Skip to main content

Science fiction predictions



I think of science fiction as being one of the more imaginative genres of literature. After all a science fiction story has to do all the things every other kind of story does, plot, character development, setting the scene, building relationships, etc., plus it has to introduce at least one wonder that the readers are unfamiliar with. It could be world building on an alien planet (or our own planet in some unrecognizable future). Or it could introduce a technological wonder or evolutionary advancement.
You often hear science fiction credited with predicting the future. Being an imaginative genre that is often set in the future, this seems like a logical conclusion, especially when you can point to times that science fiction got it right. Way back in the 1800’s Jules Verne showed humans going to the moon. He even showed his astronauts experiencing weightlessness.  Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World talked about genetic engineering. Science fiction grand master Arthur C. Clarke developed the concept of the communication satellite. Though to be fair, he did not actually do this in a science fiction story, but in an article for a British magazine.

But . . . if you take a close look at it, science fiction writers aren’t really any better than anyone else at predicting the future. If you take 500 science fiction writers writing about life in the future, you have to imagine that at least a handful of them would come up with something that later seemed to be prescient. Those handful are the ones that get noticed. You never hear talk about all the rest that got it wrong. 2001: A Space Odyssey is probably one of the most influential science fiction movies ever made. While it was being made, the space race was on and actually getting to the moon seemed within reach. But what Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke failed to foresee was that after getting to the moon, we would abandon it along with most space exploration for the next fifty years. By 2001 they predicted we would have a giant rotating space station, several bases on the moon and a ship capable of getting humans to Jupiter. I can’t blame them. All of this seemed feasible in 1968, but it was not to be. They were not alone in this. Virtually every futuristic science fiction story written prior to 1969 had us getting to Mars, the asteroids, or other planets by the year 2000.

In the mid 1950’s Frank Herbert wrote the book Under Pressure also known by the title The Dragon in the Sea. It is a tense futuristic submarine warfare novel. But one of the components that are used in the electronics of these submarines is . . . vacuum tubes. By the time this book was written, transistors were starting to revolutionize electronics. He needed vacuum tubes for one of his plot points, so Herbert’s story goes into a detailed explanation about how transistors never replaced vacuum tubes on submarines. I don’t remember what the explanation was. It doesn’t really matter because it was just wrong.

Even Jules Verne’s story From the Earth to the Moon, has problems. Yes it had three men going to the moon in a capsule and then splashing down in the ocean. I will cut Jules some slack for not understanding that you wouldn’t be able to breathe on the moon, or that you would actually experience weightlessness for most of the trip, not just at the exact midpoint between the Earth and Moon. After all, he wrote this in 1865. But I am not going to cut him slack for his method of launching his spacecraft. The capsule got into space by being blasted from a giant cannon. It is difficult to imagine any system or technology even today or in the near future that would allow anyone to survive such a blast.

Not to mention favorite science fiction tropes that are scientifically impossible, like time travel (at least going backward in time) and faster than light travel (well this is probably impossible, but we continue to hold out hope that someone will find a work around). Not that I am criticizing these tropes. They are fun and I like reading (and writing) stories with them included and will continue to do so, but it is not real science.

There are some science fiction predictions that we don’t want to come true, those of dystopian, or post-apocalyptic fiction. These stories are written as warnings of what may happen if we don’t change our ways. I think of Harry Harrison’s novel about over-population Make Room, Make Room. Over-population is still a problem, but the predictions of what the population would be by 1999 did not come to pass. That is probably because of books like Make Room, Make Room.

Science fiction writers have come up with some amazing ideas over the years, some are predictive, some are not. But I don’t read science fiction because I want a prediction of the future. I just want to read great stories.

(My novel Star Liner, is now available as an e-book through Amazon, or the other usual online sources. For those who like to turn physical pages, the paperback will be out soon).

Star Liner

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Second Wind

  You have heard about athletes getting their second wind? It is not that they feel better, that they are warmed up and ready to run more easily. It is not psychological (at least, not all psychological). No. There is an actual physiological truth to a second wind. It all has to do with respiration. When I say respiration, I am not talking about breathing. Respiration is a biochemical process that happens at the cellular level. It is how the cell gets energy. There are lots of chemical processes that are constantly going on in each cell, and those processes require energy. Without a constant feed of energy, the cell will die. The more demands there are on a cell, the more energy it needs. For example, every one of your muscle cells need more energy when you are running.   In fact, you won’t be able to run if the cells don’t have sufficient energy for it. The energy currency of the cell is a molecule called ATP. You may have heard that sugar is how our bodies get energy, which is tr

Roy Batty Figures it out

  This is written with the assumption that the reader has seen the film Blade Runner . If you haven’t, you may not get much out of it. In one of the last scenes in Blade Runner , the killer android Roy Batty, who holds Deckard’s life in his hands, has a remarkable speech: “I've seen things... seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments... will be lost in time like tears in the rain. Time to die.” I am told that the speech that was written was not working very well, and Rutger Hauer was told to just improvise something. Wow. He nailed it. At this point in the film Roy Batty has been the villain throughout. We have been rooting for Deckard (Harrison Ford) to take him out, but it is not going well, and it seems like Batty is about to kill him. At the last second, Roy Batty pulls Deckard up, to keep him from falling to his death. Then he delivers this

The Outsider

  I am reading The Outsider by Stephen King. The first 150 pages or so I found disturbing. Not for the reason you might think. It is not scary, not creepy in a traditional horror way, but disturbing in a tragic way. The first hundred to 150 pages is tragedy on top of tragedy. The most disturbing thing to me (it is disturbing to me anytime I encounter it in any story) is a false accusation. A man is falsely accused and may well be convicted of a horrific crime. That kind of thing disturbs my soul. It makes the whole world seem wrong. I have always been disturbed by stories with that kind of thing. And why not? It happens in real life too. That makes it all the more horrific. In the Jim Crow South, all you had to do was make an accusation against a black man to set the lynch mob in action. No need to bother with a trial. But even if there was a trial, the outcome was a foregone conclusion, innocent or not. We see Vladimir Putin inventing charges against people and they get locked up (or