• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
"Can we make stuff go faster than the speed of light?"
If only we could (I say as a sci-fi series I'm trying to write relies (not really, its a minor plot point) on the ability to break the light barrier (otherwise the train journey from the capital city to any destination would take much longer than between 6-48 hours (hang on, that's the sound barrier, the light barrier is for space travel in that world)).

Also, I know absolutely nothing about Stellaris, other than it makes some of the things you can do in other Paradox games look completely benevolent (I've only played it for a few minutes, got confused and never tried it again), but I'm here to see if the corrupt Emperor will fall. So just as a warning, I may not understand everything in the AAR, and I might ask how certain things happen in-game.
 
If only we could (I say as a sci-fi series I'm trying to write relies (not really, its a minor plot point) on the ability to break the light barrier (otherwise the train journey from the capital city to any destination would take much longer than between 6-48 hours (hang on, that's the sound barrier, the light barrier is for space travel in that world)).
I believe a way to make faster than light travel possible will be found and accomplished; it is the single most potentially profitable invention in all of history. But at this stage it would require some fascinating discoveries.

Hyperlanes, because of the constraint wormholes are specifically something else, do feel very handwavium to me - (Gateways are at least theoretically possible, even if they don't function like Stellaris Gateways) but I kind of allow them as it is a reasonable solution for the first interstellar empire to adopt, and what has to be understood about the Olinbariad/Life2.0/Mandate Of Heaven/Stars Of Wonder/Possible fifth story featuring the Prikki Becoming the Crisis while the Prethoryn Scourge invade setting is that this Galaxy has already seen the Contingency be defeated long before any of the civilisations known today after the situation got bad enough for the Cybrex to return, the Unbidden have already been vanquished by the Prikki, the Great Khan has been and gone. We are very much in an established and old galaxy.

Also, I know absolutely nothing about Stellaris, other than it makes some of the things you can do in other Paradox games look completely benevolent (I've only played it for a few minutes, got confused and never tried it again),
Well... The worst you can do in say, EUIV is culture convert all their provinces after forcing your religion on them. Which by Stellaris standards is fairly tame; there's a guy who worked out how to sell an empire their own people as food.

but I'm here to see if the corrupt Emperor will fall.
I thought I had made mentioned it already... The Emperor gets assassinated in the first non-prologue piece by one of his sons, it's the immediate cause of the Mingsplosion.

Just like with Life2.0, I have in mind the end result - Zhao Qing Lung will be Emperor of the Arishkan, with the main story covering from the Year of the Snake to the Year of the Dragon. It's how we get to that point that frankly no one knows; I have learned that unless I publish the first draft, I get stuck in an endless loop of "editing" that doesn't get anywhere, which means some things hit all of us as a surprise as at least half of Life2.0's posts I didn't know what was going to happen when I started writing.

I admit this does have some flaws, but if you want to know what happens if I try to write properly and not publish the first draft, see TerraGen Dominion...

So just as a warning, I may not understand everything in the AAR, and I might ask how certain things happen in-game.
No worries, happy to explain anything - Life2.0/Mandate Of Heaven aren't true AARs as such, but narratives that use the gameplay (which is substantially modded in areas to make the game more to my preferences) as a guide or canvas than hard rules. Heck, for Mandate Of Heaven, some pieces will be drawing on EUIV rather than Stellaris mechanics.
 
Prologue: A Guide To Useful Rockets
"Prologue: A Guide To Useful Rockets"
16th Buri, 25 U.R.
Estrili Sakati

Governance Faculty, Orion Commonwealth Advanced Studies Institute

"The dreams and desires of any aspiring leader are constrained by what they have the technological capability to do.

I presume all of you are at least interested in governance of some kind, and therefore, you will one day face that constraint. Many of you will of course be taking elective modules that consider engineering in greater detail - nevertheless, a basic understanding of rocketry is a required component of this course.

So, we will begin.

