Travel Through Dark Matter

Dark matter was discovered because of its gravitational pull, this suggests that it is some form of matter, so this doesn't suggest that it has different physical laws...You can invent a new thing that isn't known to exist, but you can't really mislabel that which is known, even if it is not completely known...Travelling great distances in a relatively short time would be better fantasized as an entangled particle transporter, where a human could be translated into light and transported at lightspeed to a receiver location...We could send receivers out into space and after 100 years transport a human to the receiver in that ship....this might actually be possible in some iteration someday...

Oh who discovered it ? As far as I know there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that dark matter has a gravitational field, how could it when it is universal. Around a galaxy there will be intense gravitational forces. Trapped in that will be minute particles, some perhaps just electrons, billions of them spread over a vast expanse.although miles apart when combined they will exert a gravitational pull or effect and even from a distance, because it is distance in depth, will appear to be solid. That is probably what they are seeing I don't know how your gravitational particle transporter works but if it relies on any form of transport then you have still got the same problem that nothing can move faster than light in our universe and to go to even the middle of our galaxy and come back would be in time to probably see your great, great, great, great grandchildren buried . All one could say afterwards was ' yes I went there', but it was of no practice or commercial value

Particle transporter, warp drive... whatever. These are simply premises on which to hang the story that follows - premises that require the reader's willing suspension of disbelief (see my post #6). The reader of sci-fi says, 'Okay, I'll temporarily accept the premise that travel to distant galaxies is possible. Now tell me your story.' This is no different than the reader of a Jack Reacher novel, saying, 'Okay, I'll accept the premise that the vagabond Jack Reacher is the smartest, toughest man in North America. Now tell me your story."

I also was a Sci-Fi fan. When I went to college... I pretty much stop reading Sci-fi, because most good sci-if reading was written by Physicist’s, scientist’s and engineers.

Where they took actual facts, give it a entertaining twist where it loses it’s value for the readers entertainment.

Being a layman, I had to limit my exposure to sci-fi just because, if a discussion came up, I didn’t want to say, ‘well, I read it....’, not knowing where I actually read it, whether it was a textbook, technical journal or a sci-if book.

<...fairy stories...> have been told around the campfire for millennia. And there's nothing wrong with that.

I disagree. Sci-fi simply requires what is known in literary criticism as the "willing suspension of disbelief". Two examples in the genre come immediately to mind. "The Time Machine" by H.G.Wells requires that the reader accept, for the duration of the story, that time travel could be possible. "Flowers for Algernon" by Daniel Keyes requires that the reader accept, for the duration of the story, that a brain operation could be possible that would transform a mentally disabled person into a genius. The stories do not demand that the reader accept either premise in actuality, they only ask for the willing suspension of disbelief in the premise while reading the story. Provided the author adheres to an internal logic that follows from the premise, the reader's cognitive functions can be stimulated and engaged.

That is one way of looking at it of course, ' the fairy story' but then they ought to begin with once upon a time maybe ? However, I think the essence is really in 'just beyond our grasp at the moment.' But once the already; 'known to be impossible' is ignored, then the realism for me is lost.

As another example, "2001, A Space Odyssey" was a speculation on the origin of human consciousness, and the evolution of our species from tool-makers to the birth of the first star-child. It was not a "fairy story" for children, and if you can dismiss that work of art as such, then that says more about you than about it.

Though I understand the logic to your comment, where is the fun in that. Sci-Fi was created to entertain and create fantasy and thoughts of achievement. As a die-hard Star Trek fan, good old captain Kirks flip communicator became a possibility in the 90's when the "Flip Phone" became an item.

Spectrometers are basically a "Tricorder" device used as a fantasy item in Star Trek. Though Light "warp' Speed is a likely fantasy, many other attributes have come from those Sci-fi fantasy nerds/geeks.

I say hurrah for the Sci-fi wonders and imagination it has created for many.

Then again maybe my mind has fallen into a Dark Matter worm hole and I still don't know where it will end up.

IMO - Good science fiction, or fantasy, uses the science or magical world as a framework to build the human story around. The framework has to be designed and explained enough to hold together in the context of the story so it becomes the background. When it does not become the background it becomes a distraction. The framework does not have to hold together with physics reality we know as fact today to make a good story.

If you want to write stories using travel through dark matter as a framework that's great, as long as the story is a good one. The point of the story can't be that travel through dark matter doesn't violate the known laws of physics though, then it's a text book.

Very good. As always, the story has to be engaging, and we have to care about the characters. I particularly like your last sentence, "The point of the story can't be that travel through dark matter doesn't violate the known laws of physics though, then it's a text book." I accept that sci-fi can speculate beyond the known laws of physics, since our knowledge of those laws and what is possible is incomplete, but I want the speculations to retain some futuristic plausibility. I read a story by Ray Bradbury about virtual reality that he wrote fifty years ago! Sci-fi writers with a grounding in science often give us visions of an actual possible future that seem like fantasy at the time of writing. I think it was Arthur C. Clark who said that any technology sufficiently advanced will be indistinguishable from magic.

Just use a flux capacitor.