# Accepting the Unacceptable?



## Skyrender (Sep 22, 2012)

So I've been doing a lot of research about lunar cycles, orbits etc. in trying to figure out if one of my simple details is actually going to work.

Basically, I just want to have 2 moons for my planet, one that is, for all intents and purposes, the same as ours, and then one that is much larger in appearance and generally gives off beautiful white light.

In my findings, if a moon is larger/closer it ruins the tides, changes day length, curves your spine, etc. I was thinking with it being basically a visual, does it really matter if it is scientifically impossible? I mean, it is fantasy after all.

I think most people would just say "oh yeah, cool, a large moon. I know what that is," and move along with the story. But I am afraid others may be more prone to "that's impossible!". I know that I never really gave much thought to the double suns on Tattooine.

I'm thinking that if people are into the story, they will accept it if everything else is sound and believable. Kind of like the ending to Jaws.

Thoughts?


----------



## Penpilot (Sep 22, 2012)

Don't worry about it. Just do it. Dragon flight is impossible too but not too many people doubt and complain about that.

If a person is distracted by the fact that the two moons is impossible the way you set it up then it's a possibility that what you've written isn't interesting enough to pull them into the world and accept that fact, so write it well and it'll work. 

Also there's always those who look to pick things apart, saying this ain't possible that ain't real, and no matter how well something is written, won't accept it. They're just too grounded in reality and just can't leave even for fun.


----------



## Guru Coyote (Sep 22, 2012)

As a reader of SciFi, I might object to an 'impossible moon', but that's not the kind of story you are writing, is it? And besides, even in a lot of SciFi you have less than scientific things. 

But maybe it's not so much the reader who is distracted by the 'impossible moon' than you? (I know I want my world to be plausible as a writer...)

Here's an idea that could give you this very large 'moon': what if your world is not actually the planet around which both moons orbit, but actually a moon of a largge gas-giant? That would give you a very large celestial object in the night sky...


----------



## ThinkerX (Sep 22, 2012)

Ok...

long term problem with two or more moons is that sooner or later, they're going to collide or one will be ejected from the system unless there is something unusual about their orbits (such as having one moon in the other Lagrange point or something).

But...if all you want is for the moon to be more reflective, then have it an 'iceball' type worldlet instead of dead stone like our moon.  Ice is vastly more reflective than rock, hence said moon would be far brighter than ours, even if not very big.

Now...if you want to set up a long term situation for your worlds populace, go with two moons, with one in an unstable orbit.  Even if it doesn't collide with your planet, the gravitational effects of a near miss would be devastating.  (A near miss like that, though would probably result in the moon being ejected from its orbit.)  Or just have the two moons collide.  The larger would not be destroyed, but there would be a lot of stuff falling out of the sky for a while, some of it big enough to inflict serious damage.


----------



## Saigonnus (Sep 22, 2012)

It would be entirely plausible... after all Mars has two and though they may eventually collide, they have a fairly standard orbit at the moment. I believe they are fairly similar in size though.

I think perhaps one of two possible scenarios for having more than one moon:

1. One moon IS bigger and it is far enough away that the effects of gravity aren't that pronounced on the smaller moon, but they would probably look close to the same size in the sky from the added difference in distance.

2. Both moons are of similar size and one is; as suggested above ice or has large amounts of ice to make it reflect more sunlight.  

I don't think it would throw too many people off in the scheme of things considering it is fantasy. My world has 3 moons and generally I don't really think about it. You will always have those people that question every little thing people write so the best thing is to write it how you want and just not worry about it.


----------



## Ravana (Sep 22, 2012)

ThinkerX said:


> long term problem with two or more moons is that sooner or later, they're going to collide or one will be ejected from the system unless there is something unusual about their orbits (such as having one moon in the other Lagrange point or something).



Uhm… you _do_ realize that the outer planets each have dozens of moons, right? "Long-term" has to be understood in the sense of hundreds of millions, even billions, of years in this context. If ever, when it comes to "colliding"; most will probably follow their own individual death spirals into their primaries eventually, a few will go the opposite direction. (Luna is one of these: it's getting farther away over time. But don't panic: the Earth/Luna system will be engulfed by the Sun's expansion before it escapes.)

-

As far as the science goes: a larger moon might be far less dense–Luna is the second densest moon in the Solar System, but is only the fifth largest; Ganymede, Callisto and Titan are all larger but less dense. (Io is both larger and marginally more dense.) One thing that could cause a lower density is a high composition of ices… which would also make it reflect more light, thus making it brighter as well (Luna is actually pretty dim compared to some of the others). As others have mentioned.

I'm not sure it even makes sense to speak of "ruining" tides–since our sole example of tidal forces acting upon liquid water is probably a bit biased, since comes from the influence of our single moon. Oh, and the Sun. Which is not an inconsiderable influence. Having two large, nearby moons will certainly make the tides _different_–and require a lot more math if you want to know their precise effects; on the other hand, when have you ever seen someone go to the trouble of doing the math even for the Earth system? The tides would be less significant most of the time, as usually the two will be pulling in different directions; they would be rather higher whenever the two moons were in line with the planet, but this will be a small percentage of the time compared to when they are not so aligned.

Changing day lengths is a function of the age of the system as a whole… and thus will have no effect on your story. You just set it in whatever point of the system's history provides a day of the desired length. For those who are wondering, Earth's days are slowing down–at a rate of fifteen millionths of a second per year. 

Having two moons should straighten spines, courtesy of that minuscule extra pull of gravity from space. 

Note that your planet need not have _formed_ with two moons: the second could be a late capture… though an Earth-sized planet capturing a moon that large is fairly unlikely, I'd have to say. It would have had to be moving really slow. Still, this is not impossible.

And note finally something I often remind people of in the context of creating their own mythologies: "With gods, all things are possible."


----------



## Devor (Sep 22, 2012)

Skyrender said:


> I think most people would just say "oh yeah, cool, a large moon. I know what that is," and move along with the story. But I am afraid others may be more prone to "that's impossible!".



I wouldn't do it without considering the implications.  There's two reasons for that.  First, a little complexity adds depth.  If you casually mention that the tides were skewed and funny because of the two moons, _that's cool_, if you do it right.  Second, people know that a second moon will affect at least the tides.  I would notice it right away, and it would bug me if you didn't play off the implications.  Star Wars didn't have to consider it.  Maybe because it's an old movie from the seventies.  More likely because, y'know.  Tatooine.


----------



## Steerpike (Sep 22, 2012)

Unless something to do with the tides impacts the story, it might appear odd to have a character mention it. After all, to them the two moons and the corresponding effect on the tides will be normal. They wouldn't perceive anything odd about it without another frame of reference.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Sep 22, 2012)

The great thing about writing fantasy is that you can do whatever you want because you're making up the rules.  You can change the laws of physics if you want to make it plausible to have the setup you want.  You can also use your magic system to break the laws of physics so that the moon setup is plausible.

Bottom line, IMO, it's okay to have implausible setups, but you have to justify them somehow.

Note: you do not need to go into great detail in your book about your justification unless it is warranted for your storyline.  As long as it's plausible to you, that's all you need.


----------



## The Dark One (Sep 23, 2012)

Why not call the story "Impossible Moon"?

Your dilemma reminds me of watching a fantasy/adventure movie at the cinema, years ago, and at this particular dramatic point where someone scaling a battlement is waiting for some guards (with dogs) to pass, this kid behind me suddenly says: That's ridiculous! As if the dogs wouldn't have sniffed him!

This kid has just watched 90 minutes of magic and dragon flight and all sorts of outrageous plot-inducing coincidences, and it all just washed over him. But there was no way he'd accept a guard dog with a weak sniffer...


----------



## Guru Coyote (Sep 23, 2012)

The Dark One said:


> This kid has just watched 90 minutes of magic and dragon flight and all sorts of outrageous plot-inducing coincidences, and it all just washed over him. But there was no way he'd accept a guard dog with a weak sniffer...



Good point 
It all comes down to "suspense of disbelief" ... and that movie may have achieved it with the dragons and the magic, but failed at the guard dogs - at least for that kid. Maybe that's because the situation was just too 'real' ... while all the dragon-flight and magic was just 'wow'. How can we know if dragons can't fly? We don't have dragons... but we do have dogs, and we know what they can or can not do - at least we think we know.

As to the impossible moon... I think it's important that it makes sense to the writer, and that the world is plausible to the writer. That feeling will translate to the story. If the writer thinks it's not plausible... the reader will catch on.


----------



## srcroft (Sep 23, 2012)

Skyrender said:


> So I've been doing a lot of research about lunar cycles, orbits etc. in trying to figure out if one of my simple details is actually going to work.
> 
> Basically, I just want to have 2 moons for my planet, one that is, for all intents and purposes, the same as ours, and then one that is much larger in appearance and generally gives off beautiful white light.
> 
> ...



