I guess part of what I am saying is that when I was younger I gained value from scifi with a wide range of 'hardness' without knowing the physics, and even now,

I guess part of what I am saying is that when I was younger I gained value from scifi with a wide range of 'hardness' without knowing the physics, and even now, that I've come to understand the physics, I still find value in the same. But I've found the more I know about something the more I know about all the stuff I have yet to know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_p... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_mathematics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_m... I feel the 'protomolecule' plays pretty well within these "plausible bounds" of uknown physics. I think it's a fine metric but how or where you apply the function is subjective. There is potential for issues even taking this route though. There is an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation where Picard is musing on Fermat's Last Theorem; a yet still unsolved problem in mathematics in the 24th century. To the character the idea of solving it, even in a far future, was implausible. Yet when we watch it now it plays anachronistic because we are the 'more educated more informed viewer from 30 years later' who know Fermat's Last Theorem was solved by Andrew Wiles in 1994. But it's still fun. Both then and now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat%27s_Last_Theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat%27s_Last_Theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Royale https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Royale