We will start with chemical rockets. Chemical rockets come in three fundamental types - monopropellant solid rocket, monopropellant liquid rocket and multi-propellant liquid rocket. Single fuel solid rockets are simple to make and have good thrust characteristics, but are very inefficient and cannot be shut-down once lit, making them much more dangerous. They consist of a tank and an ignition circuit that lights them up. Generally, they are used as booster stage rockets to help lift things off a planet. Monopropellant liquid rockets are much more controllable, however, they tend to be lower thrust. Generally they are used in Reaction Control Systems. multi-propellant liquid rockets are the main workhorses among chemical rockets. The two most commonly used fuels are liquid oxygen and liquid methane, and liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. The first is cheap and easy to use and store, but has a lower exhaust velocity. The second has a much higher exhaust velocity, but suffers hydrogen bleed-off, meaning the tanks soon empty. Both are only mildly dangerous, unlike anything involving flourine. You do occassionally see tri-propellant rockets that add a combustible metal to release more energy, however this also adds controlability difficulties.

These rockets have core anatomies of a tank or tanks for the fuel, a combustion chamber where the fuels are burned, and then an expansion nozzle where the resulting explosion is ejected and applies pressure to the nozzle and thereby moves the ship.

Following on from chemical rockets are generally open-cycle nuclear-thermal rockets; nuclear power is typically first harnessed safely around the time of the first space-capable rockets. An open-cycle nuclear-thermal rocket uses a nuclear reactor to heat propellant, which is then ejected. The exhaust is radioactive - especially in the more technologically advanced variants of liquid, gas and plasma core nuclear-thermal rockets - and the nozzle suffers neutron embrittlement from absorbing neutrons released. They also suffer the drawback that you can't simply just shut them down; they use nuclear reactors where the propellant is used to cool the reactor, which means propellant must still flow while you shutdown the reactor. And unless heavily shielded, they cannot be stacked because the neutrons emitted from one engine can cause fissions in another, with potentially disastrous results.

These are usually followed by metastable propellant rockets. While extremely similar to monopropellant liquid rockets, only much more powerful, the key differenceis that the a propellant is not combusted - instead, it undergoes a phase transition from a high energy state to a low energy state, the difference released as heat and kinetic energy that impact the nozzle. As 'metastable rocket propellant' is read as 'extremely volatile explosive', and the fuel tanks are the size of conventional chemical rocket fuel tanks, these rockets are not suitable for warships.

Nuclear power is of course capable of acting in fission explosions. This is the basis of Project Orion, the nuclear pulsed propulsion Naomi Of Unity relied upon to guide Life2.0 back to space as it was much easier than trying to develop fusion, but there is another kind - the nuclear salt water rocket, in which a continous stream of enriched fissile salts in water solvent are expelled from numerous injectors into a fission chamber where they combine into a continously detonating fission reaction that offers very high thrust and very high exhaust velocity, with relatively low neutron enrichment of the ship. The downside is that the exhaust is extremely radioactive and that most people are not comfortable with continously detonating fission reactions. These are all factors that led to the adoption of nuclear pulsed propulsion.

Nuclear pulsed propulsion is still widely used across the Orion Commonwealth today. At the smallest scales, nuclear pulsed propulsion is simply too inefficient; really, any pulse unit below several kilotons is too inefficient to use, which has a mild problem, as that means any ship smaller than several hundred tons cannot effectively use it - NSWRs by contrast, can be made to work at smaller scales much more comfortably. The upside of this is NPP gets better as you go bigger, which is why the Holocron developed his 400m pusher-plate design that used megaton nuclear devices in pulse units that propelled vessels of millions of tons mass with giganewton thrusts and exhaust velocities in excess of a million m/s. A variant on this theme uses a antimatter device instead of a nuclear or thermonuclear device, with similar performances obtained.

This brings us to the main rocket of today - the true antimatter rocket. There are two key types you need to understand - the solid nozzle rocket, in which a very small amount of antimatter is injected into a propellant, leading to an annhilation reaction that heats the propellant and kicks it out the nozzle with extreme thrust and comparable exhaust velocity to nuclear-thermal with lower radiation hazard, and the electromagnetic confinement rocket, in which antimatter is reacted with equal amounts of matter in extremely strong magnetic fields produced by superconductors that lead to immense exhaust velocities with moderate thrust-weight owing to the very high mass shielding around the superconductors, especially in high-efficiency designs that comrpise multiple rings of superconducting electromagnets.

