forum.comicostrich.com

[Selezen]

Apologies if this post sounds like the POdwarp podcasts - I've just paused Podcast 2 to type this, and I think I'm writing like Ben...

I think there are two distinct flavours of 'technical description' in sci-fi. The first is when something technical needs to be described in order to further the story. For example, explaining that the dilithium crystal is used to focus the particles of antimatter and thus control the explosion. That sort of description needs to be kept as simple as possible in order to avoid confusing the reader or making them run to Wikipedia. It should ONLY be used IF that piece of technology and how it works is an important plot point. One of the most important parts of storytelling is introducing an element before it becomes important. In sci-fi, this can often involve a piece of technology and its accompanying description.

The second flavour is techno-babble. Vaguely scientific sounding things that serve no purpose or have been made up to explain what's happening or (god forbid) how to fix all the problems. Star Trek TNG was too find of this 'deus ex machina' approach to technology, and it's all their fault that technobabble became a commonly accepted concept. Distrupting the electron flow at the quamtum level with a reversed polarity plasma blast from the deflector dish can solve everyone's problems, but does that mean that it should? I mean the Enterprise D's main deflector spent more time throwing stuff out of its emitters than actually deflecting space junk.

Technobabble has its place. In what I call "real" sci-fi, where science is part of the story, technobabble is important, but only if it is used sparingly (like Kyle's spica analogy) and in such a way as not to alienate the non-technical readers. I suppose the basic rule is that if you don't need to describe it then don't. Leave that for an appendix on the website or some forum discussion. Character-based stories should have very little (if any) technical talk...
_________________

[ttallan]

OK, I don't know how many of you read Narbonic, but I was reading through the print collections and came across a strip that cried out to be linked to in this thread.

Go see! Third one down.
_________________

[Axonite]

That's a *good* use of technobabble! (Of course, if it was meant to be serious, it'd be pretty bad...)
_________________

[Adam_Y]

[Alitorious]

What's not to understand about the description?
It sounds like an electrical engineering course, mainly focusing on noise in electric circuits and systems. It looks like the first half of the course is about the noise itself: where it's from, how to model it mathematically (which is where all the probability stuff comes from), and where to watch out for it. I don't know what the last sentence means, but I expect it's using statistics tools (covariance, correlation) and seeing what happens when you apply them to electric signals.

Essentially: "Why sunspots make your radios sound worse - for engineers."

What's the name of the course? What year EE is it?


I don't know if omniwheel is the best example of something that defies explanation. I'd think parts or instruments named after people, or after effects named after people, are probably worse. Looking at omniwheel: wheels roll forwards/backwards, so what does an "all"-wheel or "any"-wheel do?
On the other hand, what's a Jacob's Ladder?


I'd never heard of the turboencabulator before, but I like it!


Jargon's not specific to engineers and scientists, either. Almost any specialized profession or hobby has their own jargon.

Modern Art critic: "It's the artist's expression of his frustration with the dichotomy between the apparent discontinuity of our own self awareness and the fundamental abhorrence integral to human existence."

Music: "Listen to the cadences at the fourteenth measure after the coda. The composer asks for extra vibrato from the woodwinds at the same time the basses pull off a discordant countermelody - the piece is in F sharp yet the bass is in D sharp. After that he pulls things into a harmonic minor from the suspended seventh before bringing in the horns with sforzando, reminding us of the second movement."

Pick any game with a competitive scene, and go browse some forums for there. Sometimes not only do you have the characters/unit names and move/spell names, but roles, or even names for strategies or techniques. (Wavedashing in Smash Bros?)

Incomprehensible jargon's not limited to sci-fi technobabble, but it does seem to be where we find the most infamous and gregarious uses of it, probably because technology is often integral to the setting or story.

Hrm, there's a question: is the stuff you find in House or Grey's Anatomy technobabble? Medibabble? Or is it different? How about in Indiana Jones, when he's talking archeology?

[ttallan]

[tbowl]

Well like in Jurassic Park, Sam Neil's character knows, and flat out acts and says that he isn't doing real paleontology all the time... for example. But ya, Indianna Jones.... They do get into scrapes with the locals though. Especially in South America. But not like every 2 seconds trying to find the golden monkey skull of the hoopy doopy clan that was wiped out over 5000 years ago by an astroid fiered by aliens that also made the pyramids which by chance has the other hoopy doopy emerald skull that when combined has the power to get to the 3rd hoopy doopy skull and when those 3 are together they make an ultimate weapon that can only be countered by the happy dappy skull ring thats been passed down through the ages from generation to generation that secretly my new girlfriend has, she just didn't tell me, cuz she isn't really here to help, she's here to be the sacrifice to be the body of the monster when I inadvertantly ressurect it cuz she's just been using me.

Hmm..

But technobabble? I hate it when they say things just to sound cool.

[Arioch]

[ttallan]

As a point of interest: after this was first brought up in the topic thread, I asked my sister-in-law, who is a family doctor, about shows like House, and if they make her want to throw things at the TV. She said that although she's able to enjoy the medical dramas, they are full of inaccuracies that she and her colleagues like to complain about at work the next morning.
_________________

[Adam_Y]

[Adam_Y]

[dph_of_rules]

[tbowl]

I don't see how bits could start getting too small on a computer to calculate. Each bit would be a decimal backwards... right?

I mean, the whole concept is freaking hillarious don't get me wrong, but Data can practically fly the Enterprise without using its navigation but well. I guess it was Spock that always said their chances were too small to calculate?

Ah I can't think. Need to go lay back down. :/
_________________

[dph_of_rules]

The problem isn't you can't calculate those large numbers, but rather how much accuracy you can give.
_________________
Whatever happened to simplicity?

[Arioch]