Sci-Fi, fantasy and speculative Indie Authors Review discussion

Freedom at Feronia
This topic is about Freedom at Feronia
49 views
Your genre of choice > Engineering Fiction

Comments Showing 1-48 of 48 (48 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments I've been struggling to come up with a term to fit my books. I have them classified in Hard Scifi at the moment because that seems the closest fit, but there's not a lot in there which is written with the same goals as mine. I am writing in a 40-year future where the colonization of the Solar System has begun, and I try to keep the science as close to reality as possible, so gravity only comes from spin or acceleration, space travel takes many months, there are no supernatural forces or creatures. I like to delve into the details and include an illustrated glossary of terms, putting me way out in the realms of geek fiction.
Are there other indie authors who write with similar constraints? If you know of any, please post links here. I'd most like to find someone I could exchange reviews with, emphasising the science more than the literary merit (though of course writerly review would also be welcome). As for 'engineering fiction' - I doubt if it will catch on, but 'science fiction' has become totally disconnected from real science, so who knows>


message 2: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments A similar post on Twitter has come up with the term 'Solar Fiction' meaning fiction related to the settlement of the Solar System. Seems like a good fit, though outsiders might be confused by the term. Any Goodreaders seen it?


message 3: by Christina (new)

Christina McMullen (cmcmullen) | 1213 comments Mod
I would think exploration and colonization would be the subcategories under science fiction, at least from the brief exploring I just did on Amazon. I've heard others use engineering fiction, but never solar. I would find that one a bit confusing myself.


message 4: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments Thanks, I felt the same way, but I've been tweeting among the space enthusiasts, and found a couple of people willing to review my book, which is a plus. Each field has its jargon, I guess. The 'hard' sci-fi category on the official list seems to be space-opera.


message 5: by Micah (new)

Micah Sisk (micahrsisk) | 563 comments The hard sci-fi you're referring to, which seems to be space-opera--if you're talking about authors like Alastair Reynolds--actually includes elements of both subgenres but really fit neither perfectly (and of course depending on the individual work).

For example, Reynolds does not use FTL, but he does use cryogenic sleep and unexplained "Conjoiner" drives that get big ships up to a significant % of C. And his plots take place in a large multi-system group of planetary societies with some aliens scattered in, and far-out-there nanotech. So they have a much more space-opera like feel...But they fail to have the old school space opera tropes of galactic empires and good vs evil and heroic space adventurers who save the universe.

There is hard sci-fi out there (Kim Stanley Robinson's work has a lot of it in it, much of Greg Bear's writing, and even works like Blue Remembered Earth by Reynolds...and Gradisil by Adam Roberts).

But in general, and probably largely because of the influence of film and TV and computer games, SF is a lot more about action/adventure than space exploration and big engineering these days. That's also helped along by the damp rag, unambitious, and anemically funded space programs we've had since the end of the Apollo missions.

How can Mars probes grab people's attention or satisfy their incessant need for instant gratification when it's competing with small-scale but personal tech like smartphones and tablets and HDTVs and Candy Crush addictions? The biggest tech advances have all been in the consumer industry. People can touch that, use it, get mesmerized by it.

Big engineering? Pfft, boring.

That's sarcasm, BTW. I mean, I sat on my living room floor in rural Maryland back in 1969 and watched actual f*cking men walk on the f*cking moon! People nowadays just don't get how exciting and amazing that was. I feel we've been robbed of that kind of wonder ever since.

[Oh, and also...YOU KIDS GET OFF MY YARD!]


message 6: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments Awesome post, Micah. You've certainly captured what gets me writing. I chose, rather than railing at the patheticness of 'spaceports' which only get high-flying airplanes, to imagine what the System would be like if someone grasps that nettle. I've got hope for India, to get out there. Maybe one of those kids'll read a story, and get inspired... who knows? I'm enjoying making up stuff, anyhoo.


message 7: by Mark (new)

Mark | 7 comments What happened to the dream of space colonization is that economics reared its ugly head. It's not cost-effective with chemical rockets. It's an engineering nightmare to send people into space. You have to keep their 15 psi environment, feed them, deal with the waste, shield them from radiation, etc. The big engineering of old-school SF seems passe. Space will probably belong to robots and possibly people genetically modified to live there. The high-energy stuff of old school SF is not happening as fast as we thought. It may never happen.