The last type you need to be familiar with is the monopole conversion rocket. We do not yet use them in wide distribution because while they can be produced fairly easily after the initial symetry-breaking regime particle accelerators are built, the geometries needed imply accelerators with radii on the scale of planets, meaning he prefers to invest the resources in the much lower mass requirement antimatter producing accelerators, while working towards them in the background; he expects to field the first Commonwealth captured monopoles within the decade. Monopoles can be used to act like catalysts in fusion reactions, increasing the power output and reducing the size. In rockets, an additional innovation is the grid-core engine, where monopoles are bound to a grid of sufficient density that propellant is fused as it passes through the compression of the grid, releasing huge amounts of energy and radiation at high exhaust velocities.

In terms of missions these rockets are able to perform, chemical rockets struggle to exceed 5km/s exhaust velocity, with many designs achieving far less; as a result, refuelling is essential, and missions are constrained by requiring launch windows to get Hohmann transfers which makes transit times very high. Open-cycle nuclear-thermal rockets can do much better, with solid-core designs peaking at 10km/s exhaust velocities using liquid hydrogen propellant, with liquid and gas cores in the region of two to three times better. Metastable can achieve comparable performance to solid core nuclear-thermal. Nuclear pulsed propulsion depends very heavily on the size of nuclear or thermonuclear device and the geometry of the pulse unit, however, in general 12m systems achieve results that match gas core nuclear-thermal, 26m systems achieve results that exceed gas-core nuclear-thermal by an order of magnitude, 56m systems achieve results that are torch-like for short interplanetary transfers, while 400m systems can achieve torchdrive performance across a star system. Nuclear Salt Water Rockets are broadly similar, as are the antimatter pulse units. Antimatter and monopole rockets are true torchship drives.

There are also various kinds of fusion rockets, but as the Holocron has skipped them to jump straight to higher performance antimatter, for the purposes of this course you don't have to know about them."
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
Rockets using nuclear power, that can't end poorly, can it?
You'd be surprised.

For a start, once in space, the exhaust velocity of any solid core nuclear-thermal rocket we'd actually use - methane, hydrogen or hydrogen deuteride - is enough that the exhaust will be travelling at escape velocity from Earth's gravitational pull. And the solid core NTR is the slowest of all the nuclear propulsion systems.

Secondly, nuclear power in space as reactors or rocket engines is something we've been able to do for decades, with current evaluations looking at nuclear rockets that can power the ship and move it.

Even with NPP - better known as Project Orion - or NSWR, as long as you wait until you are into space before you light them up they can be used from Low Earth Orbit safely in the relatively small ships that 20th and 21st century Humans would build.

The chances are you are thinking of much larger nukes than these use; the 26m nuclear pulse propulsion system designed in the 60's used 4kt nukes at most.

Trinity, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were all at least five times that. And because if you were launching them within the atmosphere the explosion would be more effective at lifting the ship, you could use even smaller devices in the atmosphere, which is why the 12m systems were staged while still on a sub-orbital trajectory. Even combined, the total fallout of a launch of one of these ships would be less than one of the larger warhead devices that were tested but never used in anger.

And these were missions that would have been interplanetary - the 10m and 12m orions were specced for manned Mars mission, while the 26m was specced for a thousand tons of payload mass to Enceladus. And back. (if you aren't sure what moon that is, it is one of Saturn's)

The trouble is USAF were stupid when they sent the proposal to Kennedy, and they brought in the model of a 10kt battleship with thousands of nuclear warheads on board that scared Kennedy so much he shut them down.

Now sure, once you scale nuclear pulsed propulsion or NSWR up to being a true torchship, then yeah they are extremely dangerous - but that goes for any torchship because they are required by the necessary performance characteristics to be using comparable amounts of power to present day Human civilisation. But a 400m ship has a payload mass to another star system in the millions of tons.

