The concept of the novum is a central theme for science fiction as a whole. It represents something new and different from the world as we know it. The novum usually functions as the impetus to the science fiction story, driving the motivations of the main characters or, in some cases, existing as the protagonist itself. Obvious novums include the title subjects of HG Wells' The Time Machine and Avram Davidson's “The.” Golem", as well as the various artificial beings presented in Isaac Asimov's I, Robot stories. In some cases, in Wells' work, for example, the future environments he sculpts for his protagonists to explore, by representing them do something equally unknown to contemporary humanity, serve as further paradigms of the novum of science fiction. In this case, then, the setting of the story itself can serve as a novum by evaluating the consequences of the Wells, Davidson, and Asimov technological novums, as well as the explanations and conditions of Wells' dystopian vision of the future, the present study will present the stories as cautionary tales that reveal to the reader the irresponsibility of the human species' fixation on technological and economic progress .Say no to plagiarism violent should not be banned"? Get an original essay In Wells' The Time Machine, the protagonist finds himself in the year 802,701, after which humanity has apparently split into two subspecies: the Eloi, who appear to represent a humanity that had reached its technological limits and consequently surrendered most of its strength and intellect, and the severe, bestial Morlocks, counter-evolved from the lower working classes. In many works of science fiction, the novum concerns a plausible future. Here, Wells's quasi-Darwinian concept of the distant future draws on the common conflict of socioeconomic division to explain a degeneration of the human race. In the two subspecies the class gap is extrapolated to the extreme, and both the environment and its occupants become a novum. That population genetics could lead to such total devolution is speculative at best, but reasonable enough to serve as a stark warning against, as Colin Manlove puts it, “the brutal divide between capitalist and worker that had increased in Wells during the entire nineteenth century” (228). ). Wells's predictive awareness—a major component in the development of the novum—introduces these bleak representations of the future by means of the text's primary invention, in turn creating further novums intended to both captivate and warn the reader. Manlove continues by proposing an interesting theory that considers Wells' time machine itself as a sort of creator of the future visited by its traveler. Not only does the invention allow one to see the future, Manlove states that "[its] movements...are assimilated to those of the future story itself" as the protagonist witnesses many trees and buildings rising and falling (229) . Eventually, many millions of years in the future, his time travel is accompanied by the slowing of the sun, which, according to Darwin's theories of thermodynamics, finally shuts down and looms dead in the sky. Although contemporary science has since found this to be untrue, Wells' prediction for the distant future is once again not to be underestimated, especially considering the primitiveness of nineteenth-century technology compared to today's standards (Manlove 229). Accepting Manlove's aforementioned theory, the time machine can be labeled a “transgressive technology” that serves to “eradicate the future as it passes through it” (230). He clarifies one of the purposesof Wells' invention: "[Wells] wants to cast an ironic light on our technological pride by imagining an infinitely superior technology" (228). While this can be said of almost any scientific novelty, the dark images Wells uses to describe humanity's extraordinarily devolved nature and the end of the earth – themselves rather bleak concepts – also serve as warnings that our obsession with progress science could ultimately spell our end. As the Time Traveler encounters the world in its final stages, Wells presents readers with a sense of hopelessness and hopelessness by imparting an overtly dark language to the scene: words like “dark,” “cold,” “still,” and “silent.” each appears several times in the chapter (144-8). Wells' vision of the time machine is perhaps an excessive extrapolation of modern science. However, this is a novum for obvious reasons: it drives the narrative, was unheard of before, and, while open to potential logical and technical objections, is achievable both through future scientific developments and the sheer vastness and mystery of the universe. It also illuminates the scientific pride of humans while offering something awesome to strive for. In this sense, The Time Machine both glorifies and warns against technological progress. As Manlove indicates, “when the mind has done all it can to subdue matter, it atrophies for want of material, and the results stagnate and then decline” (230). There is a potential benefit, however. Since the protagonist has become a physical part of these distant future environments, it can be assumed that he must rematerialize - for example in the year 802,701 - for that segment of the story to become an actual historical reality. It is his invention of the time machine that justifies his transcending the known limits of space-time; however, despite