It's not well-known but real scientific missions are better done by robots. Almost all recent science came from unmanned probes of the outer system. We're simply not learning much from sticking people in smelly little cans a few miles up. Outgassing from pressurized compartments messes up sensitive instruments, so unmanned works better if you want to learn something out there. Scientists are angry most money goes to manned programs which don't produce scientific knowledge. But the public loves the SF aspect of manned flight, so the impractical and useless gets funded.

"Realistic" SF (OK, it's an oxymoron!) should acknowledge that humans probably are not going to conquer the cosmos in bodies designed for chasing antelope across the veldt. Engineering is about efficiency. People as-is aren't efficient in space. John Varley's Ophuichi Hotline had that as a theme.

There is a book called The Lights in the Sky Are Stars by Fredric Brown. It's not great, but iirc it predicted a hiatus in manned space exploration at a time when we all thought the stuff in 2001:A Space Odyssey would really happen. In hindsight Brown made a hell of a prediction compared to Clarke.


message 8: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments Hi Mark, I agree that if your goals are scientific, humans are an inefficient way to achieve them. Putting blokes in a little can in LEO and doing pretend experiments is not a good way to either do science or move towards a sustainable habitation of space. People will go to space when somebody with a huge pile of money decides to bet most of it on the prospect of getting even richer that way. The US government has lost sight of any credible goal, and has become so risk-averse that it is incapable of doing anything new. But sci-fi is not prediction, it is inspiration, a tale of hope. I try to make mine as credible as I can with my limited science knowledge, because, to me, a magic stardrive is an admission of defeat. The characters in my books haven't gone into space to benefit mankind, but to benefit themselves - because they see green grass on the other side of that fence. That's how capitalism works, innit?


message 9: by [deleted user] (new)

Luckily the US government is farming it's space program out to private enterprise, and I think that's a good thing: http://www.spacex.com/


message 10: by Christina (last edited Oct 03, 2014 10:22AM) (new)

Christina McMullen (cmcmullen) | 1213 comments Mod
Well, since the complaints are out there, let me add my voice to the cry for more funding of (real and exploratory) missions to space. My sarcastic take on it is that once we figure out how to carry civilians into orbit and start building space hotels and theme parks, we will no longer have the drive to look beyond our own orbit.

I was going to mention Kim Stanley Robinson as well, but you specifically mentioned indie authors. I'm surprised Ken Doggett hasn't chimed in. What I've read of his work seems to fit with what you're describing.

Edit: speak of the devil...


message 11: by Micah (last edited Oct 03, 2014 10:44AM) (new)

Micah Sisk (micahrsisk) | 563 comments Mark wrote: "What happened to the dream of space colonization is that economics reared its ugly head. It's not cost-effective with chemical rockets..."

Ken wrote: "Luckily the US government is farming it's space program out to private enterprise..."

Those points (sort of) taken together are the central theme to the Adam Roberts novel I'm reading now (linked to in my first post). It's about the colonization of LEO by private individuals who eschew high-energy rocketry and use the Earth's magnetosphere to "fly" up in to orbit, and then use low thrust solid fuel engines to maneuver once in space.

I'd agree that pure science research needs to be done by robotics, except...except the biosciences relating to how we can learn to live in zero g, high-radiation environments for extended periods of time. That science can only be done by actually going out there and figuring it out.

And, in my opinion, aside from resource acquisition (a field that's best done by robotics as well), and pure science, the real reason to go out there is species preservation. If we don't, the human race is doomed: 100% chance of an extinction event (eventually).

We've got the technology now to start figuring out what we need to do in order to survive as a species in the long run, so no time like the present. Whether the answer is through re-engineering our bodies, or acquiring the technological/engineering expertise to survive long-term, it's got to be done.

Remember, as the late great Sun Ra said: "Space is the place." ;D


message 12: by [deleted user] (new)

Christina wrote: "Edit: speak of the devil......"

Wow, never been referred to as the devil before, but I'll take it. Thanks for the mention. I don't swap reviews, but I'll talk to anybody who wants to talk, and even offer my limited knowledge on the subject of science and engineering. Maybe I'll learn something.


message 13: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments The big assumption behind my books is that a nuclear rocket could go anywhere in the System it could find ice, refuelling as it goes. By 'hopping' onto a Mars-crossing asteroid and then mining it for ice as it travels out into the Belt, it divides up the trip into segments, with about 8 km/s of Delta V at each point. The asteroid also provides radiation shielding, should a solar storm occur on the trip. Still takes years to get out to the Belt, but seems credible. What you get, though, is colonies that are totally cut off from help or interference, which I find makes for interesting story ideas.


message 14: by Richard (new)

Richard | 490 comments Mod
As an utter space-nut myself (as a kid I too sat up right through that unforgettable night in 1969, open-mouthed, and my favourite mission of them all was Apollo 8) I hesitate to put a damper on all this. I just hope, though, that future space-generations won't look back on all this strip-mining of asteroids and systematic dismantling of the rings of Saturn in much the same way that we look on (or I look on anyway) in horror at the trashing of our own little planet.


message 15: by [deleted user] (new)

Richard wrote: "As an utter space-nut myself (as a kid I too sat up right through that unforgettable night in 1969, open-mouthed, and my favourite mission of them all was Apollo 8) I hesitate to put a damper on al..."

I saw it, too. It was great, in all its fuzzy-black-and-white glory. I also saw Sputnik cross the nighttime sky in 1958, and even though it was Soviet, I thought the future of space flight looked very bright.


message 16: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments My characters never express any such emotions. They depend on mining for their survival, and hope to expand their colonies to as many of the millions of rocks as they can. Not that I disapprove of the sentiment, just that I don't see it as a realistic one at the stage they are at, with 50 of the 2000 large rocks in the belt settled, and nobody at Jupiter or Saturn. Even on the settled rocks, you have maybe 1 km2 of mining on a 200,000 km2 rock. The only place that's widely exploited in my story is Phobos, because it's so strategic. My characters are heading there in the fourth book. Maybe I'll put in a greenie there, and have my characters deride him.


message 17: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments This is a great discussion, and I hope it continues, but it would sure be nice to hear from someone who's read my book, even if they tried and gave up.


message 18: by Richard (new)

Richard | 490 comments Mod
Come to think of it, almost Armstrong and Aldrin's final act on the Moon, back in the LM before it blasted off, was to throw out the trash - empty food containers, full urine bags, etc - it wasn't even bagged up, they just threw it all out of the hatch! It's still there of course (although the blast from the ascent stage engine must have spread it even further over a couple of square miles of the Sea of Tranquility) and a more fitting tribute to the human spirit, a cynic might say, than the plaque they left behind: "We came in peace, and left our garbage, for all mankind."!


message 19: by Mark (new)

Mark | 7 comments The Moon landing thrilled us old farts who grew up loving Tom Swift and Tom Corbett (if anyone else remembers him). Back in the day most of us were big fans of the manned space program. Despite using the Moon as a garbage dump, Apollo was a great thing. That garbage is historically valuable anyway. If we colonize the Moon, it'll probably have to be protected from looters.

It's been downhill since Apollo for manned exploration. The same NASA which put (exclusively) men on the Moon blew up a teacher. Not impressed anymore.

Now we're old and cynical. Happy, upbeat stories where humankind goes on to conquer the cosmos seem naive. If humanity doesn't conquer the cosmos, that's OK. If we render ourselves extinct on this world, so it goes. Why would we deserve another?

There's a reason "space opera" implies derision. Vonnegut's Kilgore Trout mocks SF, because as Ted Sturgeon admitted, ninety percent of it is crap.

Very seldom does SF rise to the level of literature. Perhaps the first space opera, Wells' War of the Worlds, is great literature which holds up today. But it's not about the mesmerizing Martian technology. Wells wrote it with the intent of showing Victorian England what it is like to be oppressed. The Martians are the British, and the British their own colonial subjects. The Time Machine has something similar to say. The Eloi are the decadent upper class, and the Morlocks the workers. The Morlocks feed the Eloi, and the Eloi feed them. It's a sensible, beautiful, repugnantly awesome theme. Capitalism equals cannibalism to Wells. Whether you agree with that or not, his books are more than adventure stories.