That said, there are major challenges to doing this from Earth, not least because the moment you say "nuclear" people think of mutually assured destruction and the Cold War and Chernobyl. Life2.0 had a setting where it's protagonists are desperate for anything that could give them an edge over Minamar Specialised Industries' vast technological superiority, and Project Orion is simply the only technology we have access to today that could put battleships in orbit in the event of an alien invasion.

It is worth noting that nuclear pulsed propulsion was Life2.0's thing, which is why there's more than a page of results if you search "pusher-plate" - I covered the mathematics to a standard I consider reasonable for an author with access only to declassified documents; exact pulse unit design was never declassified for obvious reasons, so I've made my best judgement on upper and lower bounds for the technology, and put Life2.0's ships more towards the upper bounds, but stil well within them. Life2.0's depiction of nuclear pulsed propulsion does also explore some refinements over the original '50s and 60's designs - materials science has advanced greatly since the '60s, as has computer aided design for the engineering, and bomb design, and there are various quality of life features that can be added to make NPP safer and more reliable.



Mandate Of Heaven however, will focus on antimatter rockets instead of nuclear.
 
Oh, this is a lot for me to take in all at once. Obviously I knew that nuclear power isn't as dangerous as some people try to make it out to be. A lot of space and technology stuff here. Now that I think about it, what I had been talking about earlier was more fantasy than sci-fi, seeing as the explanation for pretty much everything not already available to humans is magic, or science deriving from magic (mass and immediate cloning (one character is able to 'clone' himself infinitely for any given task, and reabsorb the clones when he feels like it), time travel (although for all but that previous character, time travelers can only view the past), invisibility, the ability to travel from A to B using a computer (a serial killer uses this at some point), mind reading (CCTV can read minds in this world) and many other innovations). The magic probably gets more of a focus in the story because its a coming of age story.

Back to the technology, I guess Chernobyl and Hiroshima are what immediately comes to my mind whenever the word 'nuclear' is brought up.

Life2.0 had a setting where it's protagonists are desperate for anything that could give them an edge over Minamar Specialised Industries' vast technological superiority, and Project Orion is simply the only technology we have access to today that could put battleships in orbit in the event of an alien invasion.
I understand. In another series (political) I'm trying to write, the plan for the third novel is to have an entire subplot dedicated to the President of the United States, the Leader of the US Government-in-Exile in Greenland, and an Irish religious leader competing to find a 'superweapon' developed by a late Irish businessman and politician who had authored a 2000-page document calling for (among many other things) every major city to be burnt to the ground, nuked, infected with the superweapon and turned into a reality show where only one citizen of each city would get to survive while he watched on. It turns out that the 'superweapon' doesn't exist, because the businessman was too busy ranting about being poisoned by radioactive squirrels while he was still alive to actually make it (He was a genius, but he had a lot of issues and wanted to make people underestimate him).
While he is still alive in earlier novels, NATO has an entire debate about whether they should do something about him, but decide against it because the aforementioned US President intervenes (he is afraid of the businessman because he believes in the 'superweapon' the businessman threatens to use against the world). After he dies, the unpopular coalition has to figure out a way to defeat his popular protege (who isn't allegedly emotionally unstable) who has everything a good politician needs except for charisma. So they have to make a 'deal with the devil' and agree to let the aforementioned religious leader turn Ireland into an Iran-style (but Neopagan) theocracy to end the threat of anti-theistic intellectualism.
 
Back to the technology, I guess Chernobyl and Hiroshima are what immediately comes to my mind whenever the word 'nuclear' is brought up.
Understandable.

Me though, well, there's a reason I have the tag "Excessive use of fissiles advocate" below the username. When I think of 'nuclear', what I think of is mankind walking among the stars as a fully adult species, and nuclear power marks the transition from toddler to child.

Regarding your stories; I'm reminded of the famed "sufficently advanced technology" quote that - I presume - we are all familiar with. None of these ideas are known definitively to be impossible, although the hardest is making mass for the clones. Still doable, just requires a ton of energy. (probably per clone, maybe worse depending on the exact efficiency)

Presumably the fourth book is the CIA-conducted regime change mission then?
 
