A few months ago, I wrote that you could identify genetically engineered life forms by checking their introns.  Introns are segments of DNA that do not code for a protein, and for the most part the arrangement of nucleotides is random.  I theorized that artificial introns might reveal themselves if they follow unnatural, non-random patterns.

An article in August’s Scientific American does not confirm my idea, but it does support it.  Researchers in my home state of Maryland replaced the natural genome of some bacteria with a synthetic version.  The bacteria are still alive, and they’ll never know anything’s different.  This is not a 100% genetically engineered organism, but it is a major step forward.

In order to avoid any confusion between the bacteria with natural DNA and those with the new kind, “watermarks” were added to the artificial DNA.  I don’t know if these watermarks are hidden in introns or somewhere else, but that’s not the important thing right now.  What’s important is that the watermarks include quotes from James Joyce, J. Robert Oppenheimer, and Richard Feynmann.  These are marks of deliberate human design.

I’m not sure how you’d write a quote using only four letters­—I guess they’re in code—but this does show that genetically engineered life can be identified by artificial patterns in its genes.  Genetic engineers of the future may even use this technique to sign their work, like artists signing their paintings.

I’m excited about the possible plot points this creates.  I’m tempted to create a geneticist who loves poetry, or maybe genetically engineered spies who carry messages in their genes.  If Mary Shelley were writing today, perhaps Dr. Frankenstein would have put some little note into the DNA of his monster.  This is a great example of how real science can offer good ideas for stories.

Sources

Biello, David and Katherine Harman.  “The Tools for Life.”  Scientific American August 2010.  Pages 17-18.

Read the original post on Planet Pailly: “Aberrant Introns.”

What would happen if you made a planet out of water and nothing else?  What if you had a giant water droplet, as big as the Earth, suspended in space with only its own gravity to hold it together?  What would such a world be like?

The obvious answer: it would never happen.  Real planets are mixtures of many elements and compounds.  A 100% water planet is as unlikely as a planet of 100% carbon or oxygen.

But I don’t care.  I’m not examining this idea to include in a story.  It’s a hypothetical extreme case that I hope will help me understand how planets are formed.  You might even call it a thought experiment.

Based on my limited knowledge of geology, I know the Earth’s core is a giant, solid mass.  Despite the fact that the core is thousands of degrees Celsius, it doesn’t melt.  The enormous pressure exerted by all the layers of rock, magma, etc on top hold it together.  So what would happen at the core of a planet made only of water?

Based on my research, I believe it would solidify at an extremely high temperature, just like the core of the Earth.  Water, when at high temperatures and under enormous pressure, will form a special kind of hot ice.  Researchers have created this ice in the laboratory, and they call it ice VII (using different temperatures and pressures, scientists have created sixteen varieties of ice).

Assuming the water planet is close enough to its parent star to allow liquid water to exist on the surface, I expect this world’s one ocean would be subject to the same Coriolis forces as Earth’s bodies of water, but without the interference of continents.  Near the poles, we’d probably find ice (ice I_h, the kind you put in your drinks), and there might be an atmosphere of water vapor.  Of course since there’s no carbon, there’s no life.

This is an ongoing project, and I still need to do more research.  I’m particularly curious to know if hot ices, like ice VII and similar forms, glow as they give off heat; and if they do, would that glow be visible from the surface of my water planet?  I should also mention that while 100% water planets are extremely unlikely, scientists have discovered at least one planet outside our Solar System that may have abnormally large amounts of water.  It’s called GJ 1214 b.

I once wrote a story about cute, fuzzy aliens from the planet Dalyna.  In order to protect them from earthquakes and volcanoes, I gave their planet a solid mantle and core.  No churning, underground magma whatsoever.  I thought they’d be happy.  Little did I know I was killing them all.

Earth’s mantle is composed of molten rock at temperatures of several hundred to several thousand degrees Celsius and includes a mixture of iron, magnesium, and other metals that remain in a liquid state.  This vast, metallic ocean keeps moving because of convection.  Warmer material rises to the surface and begins to cool while relatively cooler material sinks and heats up.

