Expert: Jayendra Upadhye - 2/3/2006

Question
-------------------------
Okay, thanks for your advice. I get what you mean about writing within certain "realms." I suppose there is less chance for speculation now, then there was for Asimov then, because scientists have discovered so much! However, the world is still changing. :- ) I will definitely try something normal, and send it your way. Thanks! (Good thing I do have some normal ideas in my brain, though the sci-fi ones are still cooking alongside them!)

Followup To
Question -
Oooooooh. Sorry about all the postings, I really only sent this once! Alright. I understand the "frames of reference." No matter where you are on the Earth, you will always see the same side of the Moon, because it turns. Not fast like Earth, but it does turn. As if I were walking in a circle around someone, and never let them see my back. I can't explain it, but I understand it. Seriously. I graduated, by the way, and I am in college, but really, they never teach us this stuff in school, not in any great detail. Added to that, I like amazing my friends by showing them how little I know about certain subjects (ex. I never knew what a miniscule was, but somehow everyone else did). But hey, Sherlock Holmes didn't know the Earth went around the Sun! And therein lies my consolation.
So...as far as the eclipse business. Ultimately, there would be constant sunlight on one side, but dark, eclipsed moons, or half eclipsed moons, and on the other side there would be only moonlight, and partially eclipses at moonrise and moonset? I would like to note that my non-rotating planet would not rotate around an axis, and it might not rotate around anything else either. Including a Sun. There is also the assumption that the sun will be beside the planet, when it could actually be above or below it. :-). Goodness, this is complicated. Well, the Sun could rotate around the Planet. Since stars do rotate...? Or, the Planet could rotate on its own axis only, the Moons Rotate with the Planet (staying in their respective hemispheres) and the Sun could be stationary. That way there would be day and night on both sides. (just going over possibilities) However, I need the non-rotating idea, because one half of the Planet is Ice and Snow, and the other half is Ocean. So if the sun is only on one side, the Ocean side, the other side would be alot colder, hence the ice etc. Yes, it is very obvious that I don't know what I am talking about. (I do know that the tilt of Earth's axis makes Winter!) But the book is not, as they say, hard science fiction, that which focuses on the science of the fiction. It is more "space opera-ish" which focuses on the plot/characters etc. in the sci-fi world. I am just trying to make a fantastical, but believable foundation. In fantasy, it wouldn't matter. In sci-fi, it does.

-------------------------
Followup To
Question -
Hello, I am just resubmitting the followup to my original question, because the URL is persisting in being...dead.
" Hmm, now I read somewhere that the Moon does rotate, but you said that it does not rotate with respect to the Earth. What is the difference? Also, back to the stationary planet idea: So, if the planet does not rotate, that would mean that in one hemisphere it is always daytime, and in another hemisphere it is always nighttime, right? This is assuming I include a sun. If there were six moons for each hemisphere then, I suppose the six on the daylight side would be faintly visible (the way we see the moon at sunset) and the six on the night side would never be visible, because the moon can only reflect the light of the sun?

Answer -
Hi,
Something has gone drastically wrong with this site!
You are posting same question 6 times!
Anyway..
you can read the posted answer to the second phase question at
http://www.allexperts.com/answerq.asp?QuestionID=4243038&ExpertID=59777

alternatively i am cut pasting it for you.

******* start
Heather ..heather !
How old are you?
'Cause your questions are reflecting a "likeable" innocence of all things scientefic! :)

And yet you are writing a book on science-fiction..am i correct?

The plus point is the "correct aspiration" is there! As long as one "does not hide" one's "lacks" in any field and opens out all the cards well, one always succeeds in doing what he does, despite the initial shortcomings.

Bravo! you have courage, and will succeed in that book.

Now your question!
Heather, remember i said "sheltered" and "preferred" two words indication that "stationary" was only an exclusive view point.
The moon HAS to rotate about itself as it goes round the earth! Only it does so in synch with its orbital period. Meaning it turns around itself once as it completes its orbit around the earth.
That way, to observers on the moon and earth, in their "exclusive" frame of reference, the moon keeps one face always to the earth. it means for any point of the moon, if the earth is "just rising", it will remain so for ages! At other points on the moon if the earth is directly overhead, it will remain that way for ever!
To us on earth, we will in return see "only one face" of the moon. For ever. (the one with the bunny like dark pattern on it).
To the external observer however, both the earth and the moon DO TURN! Non rotation occurs only when we have "wilful blinkered vision"! (sheltered heaven..ignorance is bliss ..and so on).
Now was that much clearer?
You made a "slight mistake" on the 6 moon stuff too.

Imagine 12 moons totally (6 per hemisphere).
those in direct line with the sun would actually eclipse the sun and present their "dark" night side to the viewer.
Others placed at different angles in the sky would present phases like our moon depending on their phases.

The one that was directly in "opposition" to the sun, on the planet's night side, would briefly have a lunar eclipse seen on the moon rise side as well as the moon setting side.

HAVE you given a thought to how the planet's evolution (life) would be profoundly affected, as "true" night would never come? the eyes would be different as the range of darkness and light would be narrowed?

The religions would have a dozen goddesses (and one sun god)!

The possibilities are endless!
Jayen
******* end

jayen
Answer -
Hi,
Heather, thanks for telling me how old you are! (by inference that is).

You see, the problem in writing science fiction is that one has to be thorough in "general science" and somewhat proficient in "particular science".
Else some wise-guy can stun the author with "finger pointing" all the weaknesses his "untenable" notions created in his work.

Asimov got away with is "positronic" brains in I robot on 2 counts:-
1 - The pure fiction was excellent (human interaction of susan Calvin with Lanning) and even amusing.
2 - The "positronic" brain of the robots was not in the realm of general nor particular science! It lay in the realm of fantasy! So asimov could never be "caught" by any wiseguys on that front!
People would simply say "ya! such things could be possible in the future!" and move onto the more interesting interactions between lanning and his robots and Calvin.

For you to do that, is difficult, as even in a non-rotating sun-planet "preferred" frame of reference, the laws of physics cannot be held in abeyance!
Namely:-
1 - Thermal conductivity would soon heat up water on the other (night side) of the planet.
2 - The water vapour on the day side would be spread by the atmosphere to the night side and the green house effect would warm up things. (just as in summer, we dont freeze at night just because the sun has set).
3 - There would be continuous gales and cyclones on the "twilight" areas of the planet as the heated air from the planet's midday side would stream to the midnight side,
(fuelled by 'coriolis' acceleration: look it up in wikipedia on the web).
4 - In a mere hundred years, the runaway greenhouse would kill / fry everything.
This does not happen on earth, because the planet quickly turns and stops water from boiling over in localised areas.
even then we reach searing 50 deg centigrade temperature in the tropics! (literally half boiling).

I trust you have NOT YET APPLIED YOURSELF to the PITFALLS of science fiction.

I suggest you TEST your skills first with simple fiction.
As i said any science fiction writer MUST be a good fiction writer first!

I do not mean to put you off, but constructive criticism has it's virtues!

Do mail me your stuff at jupadhye_99@yahoo.com when you are finished.

Jayen


Answer
Hi heather!
Hahaha :)
If there is ONE quality you certainly have, it is persistence!
And as people say it always pays to be persistent.
So do send your creations my way.
I will be happy to play critic!

regards and goodluck to you in all things you do!
Jayen