Internally consistent grav-plating
So in (a lot of) sci-fi we have magic gravity that gives up and down and layer-cake decks, and nice and easy set design for the TV studios. I'm actually pretty much okay with this, but what rubs me the wrong way is the fact that if we can manipulate gravity like this, why don't we have relativistic rail-guns or gravity drives when we move around?
Assume the tech level is around (but not specifically) Battlestar Galatica or Star Wars (Star Trek gets way to broken when you start examining specific techs [warp wave cannon anyone?])
Is there an internally consistent explanation as to why I can have gravity inside my spaceship that doesn't mean other examples of shown technology are silly? Why would I ever have guns or nukes if I can make a gravity gun? Why would I have a reaction drive or atmospheric jets or a RCS system as my main maneuvering drive when I could have a gravity drive take care of it?
My goal is more to have a reasonable explanation for why I can have rule-of-cool looking spaceships, guns that go bang, thrusters that go whoosh, and still have a "down" for my crew on the spaceship. The idea is to have an explanation that makes sense in and of itself (inside its own universe). Handwavium is fine as long as you can explain to me why I can't use handwavium to break some OTHER aspect of the world (a little breakage is OK)/invalidate all the "˜cool' guns/thrusters/missiles stuff, or have the universe self-destruct into something unrecognizable.
This post was sourced from https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/q/56671. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads