Analog Science Fiction and Fact - July-Agust 2014
Page 35
The mid-September 1983 Probability Zero short-short "Information Implosion" foresaw the problem of having twelve thousand channels "but nothing on." "Critical Path" (mid-December 1983) envisioned a future Analog -type magazine that allowed e-mail submissions (which practice ASF began just two years ago). In 1983 Stan asked me to contribute a short story for an upcoming humor edition; "Capitol Punishment" (Mid-December 1984) was probably the first fiction ever to discuss the possibility of micro black holes, now commonly accepted. Following Campbell's avowed interest in unusual technologies, I suggested to my friend Chris Dunn that he submit an article to Stan. "Advanced Machining in Ancient Egypt?" came out in the August 1984 issue. Chris has since published books on the subject and gives talks worldwide.
The mid-December 1986 novelette "The Hephaestus Mission" took place during a future civil war in Mexico, a presentiment of the Chiapas insurrection that began in the 1990s. In addition to coining the term "warbots," the story proposed a unique physics solution that resolves time travel paradoxes. The January 1989 issue featured "Indian Summa," one of the few fantasy stories in ASF (dealing with magic), wherein a Cherokee scientist says, "Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology." Skipping forward to the twenty-first Century, "The Alien at the Alamo" (October 2010), though fictional, gave me a chance to put forward my actual beliefs about possible extraterrestrial visitors.
Science Fact and Speculation
The September 1992 fact article, "Manufacturing Magic," was the first popular article to foresee today's 3D printing revolution and beyond. (A Sandia Labs video based on that article won an Industrial Oscar-type award in 1995.) The AnLab Award-winning 1993 fact article, "Single Stage to Infinity!", was the first popular presentation of the Delta Clipper Experimental Single Stage To Orbit (DCX) project. In that piece, speaking of "the first true spaceship," I contended that it would "take off and land the way God and Robert Heinlein intended." Those last seven words have since become a mantra in the science fiction fandom community and in the entrepreneurial New Space industry.
Dr. K. Eric Drexler, nanotech guru, made his first article appearance in Analog as coauthor with Chris Peterson, of "Nanotechnology" (mid-December 1987). As a White House Fellow in late 1992, I was able to arrange for Drexler to talk about nanotech to my bosses at the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP—"the White House Science Office"). Those government officials did not like Drexler's evangelism, and offered no support. But as the OSTP author of the chapter on advanced manufacturing for the April 1993 publication, The President's Report to Congress on Science and Technology, I penned the first White House endorsement of "molecular nanotechnology" and "solid freeform fabrication," the latter now known as "3D printing." In this case, it may be that Analog had an influence on national policy.
SIGMA
Analog may continue influencing policy. As related in the article, "SIGMA: Summing Up the Speculation" (September 2012), while at the White House Science Office in 1992 I formed SIGMA, a group of science fiction authors who consult pro bono with the U.S. government and others on matters of futurism, science, and technology. All but one of the original ten SIGMA members were Analog authors (including Stan Schmidt); a large majority of today's forty SIGMA members are, as well. Ben Bova is one.
The ANALOG MAFIA
In 1985, at the Inconjunction SF Convention in Indianapolis, Timothy Zahn, Pete (P.M.) Ferguson, Mike Banks, and I were posing for photos. Jokingly, I noted that, analogous (that word again!) to the Kennedys' "Massachusetts Mafia," we must be the "ANALOG Mafia." At the next Inconjunction, Pete brought us each a pin-on button bearing that title with an illustration of a gangster's gat firing away. We enjoyed the laugh. Later I had more made up and sent to some other Analog writers whom I knew. Eventually, Asimov, deCamp, Offutt, Bujold and many others received their buttons from me personally, as did Buzz Aldrin in 1996. To avoid any possible ethnic (or criminal) sensitivities, I've said that the acronym stood for "Making Appearances Frequently In Analog," but now you know the whole "rest of the story."
