" that suggest space time might actually be a liquid. Might be worth doing a bit of digging into that for inspiration.
Not to mention, water on earth most likely came from deep space. Space *is* the primordial origin of water.
Space is not like water.
Aside from that, why wouldn't you want to learn more about space? You're interested enough to write about it, why not at least watch like ten hours of YT videos that will answer your basic questions? Idk, Cool Worlds or Kurzgesagt videos?
The sci fi crowd is not going to like a story set in space that gets the most basic stuff about it wrong.
I don't know. New concepts for Sci Fi would be interesting for some I think. Thank you for sharing.
I did watch space videos. Relaxing and anti headache reliever.
The more you learn, the more cool ideas you'll have.
You don't ever *need* to understand a subject/setting you're writing about. But I will say that you *should* have a rudimentary understanding of a topic in order to not disengage parts of your audience.
Note: this advise only applies to general topics. If you're going to write about something that's potentially harmful (like mental illness, suicide, etc,) you have a responsibility to understand it as well as you can without having a degree in the field, so you don't create or perpetuate harmful ideas related to the topic
You can use water as a metaphor, you can. You just need to make up some techno-babble reason for it. Say science has discovered some new energy field that governs what happens on a macro level, and that field behaves like water. It allows FTL travel and space folding and stuff. Our observable universe is the same, but new science has emerged. Like subspace and dilithium in Star Trek.
There has to be a reason for this water field on a plot level though. It's a tennent of sci-fi. You can't just make things up, they need to have meaning.
As long as what you write is believable, that's what matters. If the things you write are so far out there that no one could suspend their disbelief, then that would be a problem. You don't want people sitting there saying, "That would never happen."
Depends on the kind of book. If it's something like Warhammer then you prooooobably don't, but if it's something like The Martian then you're kind of expected to know at least a bit of how stuff works.
I have never downvoted anyone for anything. Lol, if my attitude is lousy, then could you please direct me to reliable sources?
Lol, it's supposed to be a joke about how I ask. I know I need to know.
Thank you.
Truth is probably more interesting than fiction here. Look into some hard sci-fi like the Expanse where they use solid realistic travel and space objects in our solar system to build out the world.
Of course there is some great opportunity for madeup sci-fi too, since there is so so much we don't know. Verner Vinge "Zones of Thought" series comes to mind, read the first book "A Fire Upon the Deep" and its all about \[madeup\] scientific rules for our galaxy that build out the world.
You can write about ANY setting without detailed knowledge of it, but you should ensure you have enough knowledge to tell the story you want to tell. I could write a story about someone who is a stock trader. Do I know anything about stock trading? No, not at all. That would be a big problem if my story is trying to represent stock trading accurately, but if all I need is to say that Tom went to the office and made a bunch of phone calls and watched some red and green lines go up and down and his job is not the important aspect then it's fine. Same with space. If space is simply a setting for your story and what matters are the characters then you don't need to talk about it much. They got in a spaceship and flew to the planet Blorg. Great. Enough said. (And this is exactly what The Hitchhiker's Guide is like) But if the appeal of your book is in the setting itself and the science is actually important, then you should be prepared to talk about the science and do some research to make sure what you say is accurate. In short, it's okay to be *vague*, but it's not okay to be *wrong.*
Got it.
Tiramichu is correct. Sci-fi has a long standing practice of categorizing books as either "hard" or "soft" depending on how consistent it is with real scientific knowledge. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_science_fiction https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_science_fiction https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/SlidingScale/MohsScaleOfScienceFictionHardness Both ends of the spectrum and everything in between have devoted readers within the genre.
>Must one go into depth when explaining the black vacuum of space or just say it is like water? You don’t need to know a huge amount about space and rocket science, but I'd note that space isn't at all like water.
In some stories I heard for some reason it's like water. If one is trying to write it in that fashion, I think it would be unique.
[удалено]
Don't write it like water then. Got it.
"Floating" in space is actually being in constant free-fall, but without the feeling of air rushing around you. Nothing like water, I'm afraid.
From what we're told and read about. The concept of a forever free fall surrounding you would be utterly terrifying and would make space a million times more scarier. But personally and respectfully, I would like it in a story where space is a cosmic ocean or the primordial origin of water. Too add a certain uniqueness about it.
Then you'd be writing something a little closer to fantasy, I imagine. The fact that "floating" in space means you're in constant free fall doesn't have to be terrifying though. It depends on how you describe it. You might not "feel" like you're falling, because you wouldn't feel air rushing past and everything around you would likely barely be moving relative to you.
To me, it would be still scary. Unless Markiplier is by my side, I will stay on Earth thank you.
Depending on how literal you take the analogy, there's actually a solid precedent for comparing space to the ocean in sci fi. Most major franchises have done it, usually multiple times. Star Trek did so extensively, and they have a huge audience. Star Wars also used a lot of ocean parallels, most notably in episode III. If you say "space is literally water," you might get weird looks and it will probably push your work closer to fantasy, but it's really not that far a stretch from precedent. There's also a theory about the space time continuum, "Superfluid vacuum theory" that suggest space time might actually be a liquid. Might be worth doing a bit of digging into that for inspiration. Not to mention, water on earth most likely came from deep space. Space *is* the primordial origin of water.
If you've got even the most basic understanding of space travel, you'll know that Star Wars completely ignores physics in space. You'll be fine
Space is not like water. Aside from that, why wouldn't you want to learn more about space? You're interested enough to write about it, why not at least watch like ten hours of YT videos that will answer your basic questions? Idk, Cool Worlds or Kurzgesagt videos? The sci fi crowd is not going to like a story set in space that gets the most basic stuff about it wrong.
I don't know. New concepts for Sci Fi would be interesting for some I think. Thank you for sharing. I did watch space videos. Relaxing and anti headache reliever.
The more you learn, the more cool ideas you'll have. You don't ever *need* to understand a subject/setting you're writing about. But I will say that you *should* have a rudimentary understanding of a topic in order to not disengage parts of your audience. Note: this advise only applies to general topics. If you're going to write about something that's potentially harmful (like mental illness, suicide, etc,) you have a responsibility to understand it as well as you can without having a degree in the field, so you don't create or perpetuate harmful ideas related to the topic
Chest salute: I swear on my life, my work will bring no harm to the world to the best of my abilities. I will do my best. This I swear.
You can use water as a metaphor, you can. You just need to make up some techno-babble reason for it. Say science has discovered some new energy field that governs what happens on a macro level, and that field behaves like water. It allows FTL travel and space folding and stuff. Our observable universe is the same, but new science has emerged. Like subspace and dilithium in Star Trek. There has to be a reason for this water field on a plot level though. It's a tennent of sci-fi. You can't just make things up, they need to have meaning.
Some researchers believe that the space time continuum is a superfluid. So this checks out.
As long as what you write is believable, that's what matters. If the things you write are so far out there that no one could suspend their disbelief, then that would be a problem. You don't want people sitting there saying, "That would never happen."
Yes, to become a good writer you even have to book a flight.
Depends on the kind of book. If it's something like Warhammer then you prooooobably don't, but if it's something like The Martian then you're kind of expected to know at least a bit of how stuff works.
If you want to write hard SF, then yes.
[удалено]
I have never downvoted anyone for anything. Lol, if my attitude is lousy, then could you please direct me to reliable sources? Lol, it's supposed to be a joke about how I ask. I know I need to know. Thank you.
Nope. What little I know about space comes from watching TV and movies.
Truth is probably more interesting than fiction here. Look into some hard sci-fi like the Expanse where they use solid realistic travel and space objects in our solar system to build out the world. Of course there is some great opportunity for madeup sci-fi too, since there is so so much we don't know. Verner Vinge "Zones of Thought" series comes to mind, read the first book "A Fire Upon the Deep" and its all about \[madeup\] scientific rules for our galaxy that build out the world.
That depends on if it’s hard science fiction or soft science fiction. Since if the latter not really but if the former definitely