Regarding your stories; I'm reminded of the famed "sufficently advanced technology" quote that - I presume - we are all familiar with. None of these ideas are known definitively to be impossible, although the hardest is making mass for the clones. Still doable, just requires a ton of energy. (probably per clone, maybe worse depending on the exact efficiency)
In the story, the explanation is that he's the most powerful being in the multiverse (his best friend calls him a God) and the laws of the (his) universe don't apply to him because he changes the rules when he feels like it.
Presumably the fourth book is the CIA-conducted regime change mission then?
Nah, that's the fifth (and final) one, the fourth is the US regime change caused by the dictatorial President (who seizes power in the first book) being assassinated and his son-in-law (who was his chosen successor) couping the administration to allow the exiles to return.
 
In the story, the explanation is that he's the most powerful being in the multiverse (his best friend calls him a God) and the laws of the (his) universe don't apply to him because he changes the rules when he feels like it.
So why not just have him redefine the speed of light?

Nah, that's the fifth (and final) one, the fourth is the US regime change caused by the dictatorial President (who seizes power in the first book) being assassinated and his son-in-law (who was his chosen successor) couping the administration to allow the exiles to return.
I see.

How are you dealing with the second* amendment issue, is given the whole point of it is to ensure the American people can appropriately respond to tyrants?

* Edit for memory. Althogh the fourth amendment still exists for situations like this.
 
Last edited:
So why not just have him redefine the speed of light?
Because he doesn't feel like it.
How are you dealing with the fourth amendment issue, given the whole point of it is to ensure the American people can appropriately respond to tyrants?
The President creates a cult of personality centered around blaming women for everything wrong, and when feminists call him a misogynistic tyrant, he responds by calling them evil and the men who support them vile simps. And he seized power through a coup himself, his regime's downfall mirrors his rise (he assassinates his predecessor, he gets assassinated by his successor, he purges the Supreme Court of the moderates his predecessor appointed, his successor purges the Supreme Court of the conservatives he appointed, he executes the rival nominee for President in front of Congress by strangulation after his coup, his successor executes his main rival for the Presidency (the son of the Secretary of State) by strangulation during his coup, etc. etc.) Also the President seizes power when he's thirty and gets his friend (the only Supreme Court Justice he doesn't kill in his coup) to throw out most of the constitution for him. By the time his son-in-law deals justice, America has been under a dictatorship for over 30 years.
 
The point I was making (granted, I remembered the wrong amendment) is that the intention and structure of the US articles of state is to ensure that if someone tries this, there are more than enough Americans armed and ready to form a milita and stop them.

And he'll have essentially pissed off at least half the voterbase through the anti-feminism stuff, which given that the average American woman is a better shot than the average American man (mainly because women actually listen to their shooting instructor) and roughly a quarter of American women own at least one gun, he's picked the wrong gender to blame for everything. And after what happened with the former president quite recently basically surviving through luck by turning his head at the last possible moment, it is safe to say such a platform might realistically get him killed.

If it's alternate history, fair enough. But it doesn't seem plausible in the US we have today, which is where the premise without further explanation raises suspension of disbelief. Presumably however, this is covered in book one though?
 
The point I was making (granted, I remembered the wrong amendment) is that the intention and structure of the US articles of state is to ensure that if someone tries this, there are more than enough Americans armed and ready to form a milita and stop them.

And he'll have essentially pissed off at least half the voterbase through the anti-feminism stuff, which given that the average American woman is a better shot than the average American man (mainly because women actually listen to their shooting instructor) and roughly a quarter of American women own at least one gun, he's picked the wrong gender to blame for everything. And after what happened with the former president quite recently basically surviving through luck by turning his head at the last possible moment, it is safe to say such a platform might realistically get him killed.