Sometimes this movement causes earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, but scientists think it also generates an intense magnetic field.  The same magnetic field that makes compasses work.

Meanwhile out in space, the sun is spewing radiation and other dangerous particles, enough to kill every living thing in the Solar System.  Fortunately for the people of Earth, these particles are electrically charged and our planet’s magnetic field repels them.  The fuzzy aliens of Dalyna, with its solid mantle and therefore no magnetic field… well… they’re dead.

In my defense, I was a kid when I wrote that story, so I didn’t know any better.  The lesson for myself and other science fiction writers is this: make sure you’re cool ideas don’t have unintended consequences.

Sources

Hirose, Kei.  “The Earth’s Missing Ingredient.”  Scientific American June 2010.  Pages 76-83.

“Mantle (geology).”  Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mantle_(geology).

I don’t want to hear anyone criticize H.G. Wells.  The man was a genius.  Some of his later stuff was a bit odd, but he’s still a genius.

One danger in writing science fiction is that, given time, science will advance and your story will become laughable.  Wells found a way around this problem: he had his narrators proclaim their own ignorance.

For example, in The War of the Worlds (at the beginning of Chapter 6), the unnamed protagonist/narrator offers some explanation as to how the Martian death ray might work:

Many think that in some way they are able to generate an intense heat in a chamber of practically absolute non-conductivity.  This intense heat they project in a parallel beam against any object they choose by means of a polished parabolic mirror of unknown composition, much as the parabolic mirror of a light-house projects a beam of light.  But no one has absolutely proved these details.

This is a good trick.  It’s also a cheap trick, but I won’t criticize H.G. Wells for using it.  He clearly did his research and presented a plausible explanation of how this weapon could work.  In a society that’s never heard of lasers, it makes sense.  For readers today familiar with modern science… well, the main character never claimed to be an expert.

Also, let’s give Mr. Wells a big round of applause for inventing the laser gun in 1898, even if the technical details were a little off.

Sources

Aldiss, Brian W.  “H.G. Wells.”  Science Fiction Writers.  Ed. E.F. Bleiler.  NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1982.  Pages 25-30.

Wells, H.G.  The War of the Worlds.  Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc., 1997.

Quantum mechanics is weird enough as it is, but now scientists are making it weirder.  A device called a quantum microphone, which is the width of a human hair and large enough to see with the naked eye, can exist in two places at once.

This is perfectly normal for individual atoms and other tiny particles.  The life of an atom is inherently unpredictable.  Experts often talk about existing in a superposition, where the atom is everywhere it could possibly be.  “Quantum weirdness,” as they sometimes call it, has irritated scientists for decades, but they’ve come to accept the fact that they can’t do anything about it.

By creating a machine that responds to a single atom, similar to what this quantum microphone does, you’ve created a machine that has to respond to all the possible things the atom could be doing at any given time.  The machine itself must enter a superposition where it exists everywhere it possibly can.

A few months ago, I told you how I’d rather not write about bad guys with guns (even fancy laser guns).  I want the weapons of the future to be stranger than that.  Well, if a large object can follow the laws of quantum mechanics, we could have a whole new kind of warfare.

Imagine spaceships, soldiers, and weapons existing in multiple places at once, their actions impossible to predict because of the uncertainty principle.  One man could become an army by existing in a superposition of all his possible locations in battle.  One ship could be an armada.  One bomb could detonate a million times in a million different places.

Before I can turn this into a story, I have to do more thinking and research.  First of all, how accurate are the reports about the quantum microphone (see disclaimer below)?  Second, how much do we know about atoms in superpositions and how they behave?  And last, how would the military use this technology, and how could someone fight against it?

Disclaimer:

Sometimes in science, someone will make a major discovery that just seems too good to be true.  Later experiments will fail to produce the same results.  I hope this quantum microphone can be reproduced, because this is an exciting concept.