It's not impossible. It depends on distance and balance-- location of other planets that can pull on that moon and the sun. It isn't for you to explain, its enough for the possibility. If you can have a planet that's bigger than a moon and stay in orbit yu can have a moon that's bigger then the planet. You may (like Dragon's Bloods' 2 Suns) want to have extra effects. Like maybe nights are longer and twice as cold, deadly in fact. Just and idea.


----------



## srcroft (Sep 23, 2012)

Guru Coyote said:


> Good point
> It all comes down to "suspense of disbelief" ... and that movie may have achieved it with the dragons and the magic, but failed at the guard dogs - at least for that kid. Maybe that's because the situation was just too 'real' ... while all the dragon-flight and magic was just 'wow'. How can we know if dragons can't fly? We don't have dragons... but we do have dogs, and we know what they can or can not do - at least we think we know.
> 
> As to the impossible moon... I think it's important that it makes sense to the writer, and that the world is plausible to the writer. That feeling will translate to the story. If the writer thinks it's not plausible... the reader will catch on.



Suspension of Disbelief is a contract that is broken by modern movie watchers and readers all too often. There does need to be a responsibility to a bit of authenticity. What I mean is this--If its a book about a magic motorcycle, you should probably know about motorcycles. In this case its not a story about moons, the moons are adornment to make an interesting planet. However, I will say if you don't have a purpose or scene that is going to be effected by it, pointing it out may not be important. This is why I mentioned earlier you may want to assign a reason for it, like adding danger.


----------



## srcroft (Sep 23, 2012)

The Dark One said:


> Why not call the story "Impossible Moon"?
> 
> Your dilemma reminds me of watching a fantasy/adventure movie at the cinema, years ago, and at this particular dramatic point where someone scaling a battlement is waiting for some guards (with dogs) to pass, this kid behind me suddenly says: That's ridiculous! As if the dogs wouldn't have sniffed him!
> 
> This kid has just watched 90 minutes of magic and dragon flight and all sorts of outrageous plot-inducing coincidences, and it all just washed over him. But there was no way he'd accept a guard dog with a weak sniffer...



But, sometimes we have to be leery as writers of this effect. Instinct can ruin one novel but let another work. Someone like Rowling can make up hubbly bubbly words and its brilliant, and others its corny. Magic and Dragons kids wanna see--but all little kids with dogs know too much about them. I've seen it in lots of movies too, tons of crazy stuff, and then you get a weird feeling like "why would the character do that?"--Thats a sign that a 3D character is known a bit better by the reader--which should never happen. As far as the moon, ya no big deal. The Dogs Sniffer "LMAO" probably an oversight that could've been field tested on some kids prior to publishing.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Sep 23, 2012)

If the moon is just a visual background detail in the sky, then whether or not it's possible is irrelevant. Just say it's there and that it's pretty.

Also keep in mind that if it provides substantial illumination at night, that can have an effect on the plot of the story, since e.g. characters could see better at night.


----------



## Zero Angel (Sep 23, 2012)

Penpilot said:


> Don't worry about it. Just do it. Dragon flight is impossible too but not too many people doubt and complain about that.



Why do people keep saying that dragon flight is impossible? What is impossible about it?

For the moon, what causes all of those things? Not the presence of the moon itself, but its gravity. And what causes the gravity? Its mass. Just have it be less massive, and as someone else mentioned, more reflective, and you're good to go. In fact, if you lower the mass of both moons, then you can probably approach a "standard" Earth-moon system.


----------



## srcroft (Sep 23, 2012)

Zero Angel said:


> Why do people keep saying that dragon flight is impossible? What is impossible about it?
> 
> For the moon, what causes all of those things? Not the presence of the moon itself, but its gravity. And what causes the gravity? Its mass. Just have it be less massive, and as someone else mentioned, more reflective, and you're good to go. In fact, if you lower the mass of both moons, then you can probably approach a "standard" Earth-moon system.



Dragon flight is impossible because animals that fly have hollow bones or it wouldn't be possible to have enough energy, so the dragons wings couldn't support its weight. The dragon would have to be light and frail or if it had bigger wings it would have other issues. 

Most animal experts agree they would be able to glide.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Sep 23, 2012)

I love the idea of a huge moon in the sky or even more than one moon, it's a fascinating concept and this is something that I have included in my own Fantasy worlds: One of them has a violet moon that takes about a quarter of the night sky, and another has two smaller blue moons that give off a sinister light.

