That's going into too much detail for what I'm trying to achieve, frankly. SciFi (emphasis on the "Fi") is not ever going to be 100% hard science. How can it be? Faster-than-light travel to other stars, warp/jump/rift space, hand-portable charged particle weapons, practical and functional AIs, and so on? There has to be a trade off between science and fiction, in order to (a) maintain reasonable suspension of disbelief, and (b) making adjustments in reality to allow it to work for the story that's being told.
So, while it's important to give a nod to science, not everything needs to be 100% bang on the nail realistic or justifiable.
And that, I think, is where I'll leave it, the questions that I asked having been more than effectively answered
Thanks one and all, and don't work too hard this week
So, while it's important to give a nod to science, not everything needs to be 100% bang on the nail realistic or justifiable.
And that, I think, is where I'll leave it, the questions that I asked having been more than effectively answered

Thanks one and all, and don't work too hard this week