his connection to these moments in time, the idea of ​​him reappearing so long after his death is not at all substantiated. It means a perceptible lack of novum. His alleged inability to relive that part of his “past” allows the trips to be further interpreted as mere warnings. In this sense, then, the biological deterioration of humankind is not inevitable, and the future is not necessarily fixed, as long as “the dangers [of social stratification] exposed under present conditions can be corrected” (Manlove 228). humans with the advancement of science and technology is perhaps most evident in Asimov's I, Robot, a collection of short stories revolving around the creation and development of artificial intelligence. Although the historical timeline lags slightly behind Asimov's speculative predictions, it is especially intriguing today as the rise in quality of humanoid robots – certainly the prevailing novum throughout the text – appears to be experiencing more rapid growth and progress than ever before. This alone can cause the “Frankenstein complex,” a term coined by Asimov to explain the public's fear of artificial beings, especially those that most closely resemble humans. The humanoid tends to evoke this fear because it is much faster, stronger, more intelligent, and overall more capable than humankind. Paranoia is especially evident in “Robbie,” a story in which the mother's doubts prove unfounded, and in “Little Lost Robot,” where a slight modification of Asimov's First Law of Robotics justifies the audience's concern. Asimov realized that fear would be the greatest obstacle to the success of the novum and to combat it he introduced the Three Laws. Described for the first time in his story "Runaround" and subsequently cited in many texts both by Asimov himself and byother science fiction writers. , the Three Laws constitute what many enthusiasts accept as the basis for reliable and safe interaction between humans and artificially intelligent beings. They are in place to preserve the safety of humankind, as well as to ensure its dominance over artificial beings and erase supposedly paranoid fears of artificial intelligence. Indeed, as Lee McCauley explains, “it was the explicit nature of the Three Laws that made the existence of robots possible by directly countering the Frankenstein Complex” (158). However, inhibiting the autonomy of such otherwise highly advanced beings will necessarily become impractical . All conscious life resents domination. Androids instilled with the Three Laws can still only grow their resentment through prolonged inferior dominance. Davidson's android in “The Golem” pays no attention to the Three Laws or the Frankenstein complex. In the story, the creature attempts to scare a Jewish couple. He explains that it was built from clay by Professor Allardyce, who by breathing life into it “rendered…all [humanity] superfluous” (306). Despite the comical tone of the story, the android – the clear novum of the concise tale – offers a strong message to readers, warning against the predestined hatred between human and artificial beings: “All humanity has an instinctive dislike towards androids and there will be an inevitable fight between them” (306). As mentioned in the introduction to "The Golem" in the Wesleyan Anthology, "Davidson clearly disagrees with Asimov's hard-sf, high-tech approach to the depiction of robots," but references Asimov as well as Shelley's work in the story ( 304).I, Robot acts as an artificial evolutionary tale. As in the evolution of The Time Machine, the reader discovers that the end result is a dystopian account of humanity. However, where Wells' subtext is about the biological involution of humanity through social stratification, Asimov presents the development of social utopia gone awry due to the use of technology. Androids, once servants of humanity's will, evolve in the lyrics of I, Robot. Their evolution seems complete in the final story of I, Robot, titled "The Avoidable Conflict." In this story, humanity's technological development has come to an end, brought about in artificial life advanced enough to act as mankind's sole guardians and control all forces that influence humanity's fate. Stephen Byerley, the Coordinator, calls Susan Calvin to discuss the “small imbalances” in the seemingly flawless system (199). Driven by fear, he recounts the inevitable conflicts that have shaped human history (200-1). His claims are legitimate: each period of human development has been defined by a particular type of human conflict. The culmination of Asimov's novum marks an evolutionary transition for humanity from the dominant to the inferior species. Progressing beyond any hope of human control, the android assumes authority over all natural life forms. As in much science fiction literature, the fully realized potential of technological innovation coincides with the degeneration of humanity. Byerley is challenged on the grounds that previous civilizations fell to barbarians, of whom none remain. His response – “we may be our own barbarians” – indicates that this supposed technological triumph of mankind may gradually come to denote the end of its existence (214). This evolution of artificial intelligence to the point where it prevails over its inherent subjugation is a notion not exclusive to the author. In an interview with Stephen Platt, Hans Moravec, scientist and professor at the Institute.