It must be hard to write good SF if ninety percent if it is crap. Technical accuracy is just one thing. As with other fiction, rounded characters, non-stupid dialogue, plot, stylistics, symbolism--all these elements have to work together to support the theme.

At the same time SF writers need a grip on science. Warp drives are fictional, but hardly magic. An orbit is the shape of space warped into a curve. Relativity describes spacetime warping, so most interstellar empires get built on warp drives. No problem with that.

But if a book is all about physics and engineering, that's not enough for me. I found Hal Clement's Mission of Gravity--considered a hard SF classic--boring. This may be heresy here, but I thought Gravity was eye-candy. Many people were thrilled at seeing realistic Newtonian mechanics instead of George Lucas's pandering WWII air battles in space. But Gravity was a simple survival story. Like Wells, American Hustle is subtle, clever and morally ambiguous, so that movie commanded my attention and respect.

As an engineer, I can read technical stuff at work. SF geegaws are OK, but it takes a lot more to satisfy a jaded old fart. Many of us lost their faith in NASA, humanity and faith itself. Cynical SF is fine with this audience. Everyone likes to see his or her opinion confirmed.


message 20: by Micah (last edited Oct 06, 2014 03:01PM) (new)

Micah Sisk (micahrsisk) | 563 comments I actually get more pleasure out of articles on advancements that will enable manned space exploration/long-term living possible than I do from fiction about it (I tend to like SF that's more character/action/idea driven than SF about the hard knocks of exploration).

Like this article on how new synthetic materials may make closed-loop life support systems more possible:

http://singularityhub.com/2014/10/06/...

"From a new material that sucks the oxygen out of a room and stores it, to a man-made photosynthetic material which generates oxygen, these new developments could be an answer to solving that pesky lack of oxygen problem."


message 21: by Mark (new)

Mark | 7 comments Ignoring the steampunk/retro subgenres, one problem with recent fiction about manned space exploration more than a few decades from now is that it's already out of date. Advances in computer technology will make the future differ from classic SF expectations. Although we can develop better life support systems, most likely they won't be needed.

Consider the result of improved fMRI technology--direct mind/computer interfaces. These are inevitable. Say goodbye to panels of blinky lights, knobs and switches. Bye to viewsceens. Bye to viewports too. Why compromise hull integrity when a virtual window will do?

Pilots? The space shuttle computer (256K RAM iirc) entirely controlled the burn, reentry and glide down. The "pilot" lowered the landing gear. Not because the computer couldn't do it, but to give the human something to do. How did all those grimly-concentrating SF pilots fighting with the controls escape from 12 O'Clock High?

What about mind uploading? Nothing will stop this from happening. Why protect bags of protoplasm in space when you can upload and BE a spaceship?

Barring some breakthrough, the big-energy engines needed to push around massive ships with people and life support systems are almost certain to lag computing advances. Even with, say, fusion engines which won't bombard the crew with neutrons, if you already have mind uploading, you'd want less mass = extra acceleration. What role is there for human bodies as-is in space?

Preserving the species? It's unlikely virtual minds will care about their meat progenitors. An advanced 3D printer could print bodies on demand from a virtual archive. What's the point of keeping meat around when it spoils so quickly?


message 22: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments I feel like I'm falling between two stools. The sci-fi fans are so used to magic tricks (downloading brains, good lord) that they aren't interested in my idea of "realism," and the scientists and engineers I follow on Twitter are focusing on the next step and not looking out as far as I am trying to do. Not that it'll stop me writing the stuff I want to write, but it gives me some idea why no agent or publisher is likely to be interested. Ah, well. Good thing I'm not trying to make a living at this!


message 23: by J.A. (new)

J.A. Ironside (julesanneironside) | 653 comments Mod
I can see both sides here, Richard, and like the fable about the old man, the boy and the donkey, you are never going to please everyone. So definitely start by pleasing yourself!