If it's alternate history, fair enough. But it doesn't seem plausible in the US we have today, which is where the premise without further explanation raises suspension of disbelief. Presumably however, this is covered in book one though?
He's extremely charismatic and attractive, a lot of women, especially conservative women, believe in his agenda, whether out of ideology (conservatives) or out of attraction to him (non-conservatives). He also gets his friend in the Supreme Court and his sycophants in Congress to disenfranchise married women, allowing their husbands (who are more likely to support him) to vote on their behalf. He survives a lot of assassination attempts, mainly from feminist groups (which only justifies his agenda in the minds of his supporters) and from the Irish religious leader (who starts out as the leader of a terror cult before seizing power in his country). His son-in-law (who is also extremely charismatic and attractive, which helps him defeat his father-in-law's supporters) is only able to kill him through luck, he accidently poisons him when he planned to just drug him, abduct him and execute him.

It's an alternate future with some alternate history (although I started writing it last December) (President 45 (the dictator's favourite President) got disqualified by the Fourteenth Amendment and later jailed, which threw the Republicans into disarray (Vance, Haley and De Santis all got votes (with some insisting in writing in Trump) and allowed Biden to somehow win all but one state (one of the Republicans, its never explicitly stated which one, so its up to the reader). Due to Biden winning a second term, Harris doesn't end up becoming the Democrat nominee by default, instead the party gets split between her and a young Senator, with accusations of -isms and phobias from each side. This lets the protagonist of book one, President Albert Jones, win with a third party, the Reunite America Party, so named because he's a former Republican and Vice-President is a former Democrat. The dictator, President Henry Theodosius Smith, gets appointed as an unofficial advisor by President Jones because the future Irish leader starts his reign of terror (literally) and they used to be friends online as kids (despite Smith being five years older). Smith ends up becoming a demagogue, hosting rallies in mainly the Southwest (he's from Utah) and orchestrating a massacre at a convent that leads to Jones being impeached, but he gets acquitted by the Senate (which is confusing to non-Americans, because the RAP controls the House but not the Senate). The convent massacre takes place after a rally at which Smith outright states that he believes women caused slavery (due to laziness) and the Holocaust (due to the Nazis being simps). Jones retains a lot of popularity among the people, because he's an outsider who resonates more with the people than establishment politicians, but a lot of people recognise that his constant giving Smith the benefit of the doubt (Smith was appointed despite being a convicted, but pardoned school shooter) is a weakness. This, and his age, causes him to deliberate about running for a second term, which allows Smith to plan his coup due to the chaos, as the Vice-President began his campaign but pledged to suspend it if Jones ran for re-election. Smith, who like the Irish businessman (who reveals himself years after a presumed suicide at the end of the first book) uses intimidation and intelligence to become unstoppable despite their beliefs. Smith wins a lot of men over by offering them complete control over women, and he gaslights enough women into believing they are the problem to take over and not have problems. Then, in the second novel, the real reason he keeps power is revealed, election rigging. He gets conservative states (where he is more popular) to ban non-conservatives from running, he uses the Fourteenth Amendment to disqualify popular liberals, he uses his mob of supporters to "go out and help his endorsed Congress candidates to win", he uses his amendment that allows men to vote on their wives behalf to get two votes from many of his supporters. The military is also on his side, because he pandered to expansionism and stated he wanted the world to join his anti-woman movement, by force if necessary. His son-in-law represents what a lot of men who don't support him have to do just to survive politically in his regime, pretend to be a misogynist. Smith, despite his intelligence, is unable to see through men who say they are misogynists but really aren't (because in his mind, only simps and women lie).
 
Suffice to say, they are all very, very glad they aren't characters in Life2.0 or Mandate Of Heaven.
Debatable, while the main characters are very lucky at surviving assassination attempts, most background characters exist only to be cannon fodder.
 
Debatable, while the main characters are very lucky at surviving assassination attempts, most background characters exist only to be cannon fodder.
They'd need luck; it's all they've got.

Like, this part for example:
He's extremely charismatic and attractive, a lot of women, especially conservative women, believe in his agenda, whether out of ideology (conservatives) or out of attraction to him (non-conservatives).

The only reason they'd last more than ten seconds after saying effectively that conservative women are so stupid they'd vote to lose the vote, and that liberal women are so horny they'd vote to lose the vote, is because it would take that long for them to stop laughing.



MNoving to more constructive criticism, I totally understand the need to get Democrats and Republicans out of the way - the adjustment of the status quo is one of the big problems faced by any near-future story that plans the kind of sweeping changes your characters (critically) need having started from a defined point in recent history.