I have another moon composed entirely by ice where visiting Mages can have fun ice skating =)

I would say that if you like this idea, and it makes you feel good and like your world even more, then go for it and do not worry if it's cosmically plausible or not.


----------



## Feo Takahari (Sep 23, 2012)

Zero Angel said:


> For the moon, what causes all of those things? Not the presence of the moon itself, but its gravity. And what causes the gravity? Its mass. Just have it be less massive, and as someone else mentioned, more reflective, and you're good to go. In fact, if you lower the mass of both moons, then you can probably approach a "standard" Earth-moon system.



As a _Freefall_ fan, I'd like to point out that this can be complicated. You can set up a dual-moon system that mimics Earth's moon, but you'll need to do a lot of research (and some basic geometry.)

Unlike most of the posters in this thread, I'd say it's actually worth the effort to get things right. You'll probably be having gravity work the same way as in our world in every other circumstance, so why have it differ in this case, even if most people won't notice? If you're uncertain of the details, you can always hide them--you'll probably never need to specify the exact mass and diameter of each moon--but accuracy on a general level makes a world feel more lived-in.


----------



## srcroft (Sep 23, 2012)

Feo Takahari said:


> As a _Freefall_ fan, I'd like to point out that this can be complicated. You can set up a dual-moon system that mimics Earth's moon, but you'll need to do a lot of research (and some basic geometry.)
> 
> Unlike most of the posters in this thread, I'd say it's actually worth the effort to get things right. You'll probably be having gravity work the same way as in our world in every other circumstance, so why have it differ in this case, even if most people won't notice? If you're uncertain of the details, you can always hide them--you'll probably never need to specify the exact mass and diameter of each moon--but accuracy on a general level makes a world feel more lived-in.



I'm not disagreeing just to disagree, but I would rather read: John could see the two moons in the sky. Rather then a 4 page dissertation on the science that makes it possible. If its important to the plot and theme, or its a symbol or allegory--I agree do the research--if not, its just embellishment and I wouldn't do more than find out that its possible.


----------



## srcroft (Sep 23, 2012)

Sheilawisz said:


> I have another moon composed entirely by ice where visiting Mages can have fun ice skating =)
> .


Lmao! That sounds fun! My world has a 13 year old God--that's sorely out of context--but that still doesn't beat ice skating on the moon.


----------



## Zero Angel (Sep 23, 2012)

srcroft said:


> Dragon flight is impossible because animals that fly have hollow bones or it wouldn't be possible to have enough energy, so the dragons wings couldn't support its weight. The dragon would have to be light and frail or if it had bigger wings it would have other issues.
> 
> Most animal experts agree they would be able to glide.



I have regularly read stories where they talked about having a gas bladder for their fire breath to help with this...it also enabled them to have a fire breath by chewing platinum. 

Also, it makes sense they're super strong and able to generate the power to fly (at least to me). And who says they can't have hollow bones? 

I am glad that "most agree they can glide" since eagles are able to pick up goats that are the same size as they are and glide with them.

And that's just regular science. There's the whole magick aspect of most fantasy dragons...


----------



## Mindfire (Sep 24, 2012)

Inb4 Astner. 

No, but really this seems right up his alley.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Sep 24, 2012)

Zero Angel said:


> I have regularly read stories where they talked about having a gas bladder for their fire breath to help with this...it also enabled them to have a fire breath by chewing platinum.
> 
> Also, it makes sense they're super strong and able to generate the power to fly (at least to me). And who says they can't have hollow bones?
> 
> ...



I think the idea is that the amount of lift that can be generated by wings only scales linearly with the surface area, but the mass of the creature increases as the cube of its size. Meaning that you end up with an effective upper limit on the size of flying creatures for a given gravity and atmospheric density. Same reason why you can't have ground-walking creatures above a certain size; bone strength increases with the square of the cross-section but mass increases with the cube.

Adding a "gas bladder" wouldn't help unless its contents were significantly lighter than air (e.g. helium), and that would occupy a lot of volume in the creature, making it relatively fragile. Dragons are not routinely fragile.


----------



## Jared (Sep 24, 2012)

Skyrender said:


> So I've been doing a lot of research about lunar cycles, orbits etc. in trying to figure out if one of my simple details is actually going to work.
> 
> Basically, I just want to have 2 moons for my planet, one that is, for all intents and purposes, the same as ours, and then one that is much larger in appearance and generally gives off beautiful white light.
> 
> In my findings, if a moon is larger/closer it ruins the tides, changes day length, curves your spine, etc. I was thinking with it being basically a visual, does it really matter if it is scientifically impossible? I mean, it is fantasy after all.