When all else fails, Story Is King. As long as you avoid major gaffs like whirling asteroid fields, who cares if the tech you use turns out to be inaccurate in 10/20/30 however many years time? If you did your due diligence with the most current sources when you researched your book, and you spin a good yarn, you've done your job.

Personally, I'll forgive a lot if it's a rollicking good plot with great characters and excellent voice. Just sayin'. ;)


message 24: by Mark (new)

Mark | 7 comments Not telling anyone not to enjoy good ol' space operas! I used to be able to do that, but now understand too much (not bragging, it's just what I do for a living) about computers to take most hard SF seriously. If you write about engineering, engineers are out there who cannot help but evaluate your SF world based on their expertise.

Pushing a proton to lightspeed is impossible. But there is no physical principle which prohibits mind uploading. That technology will happen simply because it can. Ray Kurzweil probably won't make it to immortality, but most experts predict this "magic trick" to occur within 50 years. I'm not pseudo-religious about a Singularity like Ray and expect life to go on, but it will be very different from expectations. To me it's exciting and liberating to speculate about how a future informed by current technology trends. Old SF had libraries of books and star charts on spaceships. We've seen other staples of SF obviated by nothing more than slightly-advanced 3D gaming engines. It helps verisimilitude to keep up with technology.


message 25: by [deleted user] (new)

Mark wrote: "Not telling anyone not to enjoy good ol' space operas! I used to be able to do that, but now understand too much (not bragging, it's just what I do for a living) about computers to take most hard S..."

There is no predicting the advances that will come in the future, or the new theories that may open up possibilities we dismiss today. Compare today with a hundred years ago, and as a mental exercise imagine sitting down with a scientist or engineer of that time and explaining the Internet. Unless he is also an author of speculative fiction he'll tell you that it's impractical if not impossible. Imagine all the things that had to be invented in the interim just to get us to the Internet.

Want to give people a good laugh fifty or a hundred years from now? Predict that something can't be done. Pushing a proton to lightspeed may become one of those home, do-it-yourself-for-fun projects a hundred years from now.


message 26: by [deleted user] (last edited Oct 09, 2014 04:14AM) (new)

Mark wrote: "There's a reason "space opera" implies derision. Vonnegut's Kilgore Trout mocks SF, because as Ted Sturgeon admitted, ninety percent of it is crap..."

Your characterization of Sturgeon's "admission" is somewhat misleading. He actually said, "Sure, 90% of science fiction is crud. That's because 90% of everything is crud." As a matter of fact, bad writers write crap, whatever the genre.

I read the much touted "Adventures of Augie March," by Saul Bellow, one of the premiere writers of literature. It had great characterization--in fact it had too much characterization, and character descriptions sometimes took up an entire chapter. The writing was great; the story was boring. I finished it, finally, and couldn't wait to move on to something with a story I could get into.

I like Wells, but he wrote a hundred years ago. Science and Science Fiction move on. If you can't find great writing in Science Fiction, you're either reading the wrong books, or you simply don't like Science Fiction. If it's the latter, there are plenty of Literature groups out there to join. It takes an open mind and an agile imagination to enjoy Science Fiction.


message 27: by Micah (last edited Oct 09, 2014 07:44AM) (new)

Micah Sisk (micahrsisk) | 563 comments "Ken wrote: "Want to give people a good laugh fifty or a hundred years from now? Predict that something can't be done..."

Then again there's the reverse situation. Reference flying cars, jet packs all over the place, human grade artificial intelligence (Arthur C. Clarke had it fully developed by 2001 and what do we actually have now, 13 years after that date? really good chess programs and Siri!), useful household robots. Some of that list might eventually come, but those were all predictions from 50 years ago and none of them are here yet.

As for uploading minds into computers...even though my own writing uses that trope heavily, I can't really believe that's going to happen in 50 years (or possibly ever).

First off, it's not simply a matter of computing power as Kurzweil seems to believe. We are still really at the very early stages of understanding what consciousness is, how memory works...we simply do not understand the brain that well.

Secondly...transferring minds how? What is the mind? Is it the patterns of electro-chemical singals throughout the brain? Or does it arise from the physical structure of the brain itself? We don't know. And there's a real question of whether any kind of transferrance would really be moving one mind from a body to a machine...or simply killing the mind in the body and copying it to the machine.