If anyone hears something more about quantum microphones or other examples of “quantum weirdness” in the visible world, please post a comment on this blog so I can look into it.

Sources:

Castelvecchi, Davide.  “ ‘Quantum Microphone’ Puts Visible Object in Two Places at Once.”  Scientific American June 2010.  Page 16.

We once believed depression was a mental problem, but recent studies suggest it is caused by imbalances in part of the brain called Area 25 (Insel, 46).  Other mental illnesses can now be linked to physical problems as well, and it won’t be long until all our emotional states can be catalogued in the same way.  So what kind of world will we live in once that happens?

The more we learn about how our brains work, the easier it becomes to manipulate them.  Many sci-fi dystopias are based on this idea.  In fact, it’s been done too many times, and I’m not interested in writing another one.  My question is what would a functional, stable society do to keep itself from degenerating into 1984, Brave New World, or Uglies?

We struggle today with freedom of speech, so how much harder would the struggle for freedom of emotions be?  It might require legal definitions of what is and is not a normal emotion.  They may enact constitutional protection for your emotional rights.  The future’s highest law may be that brain surgery must be voluntary, but then can a truly mentally ill person make a voluntary decision?

A better understanding of the biology of the human brain could also lead to personality modification.  Shyness is not a mental illness, but someday new technology could take it away… perhaps by tampering with the hypothalamus (Staff).  Modifications to the amygdala could make a person harder to frighten, which would be good for anyone in a dangerous profession like law enforcement (Insel, 48).

Advancing science does not have to lead to a dehumanizing future.  With the proper laws and cultural values, everything we learn about the brain could be put to good use in a happy, healthy society.  Of course, no civilization is flawless.  That would make a very boring story.

Sources

Insel, Thomas R.  “Faulty Circuits.”  Scientific American April 2010.  Pages 44-51.

Staff, P.T.  “The Shy Brain.”  Psychology Today November 1, 1995. http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199511/the-shy-brain

In the next hundred years, we will see many great advancements in science and technology.  I believe we will also see a great step forward in literature.  The next William Shakespeare is coming.  He may even be alive today.

Whoever he is, he’s going to turn scientific language into poetry.  There are so many beautiful terms in science—entropy, absolute zero, the inverse square law—and our society is becoming more and more accustomed to hearing them.  The news media has helped with reports on global warming, NASA missions, and the latest iphones.  Wikipedia helps.  Science fiction writers have played their part too.

A scientifically literate society will have scientifically literate literature.  Yes, technical details can be boring.  No one wants to read about quadratic equations, at least not for entertainment.  But in the hands of a genius, someone like William Shakespeare, even dull mathematics can be exciting.

I am not the next William Shakespeare, but I recently discovered a tool the future Shakespeare might use: the Oxford Dictionary of Weights, Measures, and Units.  Basically, it’s a reference book for units of measure.  If I ever write about magnetic flux, I can look it up and find that it is measured in maxwells.  Other publishers have similar books, and I’m told Amazon offers a free version for Kindle.

As a science fiction writer, it is part of my job to use scientific terms correctly.  The Dictionary of Weights, Measures, and Units should help me do that.  I also like to believe that, in my own small way, I’m helping to pave the way for someone who will be among the greatest writers of all time.

Sources

Fenna, Donald.  The Oxford Dictionary of Weights, Measures, and Units.  Oxford University Press, 2009.

When the day comes that humanity does have an intergalactic empire, there is one everyday item we will have to get rid of: calendars.  Thanks to the Theory of Relativity, we know time is flexible.  It moves at a different rate depending on your velocity.

Space ship navigators traveling at speeds approaching or somehow exceeding the speed of light will be very aware of time dilation.  In the year it takes to go from point A to point B, several decades may have passed for the rest of the universe.

In order for science fiction writers to avoid the complex calculations in Einstein’s theory, there are several websites (listed below) that offer Relativity Calculators.  Time doesn’t severely distort until around 80 or 90% of the speed of light, but even at 50% the crew of a spaceship will start losing a few hours per day.

