Maybe the ‘Alien-verse’ just has solar systems a LOT closer together than our reality. Why not, it’s fictional.
Worked for Firefly.
Firefly didn’t have a bunch of solar systems really close to each other - it took place in one solar system with an absurd number of habitable planets.
Yes, I know. Same difference.
A difference which makes a difference IS a difference.
What did Firefly gain by having “one solar system with an absurd number of habitable planets” and no FTL, as opposed to the convention storytelling standard of FTL and lots of solar systems? Nothing! And they make it worse in that, instead of just accepting FTL as possible and many solar systems, we’re supposed to believe one system has many habitable planets all over and far enough from each other to have “an outland” and yet still be liveable ? Going with our reality that FTL is impossible as “hard sf” just makes the absurdity of their system even more obvious.
I completely disagree. The deal with Firefly is not that that there a magically a bunch of habitable planets in one system, but that they have terraforming technology.
Assuming there is a wide habitable zone, this is somewhat plausible. Certainly more so than FTL travel, which for all its ubiquity in SF, is still complete fantasy and can in no way be characterized as hard science fiction.
They’d need the ability to move planets around, too. Terraforming any planet into a livable one with soil and breathable atmosphere doesn’t do much good if it freezes over in five years, or it is too far from the sun to grow plants.
And terraforming would likely take centuries. Yes Firefly is 500 years in the future. I submit that’s no nowhere near enough time. How far away from Earth are they, was that ever mentioned? Because without FTL it would take, well, a long time to get there.
While relativistic space travel makes for a way around no-FTL, it is pretty much as impossible as FTL. Without magical star trek shields, you’re not going to be able to go very fast. I wonder if you could even do 5%c.
It should be noted that a lot of different firefly worlds are moons, too, which increases the potential amount of areas in the habitable zone.
In terms of orbital mechanics, is there a reason that a star couldn’t have 5+ planets (and dozens of moons) in the habitable zone of a star? Like if our solar system had 5 planets between venus and mars instead of one, would they all crash into each other or get thrown out of orbit? Or is it just how it happened to turn out, and in the Firefly system it turned out differently?
Exactly. The premise of the show is that the Firefly system has lots of planets and moons in the habitable zone along with terraforming. No planet moving necessarily needed.*
You can certainly argue about the timing and feasibility, but at least this doesn’t violate any laws of physics like FTL travel (and Star Trek shields, for that matter).
In that sense it is far more plausible. Whereas any “science fiction” with FTL travel in the form of “warp drive” or “hyperspace” is basically space fantasy.
*Although..note that even planet/moon moving is at least theoretically possible in that it doesn’t violate any laws of physics, unlike FTL travel.
Terraforming also expands what counts as “habitable zone”: You can do things like deliberately giving a further-out world a strong greenhouse effect, or a lot of high-altitude clouds to reflect light from one closer in.