Which brings up point three...WHO would want to go through that kind of process, and boy doesn't that bring up a HUGE ethical question? I stand by the notion that people are sensual beings...we need, crave and desire not just mental affirmation, but physical touch, the sense of being a corporeal being. Seriously...would you want to be a mind in a metal and plastic box? Really?

Yeah...I think it's highly unlikely to come in any near-future term.


message 28: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments What I'm getting at in my books is that space colonization is possible, and I believe desirable, without any radical new technology. Nuclear and chemical rockets, and a staged approach that exploits resources found in space, is all that's needed. My aversion to far-out stuff is based on the notion that it puts serious development of space in some far-off future, instead of making it something today's kids should look forward to in their own futures. If people feel that FTL drives are the only way to space, they won't do anything about getting there until the FTL drives come along. What I'm learning though, is that interest in this approach is very limited, if not non-existent. I shall continue to write in the genre. Maybe one day I'll hear from someone who's read one of my books, who knows?


message 29: by [deleted user] (new)

Micah wrote: ""Mark wrote: "Want to give people a good laugh fifty or a hundred years from now? Predict that something can't be done..."

Then again there's the reverse situation. Reference flying cars, jet pack..."


I think Ken wrote that, not Mark. The point is, those things are merely the extrapolation of something that could have been done at the time, but wasn't yet practical. Still isn't. Just because a thing can be done, doesn't mean it will, but building a fictional society is simply an alternate future, not a prediction. FTL travel...now that's a prediction that may or may not come true, but at our current technological level we cannot state empirically that it WILL NOT happen.


message 30: by Micah (new)

Micah Sisk (micahrsisk) | 563 comments Richard wrote: "What I'm getting at in my books is that space colonization is possible, and I believe desirable, without any radical new technology..."

And there's room enough in the genre for all kinds of stories. There have always been different focuses in SF. None are more or less valid.

I always kind of cringe when people say "SF is about..." and then apply one narrow focus.

SF can be about exploring the implications of a particular technology extrapolated into the future ("A good science fiction story should be able to predict not the automobile but the traffic jam.” ~ Frederik Pohl) Sure, that's one thing SF can do.

But it can also be an exploration of current technology and what it could be used for if we chose to expend the politcal and monetary capital on it.

Or it can be a fanciful action adventure, a sinister social criticism, a comedy, a mind-twisting psychological freak out...SF can and is/has been all those things.


message 31: by Christina (new)

Christina McMullen (cmcmullen) | 1213 comments Mod
Don't dismiss those among us who love the past's view of the future. Part of the fun is seeing how wildly modern technology differs from the earlier speculation. Personally, I'm glad we don't live in a world with food pills and flying cars, but that doesn't impact my enjoyment of books that predicted them.


message 32: by Micah (new)

Micah Sisk (micahrsisk) | 563 comments Ken wrote: "I think Ken wrote that, not Mark..."

Fixed. Sorry. Quoting quotes within quotes is like some awful Dr. Who time twisty paradoxy thing.


message 33: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments I'm with you totally, Micah. Which brings me back to my original question - I don't want to restrict the term "Science Fiction" to my (narrow, minimalist) definition, but to find a term which describes that kind of work. I don't think "Engineering Fiction" sounds very attractive, because I'm not really focusing on the engineering, but on the ways people would live in the future that I envisage. How do they govern themselves, how do they keep the peace, etc.. "Solar Fiction" sounds a bit New Age, and science-fiction-at-the-opposite-end-of-the-scale-from-zombie-romance is too long.


message 34: by [deleted user] (new)

Richard wrote: "I'm with you totally, Micah. Which brings me back to my original question - I don't want to restrict the term "Science Fiction" to my (narrow, minimalist) definition, but to find a term which descr..."

I think that the SF you're referring to is, and has always been, called Hard SF. I don't know that we need sub-catagories within this sub-category, but of course these days if you can place your book in the right sub-sub-category it might just rank number one on Amazon.


message 35: by Micah (new)

Micah Sisk (micahrsisk) | 563 comments I still don't see anything wrong with the term Hard Science Fiction. What you're doing conforms with the classic definition of that term.