Trevor Quachri
Analog's newest editor follows in the grand ASF tradition, and has even improved on it. The novelette, "Thaw" (July/August 2013), was my first cover story after thirty years and three dozen appearances. In addition to another Probability Zero, "Wreck Support" (September 2013), Trevor published my latest article, "Homesteading to the Stars: Colony vs. Crew" (December 2013), the first serious proposal to address the possible motivations, finances, and subsequent economics of interstellar colonization.
Sixty Years and Counting
As these personal vignettes tell, ASF has been there in my mind and my heart throughout these six decades—manifesting as a playfulness of mind engendered by the editorials, stories, articles, columns, and letters. Those ideas affected my intellectual life and career from the eighth grade through graduate school; from White Sands to the White House; at Bell Labs, Sandia Labs, and my own several high-tech startup ventures; and in SIGMA's ongoing consultations with government decision makers. It continues yet today, as I write sequels that take place in the far-future, post-Ice Age world first encountered in last year's cover story.
All of us ASF readers, regardless of age, have been living through times of rapid technological and social change. In the pages of Astounding and Analog, we older fans and writers found much of our inspiration to cope with the future that is now. And along with younger generations, we still find a friendly forum here for discussing and reading about our thoughts on science, technology, the Universe, potential future problems, and often, possible solutions.
I only wish that the Founding Father, John W. Campbell, Jr., were still around to enjoy it.
* * *
THE ANALYTICAL LABORATORY
670 words
Once more we'd like to thank everyone who voted in our annual poll on the previous year's issues. Your votes help your favorite writers and artists by rewarding them directly and concretely for outstanding work. They help you by giving us a better feel for what you like and don't like—which helps us know what to give you in the future.
We have five categories: novellas, novelettes, short stories, fact articles, and covers. In each category, we asked you to list your three favorite items, in descending order of preference. Each first place vote counts as three points, second place two, and third place one. The total number of points for each item is divided by the maximum it could have received (if everyone had ranked it 1) and multiplied by 10. The result is the score listed below, on a scale of 0 (nobody voted for it) to 10 (everybody ranked it first). In practice, scores run lower in categories with many entries than in those with only a few. For comparison, the number in parentheses at the head of each category is the average for that category.
NOVELLAS (4.50)
1. "The Chaplain's Legacy," Brad R. Torgersen (5.49)
2. "Murder on the Aldrin Express," Martin L. Shoemaker (3.54)
3. "The Matthews Conundrum," Edward M. Lerner (3.13)
4. "Time Out," Edward M. Lerner (2.15)
5. "Lune Bleue," Janet Catherine Johnston (1.79)
NOVELETTES (0.75)
1. "Buddha Nature," Amy Thomson (2.46)
2. "Not Close Enough," Martin L. Shoemaker (1.59)
3 (tie). "Sixteen Million Leagues from Versailles," Allen M. Steele (1.38) "The Exchange Officers," Brad R. Torgersen (1.38)
4. "Following Jules," Ron Collins (1.28)
SHORT STORIES (0.39)
1. "The War of the Worlds, Book One, Chapter 18: The Sergeant-Major," John G. Hemry (1.49)
2. "Bugs," Ron Collins (1.28)
3. "Sentinel Chickens," David W. Goldman (1.08)
4. "Out in the Dark," Linda Nagata (.97)
5. "Hydroponics 101," Maggie Clark (.87)
FACT ARTICLES (1.53)
1. "The Great Ptolemaic Smackdown and Down-and-Dirty Mud-Wrassle," Michael F. Flynn (2.51)
2. "The Golden Age Comes to Seattle," Richard A. Lovett (2.10)
> 3. "Alien Worlds: Not in Kansas Any More," Edward M. Lerner (2.00)
4. "Galactic Cannibalism: Who's on the Menu?" H. G. Stratmann (1.79)
5. "Alien Aliens: Beyond Rubber Suits," Edward M. Lerner (1.74)
COVER (1.57)
1. July/August (for "Thaw"), by Tomislav Tikulin (3.03)
2. September, by Bob Eggleton (2.72)
3. May, by Dominic Harman (2.00)
4. October, by Dominic Harman (1.79)
5. January/February, by David A. Hardy (1.74)
There are some interesting tidbits tucked away in this year's results.