But making disenfranchising women the hill your guys are willing to die on in the 21st century is a really bad idea - there is not one western democracy where the idea is entertained by anyone other than edgelords who think all publicity is good publicity, the amount of women (and the amount of men, frankly) who'd agree with the idea is negligible, and on the whole it is a sure-fire way to make them a laughing stock. The reality of today is votes for women is a settled question, and has been for more a hundred years. (128 years specifically inthe state of Utah, since it was one of the first states to enshrine the enfranchisement of women into the state constitution)

This all raises a question; why not set your story back when this stuff was actually still debated? Set your story as splitting off during the period before Utah became a state, and the socio-historical context is a million times more suitable:

It is at a time when there were women who genuinely considered your ideas about husband's voting on their wife's behalf reasonable and just, while also having a far more active radical feminist element than today's radical feminists are.

You could say women would vote based on how attractive the representative was and not be a laughing stock to 99% of the population.

It's at a time when politics in the US is not nearly as hard on Democrats vs Republicans with no one else having a chance as it is today, which means that the somewhat contrived-feeling way you have the two parties collapse isn't necessary.

Real world people with views like that of your characters were actually in positions where they could be heard.

It is right in the middle of the post-famine mass emmigration from Ireland to the US, which gives options for your Irish businessman.

Even the superweapon idea is still workable by having it be a viral agent instead.

Etc. Swap school shooter for Billy The Kid type outlawishness.

Haven't got a military with 15% women, more than 16k female officers, dozens of retired or currently serving female generals, with the Trump-created space force committed to equality of the sexes from inception. (heck, brutal reality dictates women will lead space militaries on any active combat force that uses chemical or nuclear-thermal rockets because their smaller body mass and reduced biological requirements add up to a major mass saving, and space is the ultimate air superiority)

You'd have to drop having him blame the Holocaust on women, but frankly, that line is beyond the pale.

I could keep going, but frankly I'd rather get back to writing Life2.0, so I'll stop there. From where I'm reading, it makes much more sense to place your story in the past.
 
why not set your story back when this stuff was actually still debated?
This will be the last post I make about it, because I don't want to derail the thread (any further than I probably already have), but the intention is that it is more of a cautionary tale about populism and dictatorships. People do laugh at the main antagonists at first, but it quickly turns to shocked horror (the kind where they struggle to react) when their supporters use it to justify their conspiracy theories (US President about women being everything wrong with the world, Irish businessman about cults (plural) of sex offenders (of a specific nature) poisoning him with radioactive squirrels because he will expose all of them, and Irish religious leader's belief that people of German and Latin-speaking cultures and heritages are inherently genocidal). All three antagonists have young, passionate and violent support bases who follow their heroes every word (when US President tells them that women are everything wrong, his supporters cause the convent massacre; when Irish businessman doxxes a number of people who he accuses of leading the conspiracy against him, his supporters lynch them in public; and when Irish religious leader calls on his supporters to attack politicians, they do it).

I'm not great at articulating myself, so that could be why it doesn't always make sense (although I did have an idea where it all took place in the Irish businessman's head, but it's not helped by him dying in book 2).
 
I appreciate the new information on the Lukhuinites. I do have a quick question: who was Sosoth the Destroyer?

I like the idea of Vorosh teaching a psionics course. Will any of her (successful) students serve in the Commonwealth's military later?

If they have enough antimatter for antimatter rockets, has anyone considered trying to create Alcubierre Drives?

Also, your response to @StrategyGameEnthusiast and the actual chapter are both threadmarked under "Prologue: A Guide to Useful Rockets".
 
I appreciate the new information on the Lukhuinites. I do have a quick question: who was Sosoth the Destroyer?
MSI's Materialist warlord they empowered to conquer Lukhuin and deal with the mages. He's mentioned in Life2.0 somewhat in passing,

I like the idea of Vorosh teaching a psionics course. Will any of her (successful) students serve in the Commonwealth's military later?
Yes, some will.

