From: smith@ctron.com (Larry Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science
Subject: Re: different kind of universe
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:47:32 GMT
Reply-To: smith@ctron.com
Distribution: rec
Organization: Cabletron Systems, Inc.

In article <NICKH.92Apr14181959@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU>, nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines) writes:

...some interesting stuff.  Creating cosmosii is one of my hobbies, so I
found this especially intriguing.  I have a few comments and observations.
I will presume for the nonce that any physical phenomena that are not
expressly altered remain much as they are in the "real" universe.

>The universe is flat three-dimensional, infinite (or possibly
>finite/closed/toroidal, but so nearly flat that it appears flat), and
>full of breathable air.  It is oriented by a gravitational `force'
>(not, I repeat, like our gravity), which is in the same direction
>everywhere. This force affects some things (such as people) but not
>others (such as air). The key behaviour is that the terminal velocity
>of a falling human body in air is about 5 m/s (~11 mph). To give you
>some idea, this is the same speed with which you hit the ground if you
>jump (or fall) off your desk. Not all objects need fall with the same
>speed. The speed is determined by composition, mass, and fudge-factor
>:-). In particular, a person carrying much of anything (including
>excess body-fat) falls significantly faster (say 50 m/s), although
>nothing that falls does so much slower than a person...

This environment creates considerable evolutionary pressure for small beings.
Smaller beings can fall from disk to disk and thus have a wider range of
habitats available, an evolutionary advantage.  If they have means of flight,
they have an even greater advantage than birds have on Earth.  From the
description, the energy cost for flight is tiny compared to Earth, since flight
confers many evolutionary advantages, a HUGE amount of your ecosystem will
become airborne.

Some critters will have real advantages...this universe would be heaven for
spiders...the tiny size lets them fall slowly, they have draglines for
vertical transports, and they can presumable still balloon.  Spiders might
almost completely replace insects.

>on the upper sides. They are placed seemingly at random, separated by
>some kilometres horizontally (enough for some _really_ elegant
>suspension bridges) and some hundreds/thousands of kilometres

...I like the mental image...

>typical ecological niches. There are no really big (much larger than,
>say, pterosaurs) fast-moving aerial beasties. I can put a fudge-factor

Such an environment would encourage such, however.  Critters can be quite
large and still have low enough weight to fly with little energy cost in
this cosmos.  You could try to come up with different aerodynamic laws,
but that will affect tech, too.  If wings don't work, you can't paddle
in water, and parachutes never get invented (not beyond the first one,
anyway :) .

>for this into the `gravity' equation. There are good places for really
>_extreme_ rainforests (excess precipitation, very warm, and the weight
>that trees have to support is much smaller, because of the way gravity
>works).

This encourages vast genetic diversity (most of Earth's diversity is in the
rainforests), AND creates more evolutionary pressure for flight, to reach the
food.  Remember that rainforests are LOADED with birds, bats, insects,
flying squirrels, and so forth, all of which found it cost-efficient to fly
against Earthly gravity - in this universe, even more of the ecology will
take off.

>Godbelow, who lives AT THE BOTTOM. To progress spiritually, one must

Makes large birds the messengers of the Evil One?  They will tend to fly UP
from the POV of one of your people.

>Last, but not least, there is the Earth. In one story, this gets

Virtually all the water will drain away, leaving the world an uninhabitable
desert.  Although I have to say the mental image of all of Europe falling
off the planet IS amusing...personally, I'd try to arrange it so as to lose
the MidEast...

>PS: oh, by the way, I'd appreciate at least being _told_ if anyone
>else uses any of these ideas.

I might, but chances are you won't recognize them by the time I'm done.  Also,
your thinking somewhat parallels my own (this universe bears an astonishing
resemblence to the one I used prior to my current design).  Be happy to tell
you about it when I have more time.

Larry Smith (smith@ctron.com) No, I don't speak for Cabletron.
-------------------------------------------------------------
I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a "disgrace",
that two are called a "law firm", and that three or more become a "Congress".
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.science