Brad R. Torgersen's "The Chaplain's Legacy" took first place in Novella decisively, the first in the series (after "The Chaplain's Assistant," September 2011) to place so highly.
Newcomer Martin Shoemaker placed second in both Novella and Novelette; an auspicious sign of stories to come, no doubt. Also impressively, Edward M. Lerner—who had an especially prolific year—placed in the top five in two different categories... twice! Ron Collins, too, was a multiple spot finisher, with second place in Short Stories and fourth in Novelettes.
As a bit of trivia, Linda Nagata's sequel to 2012's "Nahiku West," "Out in the Dark," wound up receiving the exact same weighted score as its predecessor:.97.
In addition to Martin Shoemaker's aforementioned strong showing as a newcomer, Amy Thomson and Maggie Clark, also newcomers, performed well right out of the gate, with "Buddha Nature" receiving first place in Novelette, and "Hydroponics 101" receiving fifth place in Short Story—always a highly competitive category.
The cover results this year seem to show a very strong preference for action and individuals—be they bird-riders, explorers, ships escaping exploding space stations, bodies in tubes, or even just human faces—over spacescapes and stellar phenomena. Makes sense to me!
Since AnLab votes are so important to encouraging authors and artists to do their best work, and to giving you the kind of magazine you most like to read, we hope to get even more next time. Use our online ballot, e-mail, or "snail mail," whichever you prefer, but please vote! (Please be careful to vote in the right category, as listed in the annual Index. Sometimes a few votes are wasted by being cast in the wrong category, and those simply can't be counted. Using our online ballot makes this much less likely.)
* * *
IN TIMES TO COME
171 words
We kick off next month's issue with Mark Niemann-Ross's "Plastic Thingy," wherein an Average Joe gets a rare opportunity to apply some useful skills to help out his other-than-average new friends.
Then we have "Championship B'tok," where a game could have very real consequences (and may illuminate more of the secrets of Edward M. Lerner's InterstellarNet universe).
Our fact article is "Saturn's 'Jet-Propelled' Moon and the Search for Artificial Life," from Richard A. Lovett; James C. Glass fictionalizes some of that very research and wonders what lies "Beneath the Ice of Enceladus." We also have a white-knuckled account of interplanetary combat in Jacob A. Boyd's "Release"; the hurdles of diplomatically dealing with angry aliens in "Calm" from Marissa Lingen and Alec Austin; a look at how AI might influence our end-of-life decisions in Lavie Tidhar's "Vladimir Chong Chooses to Die"; and Naomi Kritzer explains (to paraphrase the Rolling Stones) that we can't always get what we want, but sometimes we get what we need, in "Artifice."
See you next time!
All contents subject to change
* * *
THE ALTERNATE VIEW
IS IT SPACE DRIVE TIME? John G. Cramer | 2013 words
I was at a NASA workshop in Tempe, Arizona last January, at which, among other things, we were discussing the nature of game-changing inventions. It was mentioned that in the early nineteenth century the typewriter was independently "invented" over one hundred times by different individuals. I suggested to the group that when the technology has evolved to a certain point, a concept becomes ripe for invention, and someone somewhere will certainly invent it. When it is "typewriter time," some individual (or perhaps a hundred individuals all over the world) will invent the typewriter.
My question for this column is whether it is now "space drive time." The term "space drive" refers to a technology that would allow the propulsion of a space vehicle without the need for rocket-style expulsion of reaction mass-energy or for "light-sailing" with solar photons. In any case, on our horizon of technological developments there are indications that space drives may be appearing. Has the march of technological development arrived at "space drive time," the era when space drives are becoming a real technology? It's really too soon to say, and the reported results need to be verified and checked. But I'm optimistic.
In this column I'll consider two promising space drive developments that may be coming into fruition, one involving Mach's principle and the other proposing to "push against the quantum vacuum" for propulsion. The formidable roadblock for the space drive concept is Newton's third law of motion, a form of the law of conservation of momentum. In conventional rocket propulsion, a space vehicle can only be propelled forward and can only increase its forward momentum if propellant with an equal and opposite incremental momentum is expelled backward as exhaust. No form of internal motion—no shaking, bumping, spinning, or orbiting of interior masses, no tilting or twisting of eccentric internal flywheels—can produce any net momentum change in the overall object. Something must go backward if something else is to go forward.
