SciFi Discussion Lobby

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KevinJS

There is a Star Trek museum in Vulcan, Alberta. Might also be worth tracking them down for some info.

---

Thanks for the lead. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iriana

Thank you all for getting back to me... I will contact Marc Cushman. I'm not trying to sell these, would just like to know their value and how unusual they might be.

Does anyone like the old 1960's Prisoner series with Patric McGoohan?? It was about a secret agent who resigns suddenly and wakes up to find himself in a prison disguised as a holiday resort.

The Prisoner (he's called Number Six) spends the entire series trying to escape from the Village and to learn the identity of his nemesis, Number One. The Prisoner was a completely new, cerebral kind of series, stretching the limits of the established television formulae.

---

Yes, I loved it. It was set in Portmerion, N. Wales. My paternal grandparents lived Bangor, N. Wales. About 60 miles away from Portmerion, as the crow flies. Patrick MgGoohan was a co-creator of the series.

A famous phrase uttered by Patrick is "I am a person, not a number!"

Sent from my iPad using iPF

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scifan57

If we're talking about reactions that generate great heat, there's thermite. Powdered aluminum and iron oxide, when ignited, burn at about 2,500°C. This compound is what fueled the solid rocket boosters that helped launch the Space Shuttle.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

---

Sorry. The SRB's of the Space Shuttle used http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammoniu...ite_Propellant.

I know this because I used to fly high power rockets, and I used the same stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MemphisMark

Sorry. The SRB's of the Space Shuttle used http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammoniu...ite_Propellant.

I know this because I used to fly high power rockets, and I used the same stuff.

---

Ammonium perchlorate is the oxidizer for the Aluminum fuel and iron oxide catalyst.

April 6, 2013 marks a momentous occasion in scifi history. 2001 will be 45 years old. For me and, no doubt, many others this story was THE ONE. After reading it nothing was ever the same again. I was hooked on the genre.

I thought it might be an idea for all of us who are regular contributors to this thread, and anyone else who cares to join in, to have a reflective moment on the book, the movie and the sequels.

For anyone who has spent the last 45 years at the bottom of a well, here's a bit of background. Stanley Kubrick approached Arthur C Clarke and announced his intention to make "the proverbial good science fiction movie", and wanted Clarke's advice and input.

What happened next changed sci-fi forever. 5 men and a computer set out on a voyage which, although quite local by the standards of Star Trek and the like, was breathtaking in scope. The visual effects still stand up to scrutiny even today, the soundtrack was outstanding and the overall effect was stunning.

Encompassing 4 million years of evolution, from the primitive to the stars leaves one yearning for more, yet simultaneously hoping that the story is complete in itself. The sequels were good reads, and 2010: The Year We Make Contact wasn't too bad at all, but they had to contend with following the original, the best, the story for which no sequel was possible.

Anyone else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KevinJS

April 6, 2013 marks a momentous occasion in scifi history. 2001 will be 45 years old. For me and, no doubt, many others this story was THE ONE. After reading it nothing was ever the same again. I was hooked on the genre.

I thought it might be an idea for all of us who are regular contributors to this thread, and anyone else who cares to join in, to have a reflective moment on the book, the movie and the sequels.

For anyone who has spent the last 45 years at the bottom of a well, here's a bit of background. Stanley Kubrick approached Arthur C Clarke and announced his intention to make "the proverbial good science fiction movie", and wanted Clarke's advice and input.

What happened next changed sci-fi forever. 5 men and a computer set out on a voyage which, although quite local by the standards of Star Trek and the like, was breathtaking in scope. The visual effects still stand up to scrutiny even today, the soundtrack was outstanding and the overall effect was stunning.

Encompassing 4 million years of evolution, from the primitive to the stars leaves one yearning for more, yet simultaneously hoping that the story is complete in itself. The sequels were good reads, and 2010: The Year We Make Contact wasn't too bad at all, but they had to contend with following the original, the best, the story for which no sequel was possible.

Anyone else?

---

I know the film. I wasn't aware that it's based on a story by Arthur C. Clarke. If a book exists, I'll have to read it. Clarke is one of my favourite scifi authors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J. A.

I know the film. I wasn't aware that it's based on a story by Arthur C. Clarke. If a book exists, I'll have to read it. Clarke is one of my favourite scifi authors.

---

IMHO, 2001, A Space Odyssey is better than 2010, A Space Odyssey.

Sent from my iPad using iPF

Now talking about space oddities.

Did British Airways beat Virgin in the space race?

2012 BA14 is scheduled to fly past Earth tonight (Europen time zone) :D

Sent from my iPad using iPF

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard Brown

IMHO, 2001, A Space Odyssey is better than 2010, A Space Odyssey.

Sent from my iPad using iPF

---

Thank you! Got it! :)
I'll start reading right away!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J. A.

I know the film. I wasn't aware that it's based on a story by Arthur C. Clarke. If a book exists, I'll have to read it. Clarke is one of my favourite scifi authors.

---

Both the book and the movie were based on a short story by Clarke, called "The Sentinel". He wrote it in (I think) 1959 for a literary competition. It didn't win, and history does not recount who beat it. In a follow up called "The lost worlds of 2001", Clarke describes the process by which the book and movie were written at the same time. The movie was actually released first.

Clarke's intention was to use as much scientific know how as possible, which was the reason Discovery went to Saturn. He was able to describe the gravitational "slingshot" effect when Discovery used Jupiter's gravitational field as a source of energy to accelerate towards Saturn, and the natural balancing of the books when he described how the process slowed Jupiter as Discovery accelerated. He also explored the strange physical attributes of Saturn's moon, Japetus, which is around 6 times more reflective on one face when compared to the other.

Kubrick was satisfied with using Jupiter as the destination. Clarke acknowledges the reason for this in Lost Worlds, and claims that Stanley wanted to keep it simple. All sequels went on to follow the plot of the movie, rather than the book, in this regard.

The complete list of books and movies is:

The Sentinel
2001: A Space Odyssey
The lost worlds of 2001
2010: Odyssey 2
2061: Odyssey 3
3001: Final Odyssey

2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick)
2010: the year we make contact (Peter Hyams)

Some trivia:

Heywood Floyd's daughter in 2001 was actually Stanley Kubrick's daughter.
Arthur C Clarke appears in 2010. His part was silent.
Leonard Rossiter also appeared in another Kubrick movie, Barry Lyndon.