I'm not sure that they can be just like ours. IIRC, tidal force goes as (moon density)*(moon radius-cubed)/(moon distance-cubed).  So to keep the tidal strength the same as on Earth, you have to keep the (moon radius)/(moon distance) ratio constant. But the size-in-the-sky goes as the arctan of (moon radius)/(moon distance), which we just said is constant.

But if you let the moon be less dense than our moon's, then you would have to move it closer or make it bigger to keep the tidal forces the same. I think that if you just said that it was slightly larger and brighter than our moon, no one would question it much. As long as it wasn't huge and insanely bright. Remember that the moon's orbital period would go as the square root of the moon distance cubed [sqrt(a^3)], so the length of the month would change.


To have two of these moons (appearing the same size in the sky), you would need one smaller and closer and another larger and farther. I don't know if that would actually be dynamically stable; I suspect that it depends on the configuration. The stable multi-moon systems in the solar system all, I think, have (medium- and large-)moon orbital inclinations less than one degree. Our moon's is 20-30 degrees (a more constant ~5 relative to Earth's orbital plane). [Edit: I just looked on Wikipedia. This is true for Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus' non-Miranda moons. Neptune has Triton (retrograde and ~25 deg inlincation) and Nereid (~7 deg inclination, may be disrupted by Triton).]


Earth's moon keeps the Earth's rotation axis stable relative to the orbital plane, unlike Mars'. I don't know what happens if you have lighter moons (I don't know the giants' obliquity history).


I think that there are some difficulties here, but it's not novel-breaking. If you make these moons ~80% of the moon's density and adjust the sizes/distances accordingly, just put them at the planet's equator and calculate each moon's real and apparent orbital period.


On this, I suspect people will just nod and go along as long as it doesn't really stretch suspension of disbelief.


----------



## Jared (Sep 24, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> I think the idea is that the amount of lift that can be generated by wings only scales linearly with the surface area, but the mass of the creature increases as the cube of its size.



I've paid scant attention to these discussions ("it's magic"), but I think people also talk about how big (both dimensions?) the animal's chest has to be to support the amount of muscle necessary for flight.


----------



## Skyrender (Sep 24, 2012)

Thanks for all the replies!

I think I'm just gonna run with it, and pass it off as minor detail. As one person said, as far as changes to tide or anything else, they wouldn't know any different.


----------



## Ireth (Sep 24, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> I think the idea is that the amount of lift that can be generated by wings only scales linearly with the surface area, but the mass of the creature increases as the cube of its size. Meaning that you end up with an effective upper limit on the size of flying creatures for a given gravity and atmospheric density. Same reason why you can't have ground-walking creatures above a certain size; bone strength increases with the square of the cross-section but mass increases with the cube.



*makes note of this for her winged vampires*


----------



## Zero Angel (Sep 24, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> I think the idea is that the amount of lift that can be generated by wings only scales linearly with the surface area, but the mass of the creature increases as the cube of its size. Meaning that you end up with an effective upper limit on the size of flying creatures for a given gravity and atmospheric density. Same reason why you can't have ground-walking creatures above a certain size; bone strength increases with the square of the cross-section but mass increases with the cube.
> 
> Adding a "gas bladder" wouldn't help unless its contents were significantly lighter than air (e.g. helium), and that would occupy a lot of volume in the creature, making it relatively fragile. Dragons are not routinely fragile.



Great points. Generally it's hydrogen. It doesn't have to become a blimp, just aide in lift. I'm not saying they can be behemoths or T-Rex size, but you can easily get largish dragons in a scientific/non-magick world. In fact, there are scientists that have worked out how this can be done. 

Luckily, my world has magick, but still, I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility for a dragon to be able to fly naturally. 

I do agree that they probably mostly glide like an albatross in a scientific world (unless they're small). Also, another great point about gravity and atmospheric pressure--adjust these and you have dragons working fine.

@Land creature point: just have the bone strength increase more


----------



## Ravana (Sep 24, 2012)

On moons: 

http://mythicscribes.com/forums/world-building/109-planet-multiple-moons.html

Also, for an "applied" example of multiple-moon use:

http://mythicscribes.com/forums/archipelago-archive/899-calendar-causing-event.html

http://mythicscribes.com/forums/archipelago-archive/979-tale-two-two-moons.html

The important parts of the discussion begins on page 2 of the first thread; the second thread is the outcome. And it was a hoot to write. 