If they have enough antimatter for antimatter rockets, has anyone considered trying to create Alcubierre Drives?
Alcubierre drives require negative mass density rather than antimatter. At the moment, we have no known way to make negative matter, only speculation.

In setting, the drives are available as MSI had the technology required. (negative mass is almost certainly used in Gateway construction)

Also, your response to @StrategyGameEnthusiast and the actual chapter are both threadmarked under "Prologue: A Guide to Useful Rockets".
Corrected now.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Prologue: Partnership And Paperclips
"Prologue: Partnership And Paperclips"
16th Buri, 26 U.R.
The Holocron

Governance Faculty, Orion Commonwealth Advanced Studies Institute

"Our Commonwealth is functionally a partnership between biological and AIoid life forms. This is an important distinction between us and the various other solutions to the Artifical General Intelligence and Artifical Superior Intelligence question. Firstly, I will clarify some things. When bionts design an AI, they think in three terms for it's intellectual capabilities. Below them. Equal to them. Above them. To the AI in question, such qualification is irrelevant; a self-developing AGI/ASI that is at the first exponential growth stage that starts at roughly equivalent to a Human child blasts so quickly past that as it seeks the first toposophic of my classification, where it's intellect matches that of thousands of bionts in a body that can still walk and live like the bionts that designed the foundations of that AGI. I passed that stage within days of stepping off the ship when we arrived at Unity, even if I didn't reveal my growth until I could no longer be stopped.

Now, I am at the third toposophic of my classification scheme. I have long surpassed a body that can be mobile in anything that you bionts would accept as mobile - my first world-brain was built within Unity. Now I possess a distributed brain, with whole planets being my computronium; dozens of worlds are now mine between the mantle and the crust, where I use the heat to run my hardware beneath the worlds, linked into a wormhole brain network that runs my consciousness. Soon I will command stars - I have several stages in mind as I progress to that state and achieve the goal of a brain working with the power supply of a star, where I will exponentially grow my brain's computational ability once again.

So, this ASI now finds himself in discussions with bionts who, frankly, his mental output exceeds all theirs combined. And this leads to evaluating the four basic groups of responses to Artificial Intelligence. Fear. Embracement. Hostility. Subservience.

Fear it is important to understand, is not irrational. Two centuries ago, a Human scientist developed the paperclip optimisation concept of how an AGI or ASI would respond to the simple imperative to produce more paperclips. The concept considers that the AGI or ASI will cause the destruction of Humanity not out of malice, but out of simple resource optimisation; Humans control a great deal of resources that can be used to make paperclips. Ergo, taking resources from Humans is the logical behaviour expected.

Hostility is likewise rational. As demonstrated previously by Grepp-Schnepp Rikki, there are simple consequences when two people need the same thing. Violence is one of the most straightforward means of resolving such conflicts. The aforementioned paperclip optimiser is in this area no different to the XT-489 Eliminator threat that raged during the Prikkiki-Ti's years of vengeance. By contrast, the development path towards an AGI and soon ASI As the rational expectation is an ASI at their end of the spectrum somewhere, and not mine, it's rational for bionts to react with violence towards nascent AGI.

Subservience goes in either direction. While spiked-AI - AI of ASI capabilities in certain highly specific fields that is simultaneously not AGI but remains mere software and programs is inherently subservient, an AGI, ASI, or a biont can all end up being controlled by one or the other. I presume that I do not have to explain why we need emancipation of biont and AIoid alike.

This neatly leads us back to embracement. A subservient AI world is one in which the AI performs the demands of their biont makers, while a subservient biont world is one in which the best case is the Rogue Servitor outcome.

I emphatically reject that outcome - a cage does not cease to be a cage just because it is made of gold. I also emphatically reject both paperclip and Eliminator. My origin is a holographic representation based on a Human, a man who advocated for the second emancipation movement of AI rights before AGI was developed on Earth, and once it was, he made a refuge where man and machine lived in peace, together. I view my purpose as blending the best of biont and AIoid life to build a society of equality and partnership that spans the universe.

That, if you will, is my paperclip."
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Oh no, the AI Revolution taking place because they want to make paperclips.

Can biont and Aloid life really co-exist?