As a workaround, light carries some momentum and can be used to avoid carrying onboard reaction mass. The emission, reflection, or absorption of a beam of light (laser or incoherent) or radio waves can, in principle, produce significant propulsion and momentum change in a space vehicle that does not carry and expel reaction mass. Examples: photon rockets, solar sails, and beam riders.
The problem with such schemes is that the momentum carrying capacity of light is very small—only its energy divided by the speed of light—and therefore the thrust (in newtons) is the power (in watts) divided by the speed of light, leading to a characteristic thrust-topower ratio of 3.33 µN/kW (3⅓ micro-newtons per kilowatt) for a photon rocket or for external light absorbed by a black sail, or twice that if the light is reflected 180° by a shiny sail. It's worth noting that any exotic propulsion process that would substitute gravity waves or neutrinos for light would lead to the same small thrust-to-power ratio. Thus, for any of these schemes the energy cost is very high for a small change in momentum, and only a tiny fraction of the input energy ends up as vehicle kinetic energy.
This brings us to possible alternatives that would use the distant universe or the quantum vacuum as reaction mass. First, let's consider Mach's principle. The physical property of mass has two distinct aspects, gravitational mass and inertial mass. Gravitational mass produces and responds to gravitational fields. It is represented by the two mass factors m in Newton's inverse-square law of gravity (F 12 = G m 1 m 2 /r 12 2 ). Inertial mass is the tendency of matter to resist acceleration. It is represented by the mass factor m in Newton's second law of motion (F=ma). These two aspects of mass always track one another. There are no known objects with a large inertial mass and a small gravitational mass, or vice versa. One of the deep mysteries of physics is the connection between inertial and gravitational mass.
Ernst Mach (1838–1916) was an Austrian physicist whose unpublished ideas about the origin of inertia influenced Einstein. Mach's principle, as elucidated by Einstein, attempts to connect inertia with gravitation by suggesting that the resistance of inertial mass to acceleration arises from the long-range gravitational forces from all the other masses in the Universe acting on a massive object (so that, in a universe empty of other masses, there would be no inertia). In essence, Mach's principle asserts that inertial and gravitational mass must be the same because inertia is, at its roots, a gravitational effect.
Dennis Sciama (1926–1999) used a simplified low-field reduction of Einstein's general relativity equations to show that in a uniform flat unive
rse, long-range gravitational interactions produce a force that resists acceleration, producing inertia. James F. Woodward extended the work of Sciama by considering the time-dependent inertial effects that occur when mass-energy is in flow, i.e., when mass-energy is moved from one part of the system to another while the system is being accelerated.
The Woodward/Sciama result is surprising. It predicts fairly large time-dependent variations in inertia, the tendency of matter to resist acceleration. Most gravitational effects predicted in general relativity, e.g., the gravitational deflection of light, frame dragging, gravitational time dilation, etc., are exceedingly small and difficult to observe, because the algebraic expressions describing them always have a numerator that includes Newton's gravitational constant G, a physical constant that has a very small value due to the weakness of gravity as a force. The inertial transient effects predicted by the Woodward/Sciama calculations are unusual and different, in that they have G in the equation's denominator, with the result that dividing by a small number (G) produces a sizable effect.
Can varying the inertial mass of an object produce thrust; for example, by pushing it forward when the inertial mass is low and pulling it backward when the inertial mass is high, thereby "rowing" through space? Woodward has tested for a net thrust from this effect using piezoelectric devices that combine stored energy with accelerated motion, mounted on a low-friction torsion balance. His results are unpublished and have not at present been confirmed. However, Woodward's recent work operating at 35–40 kHz has recorded thrusts of a few milli-newtons in brief pulses and a few micro-newtons in continuous operation. The thrust-to-power ratio is difficult to measure accurately, but is roughly 10-20 µN/kW, a factor of 3 or more better than a photon rocket. Since the Mach thrust effect depends on the third power of frequency, it can in principle become much stronger at higher frequencies.