-

Off-topic, but since it came up:

On whether or not dragons could fly (see post #18):

http://mythicscribes.com/forums/research/1462-how-big-mountains-2.html

The problem, as detailed there, is that mass increases as a function of volume (three dimensions), whereas wing surface is a function of area (two dimensions). And the bigger the wing, the more muscle required to manipulate it; those muscles adds more weight–and can't be conveniently made hollow, like bones–meaning the wings need to be bigger still to compensate for _that_, etc. You also need to strengthen the bones, hollow or not, as you go, or else the muscles will shatter them: have a look at bird anatomy to see what they require just to anchor their wing muscles. You rapidly reach a point where the wings are too large for the dragon to flap–or even to extend: imagine having arms several times the length of your body, and what it would take just to lift them.

Which is why we see the upward size limits we do of flying creatures in the real world–including those in the fossil record. They simply can't get much bigger. Not with terrestrial biology and conditions controlling them, at least. Similar reasons account for different _modes_ of flight: only the smallest of flying creatures can actively hover, for example, because for anything larger, the musculature required rapidly overtakes the lift it can generate.

Gas bladders would be of marginal help at best. Consider how large blimps and airships have to be to carry a small gondola and propulsion engines… or how large a hot air balloon has to be to carry a tiny basket. The lift generated by a gas is based on the weight–and thus the volume–of the air it displaces: the difference in weight between the lifting gas and the _same_ volume of air is the lift you get. Ergo, the smaller the volume of the gas bladder, the less lift. (Look up Archimedes' Principle if you need a detailed explanation.) Given what it takes to contain the most useful lighter-than-air gases, the dragon would probably be just as well off without it. (For that matter, if the gas were helium, you'd _still_ need to invoke magic–to explain where the helium came from.)


----------



## srcroft (Sep 24, 2012)

Trust me I want dragons to fly. I'm sure theories go both ways, even if science stacks against it.  The one issue is that there are no four legged creatures with wings. The idea of bat wings on dragons started in Africa when people took lizards and sewed bat wings on them and sold them as baby dragons. Biblically in 'Jo'b Dragon's did exist and exude fire, historically there are accounts, most however, don't include wings. Those were added later. The Chinese version of flying dragons also don't have wings but did fly. Some believe that there used to be a canopy of water over the earth and the swirls of water looked like Chinese dragons.

Here's what I say. To me, regardless of science, Dragon's will always have big fat bat wings in my mind, and breath fire, and probably talk  --


----------



## mbartelsm (Sep 27, 2012)

I once thought of a dragon that has helium/hydrogen cells on it's wings, since this gives volume to the wings it can create more lift when moving forward (at the cost of a little speed and vulnerable wings, think pterosaur), it would also make its wings substantially lighter and easier to raise, and as consequence of this, the body would also be lighter since it would not need to lift it's own wings (which are the ones that grow exponentially with size along with chest muscles).

Of course is only a theory, and I have in no way done research on it, I just want dragons to be big and strong enough to carry a man or two and perhaps some light armor.

Also, the fire trowing mechanic could work by having a conduct on the mouth (like where serpents hide their tongues) from where it launches a ball of specially flammable fat and a set of electricity generating organs (manta rays, eels) to set it on fire, the supply would be very limited, much like a serpent's poison.


----------



## srcroft (Sep 27, 2012)

It's quite possible that a dragon could have argon or a heavy gas in its hollow bones. The pressure pushing out if it is the same as the air pressure pushing in--it should strengthen the bone. OR maybe they're bones are made of something light and strong like a spider web material--thats plausible. Spider webs are stronger then steel. So imagine if the skin and cartilage are all that material and bam, scales on top.


----------



## ALB2012 (Sep 27, 2012)

Dragons can fly- they are dragons. Are you going to go debate the laws of gravity with one?

My friend is writing a fantasy book and has flying mythical creatures, she suddenly realised she didn't know how far etc. I said just as far as you need them too. It's a fantasy. I mean you don't get gryphons, dragons or unicorns in reality. In your world they do what you say they do. Maybe it is magic, maybe they just know something we don't:0

Someone was saying about the movies and suspension of disbelief- well I happily watched Stardust and then Star wars ( IV- V1) and didnt care there aren't stars who are people, small green guys who talk in riddles, giant planet squishing space ships but when I watched James Bond it is like hmm really?

If you know it is not the "Real World" you can hopefully get away with pretty much anything.


----------