At the moment, I’m not writing anything about space travel of this sort.  My current project is much stranger.  But if I were, I’d mention something about how time dilation has affected the lives of my characters.  After a year at sea, the sailors of old could never really go home; how much worse would it be for a time dilated navigator.

My advice to fellow sci-fi writers is not to think too much about this problem.  It is important, and space faring societies will be aware of it, but I’ve found that the more I try to explain Relativity the less sense it makes.  So for your readers’ sake and for your own sanity, acknowledge time dilation exists, use a Relativity Calculator, and move on with the story.  Leave the details for textbooks.

Links

Relativity Time Dilation Calculator (The easiest to use, in my opinion).

Relativity Calculator (Allows you to choose different units of measure).

Space Math (Also has calculators for escape velocity, orbital periods, etc…).

Sources

Clark, Ronald W.  Einstein: The Life and Times.  NY: Harper Collins, 1971.

Krauss, Lawrence M.  The Physics of Star Trek.  NY: Harper Collins, 1995.

This is the story of a navigator and his spaceship.  Every protagonist has a goal; in this case, the navigator wants to travel through space.  Every protagonist must overcome some obstacles; this one must overcome Newton’s laws of motion.

1. Bodies at rest remain at rest and bodies in motion remain in motion unless some force acts on them (thrust, friction, gravity, etc…).  So in order for our navigator to begin his journey, he must get some force to act on his ship.  Since space is a frictionless vacuum, once the ship is moving it will not stop.
2. Forces must operate in straight lines, but multiple forces can combine through vector mathematics, allowing objects to travel in curves.  So if our navigator needs to follow anything other than a linear course, he’ll have to use more than one force to do it.
3. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.  This law allows the spaceship to exert force on itself.  It simply launches some kind of propellant in one direction, and it will travel in the opposite direction.

Newton’s laws are simple enough, but taking advantage of them is an art form.  Piloting a spaceship, making it turn and twist around the stars, requires complex mathematical skills.  For the best pilots, vector calculations will become instinctive.

As our navigator flies through space, perhaps using Jupiter’s gravity to help change course, he still has one problem: how to stop.  Objects in motion stay in motion.  Hopefully, he saved enough fuel to counteract his enormous momentum.

Sources

“Newton’s Laws of Dynamics.” Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia Eighth Edition.  Ed. Douglas M. Considine.  NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1995.  Page 2172.

When writing science fiction, not every bit of research needs to be included.  This isn’t a textbook, and most readers don’t care about the intricacies of quantum mechanics anyway.  But the scientific facts that do get into the story have to be correct.

Over the next few weeks, I’ll be taking a closer look at some of the most basic rules in astrophysics.  These are things discovered centuries ago and are not cutting edge science, but they should be common knowledge in any space faring society.

Johannes Kepler spent part of his life as an assistant to the Dutch astronomer Tycho Brahe.  During that time, he had access to detailed measurements of planets and stars, which helped him develop three laws of planetary motion.

1. The planets move in elliptical orbits with the sun at one focal point.  Isaac Newton later developed calculations to prove this, and those calculations are important for planets orbiting binary stars.
2. An imaginary line connecting a planet to the sun will always cover the same area in the same amount of time.  In other words, planets move faster when they are closer to their star than when they are further away.
3. A planet’s distance from the sun cubed divided by the time it takes to complete one orbit squared equals a constant for all planets.  This means that with simple algebra, you can find the length of a planet’s year by knowing its distance from the sun.

Although Kepler only worked with planets, we now know these laws apply to any object orbiting any other object.  In order for a space ship navigator to safely pilot his vessel into orbit, he must know these things.  As a sci-fi writer writes about this navigator, the writer should know about them too.

Sources

“Kepler’s Laws of Planetary Motion.” Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia Eighth Edition.  Ed. Douglas M. Considine.  NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1995.  Pages 1812-1813.

Tiner, John Hudson.  100 Scientists Who Shaped World History.  San Mateo: Bluewood Books, 2000.  Page 19.