8.7 KiB
[RT][DC][FF] Shears - Thorns, 6 (rational MLP)
-
Author: u/Calamitizer Shears*
-
URL: http://www.fimfiction.net/story/300693/20/shears/thorns-6
-
Score: 13
-
Created: 2016-05-20T23:34:18
Post:
Comments:
u/Calamitizer [+1] Shears (a minute later)
The story begins here.
Basic info is here.
Hope you enjoy a little bit of hard magic science. Thanks for reading!
u/daydev [+1] (9 hours later)
Man, this fic needs a 'Required Background' disclaimer. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing^1, but this may be the most math-heavy piece of fiction I've ever read.
^1 — although they say that each included formula halves the reader base, and that's for popular science books, for pony fanfictions it's probably an order of magnitude reduction per formula :)
u/Calamitizer [+2] Shears (23 hours later)
Do you think it's a problem, or are you just stating an observation? I'm a bit concerned.
I'm wondering whether I should try / should have tried to disclaim that complete comprehension of background physics isn't required to enjoy the story, just enough scientific literacy to pick out key points (like "gems can be used to focus magical attacks on a certain target if you know their spectrum"). I'm honestly extremely happy with the background physics in this chapter (I think it makes perfect sense and is a pretty damn nifty system), but I definitely care what readers think too. The goal with these sections is really to give a given reader however much they want to get out of it; if they want to pore over the details, the details are there, but if they just want to skim it and concentrate their attention on the narrative, that's perfectly okay too. Do you have any thoughts on how to make this option more obvious? A literal disclaimer seems a bit tacky and like it would probably have the opposite of the intended effect.
Maybe I could put more effort into exhibiting Twilight summarizing the key points in her head afterwards. Or I could display her written notes.
I also would appreciate feedback (from any reader) on a couple other related things, if anyone is so inclined. Is the balance between background science and narrative strong enough? I try to generously space out info-dumps like this.
Readers who either don't pay especially close attention to the science, or readers who don't claim to understand it: does it seem like it does make sense intrinsically, and you personally didn't form a comprehension? Or does it feel like contentless technobabble? I'm much more okay with the former, since I strive to write a system that makes sense internally.
The vivification system is actually pretty much exactly the same mechanically as the system of photon emission/absorption in our world. The only difference is that you allow complex-frequency "photons", and that's what a pure magic beam is. "Thauma" is a general term for electromagnetic radiation (EMR) and magic radiation (MR) together. Readers who claim a working understanding of this chapter's physics, did any of what I just said fail to come through in the text?
I'm writing a lot more about this than I maybe intuit is wise for an author to do because it's something I want to totally nail. I want a universe with awesome, believable physics as a high priority. Maybe you don't understand all of it, but maybe you don't understand real-life physics completely either (I know I don't). I don't think you need to be a physics student to get enough content from these sections for then to be worth the time. However, I am a physics student, and I've never been especially skilled at emulating minds without my own level of understanding. If I'm not achieving what I'm aiming for, I want to be told. I don't want the level of detail to become an entry barrier. So, I'm taking a lot of care in asking for input and trying to make educated decisions about what's best for the story and my vision for it. Apologies if anything I said here comes across as elitist; I just want to be exceedingly careful. If I drastically fucked up this section, I'd prefer to edit it straight away. But if two similar comments are just a coincidence and the majority of readers have no issue with it, I'd strongly prefer not to do any unnecessary editing. Any feedback at all is sincerely appreciated.
u/MaxDougwell [+2] (a day later)
I was able to get all the salient points from the physics text, while not being very good at physics. I'm quite enjoying the rules of magic you've created and look forward to each chapter of Shears with anticipation. Keep up the good work!
u/EDSorow [+1] (a day later)
I understood the text as well. It's rare to find hard magic systems that have this much detail, so it would be unfortunate if this affects how much info on magic you include in future chapters.
That being said, the average reader probably doesn't know much about physics, if at all, so I doubt they'd understand the science. It all depends on your target audience. STEM students should have no trouble understanding this (except maybe the math, and in that case marginal research should bring them up to speed).
u/daydev [+1] (a day later)
Do you think it's a problem, or are you just stating an observation? I'm a bit concerned.
It's not a problem for me personally, if anything it's interesting for the novelty of it: a magic system so hard it involves actual math! I'm just stating a general wisdom that math alienates readers.
Do you have any thoughts on how to make this option more obvious? A literal disclaimer seems a bit tacky and like it would probably have the opposite of the intended effect.
Maybe make Spike into a bit of an Audience Surrogate and have Twilight summarize the gist of it to him? Maybe make use of Pinkie's Fourth Wall Leaning tendencies to make a comment that math is an optional bonus? Make it into a joke instead of tacky disclaimer.
Readers who claim a working understanding of this chapter's physics, did any of what I just said fail to come through in the text?
I think it came through, I got the analogy with our mundane absorption/emission. I understood that MR is like EMR, only with complex numbers. I missed that "Thauma" is a catch all term for radiation, I was under the assumptions that "thaumic" (and variants) is a fancy synonym for "magical" as per usual convention. Now looking at it I see that "thaumic wave" is right in the first sentense.
u/UltraRedSpectrum [+1] (10 hours later)
Oh, now I feel bad. I said as much in the Fimfiction comments, and now almost half the comments on the present chapter are complaining about the physics.
u/daydev [+1] (10 hours later)
I'm not exactly complaining, I personally seem to have enough background to just understand the technical section (so far, anyway).
u/Gurkenglas [+1] (9 hours later)
If red glass lets nonred light through, why does it look red even from a dark room lit through a red pane of glass?
So you can control where a bolt is absorbed by giving the bolt some visible color and controlling the color of the material it passes through/is reflected by - more signalling computery stuff :D
Did you mean to say Ψ there without defining it?
If identical Γ but wildly different Ψ means identical abilities, then measuring Γ gives you all information about abilities.
How are single frequency attacks more useful for assassination than colorful ones?
u/daydev [+1] (10 hours later)
Did you mean to say Ψ there without defining it?
But it is defined at the first occurrence: "This is a spectrum (i.e. a function from the positive complex numbers to [0,1], typically denoted as Ψ)".
If identical Γ but wildly different Ψ means identical abilities, then measuring Γ gives you all information about abilities.
I think because Γ is defined as an integral, you can't measure it directly, you need to measure Ψ, and then integrate to get Γ. Alternatively, you can compute Γ from Π and Ξ, but presumably you can't measure Π and Ξ from traces, and Ψ you can.
How are single frequency attacks more useful for assassination than colorful ones?
I think it's about concentration all the energy in the vulnerable spot instead of spreading it all around the spectrum (and thus letting most of it being absorbed).
u/Calamitizer [+1] Shears (23 hours later)
That's all pretty much spot-on.