Ask Science
Ask a science question, get a science answer.
Community Rules
Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.
Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.
Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.
Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.
Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.
Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.
Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.
Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.
Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.
Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.
Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.
Rule 7: Report violations.
Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.
Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.
Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.
Rule 9: Source required for answers.
Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.
By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.
We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.
view the rest of the comments
Totally possible. Thequestion is whether it's worth it. Science fiction is cool because of the fiction, not because of the science.
When it becomes science reality it instantly loses it's luster. Because science fiction doesn't tell you about the things that suck about the tech.
Has there ever been a science "fiction" book that actually dived in to the mechanics just to explain what's going on and years later added on to those mechanics and it became fact? Generally curious.
Depends on what exactly you mean.
Star Trek famously took scientific concepts that were in early development at that time and finctionalized them. Some of them then were developed in reality. They didn't "invent" them, but they did popularize them.
For example, the first early prototype work on touch screen was published in 1965, and Star Trek introduced them in 1966. At that time the concept of touch screens was not widely known in the general public. Touch screens did become a wide-spread product much later.
Research on speech recognition started in 1960, computer-based speech synthesis in 1950 and Chatbots in 1964. Neither of them were any good in 1966 when Star Trek used the concepts to create a "computer" that one can talk to. They neither invented the components of that, nor did they invent the combination of all that. But when they used that in fiction, reality wasn't nearly ready to actually deliver on these promises.
In general, good science fiction usually uses stuff that is right now in research. Bad science fiction makes shit up.