Genre names, at best, are only a compass needle pointing in a general direction that readers can use to be directed toward stories they might potentially enjoy. There's no real need to divide broader terms into subgenres or to find precise terms for every nuaince of a genre. That just ends up causing arguments and obfuscation. I've seen it in the music world all too often ("That's not techno, dude, that's, like, so psi-trance-stepcore!" **face palm**)


message 36: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments Cheers, thanks.


message 37: by [deleted user] (new)

On Kobo my novel is rated #1209 in "Sci-Fi & Fantasy, High Tech," and #1664 in "Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Space Opera." Now if I could only get it into a category called, "Sci-Fi & Fantasy, High-Tech Space Opera that Begins In A Prison." It would surely be #1.


message 38: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments Yeah, that will do you lots of good. I've got a Google campaign going, and have Terpsichore and Feronia as keywords (asteroids that appear in my books). Naturally, I'm ranked number one in both. Eyeballs? Zero.


message 39: by [deleted user] (new)

Me too. I think that can be attributed to the low popularity of the genre currently. Even so, I love to read Hard SF, and it's about all I write. Nothing else is any fun, and at my age, fun is the operative word.


message 40: by Mark (last edited Oct 11, 2014 05:34PM) (new)

Mark | 7 comments Ken wrote "Want to give people a good laugh fifty or a hundred years from now? Predict that something can't be done. Pushing a proton to lightspeed may become one of those home, do-it-yourself-for-fun projects a hundred years from now."

So that insight inspired a story! Enjoy!

The PA-8

Krondar waddled into the corner Gamma Ray Shack in a snit. He had neglected to pay the bill for his gravassist underwear, and when he had to walk in it, it rode up his backside and itched terribly. Pushing his bulk against the counter, he demanded, "What is the meaning of this nonsense?"

"How may I help you, sir?" asked the clerk. Over her head floated a virtual nametag, Star E. Messenger. Star E., as she liked to be called, was beautiful in a nondescript way, and she appeared eager to assist him. Clerks always did.

Krondar wheezed as he sucked in air. "My son ordered a proto, porto--"

"--proton accelerator," prompted Star E., calling up the transaction in her peripheral vision.

"Yes, and his purchase was rejected! Are you aware, Ms., who I am?"

"Your profile is online, Mr. Krondar," said Star E. "Everyone knows who everyone is."

"Don't get snippy with me, young lady." A blood vessel pulsed in Krondar's temple. "I received a prompt to come here and sign a release form. In person! What is this, the stone age?"

"No, we're quite advanced here in Moronicus. That's why we require the hobbyist release form."

"Say what?" Krondar scratched his itching posterior. It felt like fire breaking out down there.

"Your son ordered our top of the line model." Star E. forwarded a copy of the transaction to Krondar, who seemed unable to use the mindnet for himself.

Krondar blinked rapidly, as if an ordinary popup surprised him. "The PA-8," he whispered, apparently mesmerized by the vid. "Why is the 8 lying on its side?"

"That's not a number 8, Mr. Krondar," said Star E. with professional patience. "That's an infinity sign."

"An infini-what?"

"The Proton Accelerator Infinity model can accelerate a proton to the speed of light. That requires an infinite amount of power." Star E. produced an actual sheet of paper from underneath the counter. Paper with writing on it. "With great power comes this form."

Krondar eyed the paper suspiciously. "What am I supposed to do with that?"

"Oh, you don't know how to read and write? I'm sorry!" said Star E., whisking the form away. "Lucky for you I'm a notary." With a wink she retrieved her legal ring-pop from her side-pouch and--placing it on her finger--held it out for Krondar to suck. As soon as his DNA registered, the transaction was binding.

"Because you're illiterate," said Star E., "I'm legally bound to disclose the terms of your purchase. You assume complete liability for damages caused by improper operation of the unit, which can get quite expensive."

"How expensive?"

"Oh, infinitely expensive. We're talking about accelerating a proton to lightspeed, after all. That requires infinite energy. Godlike power. Your son will be able to move galactic clusters in their orbits. With the PA-I he can create and destroy whole universes--including ours--at will. It's infinite. That's what infinite means."

"My, we've come a long way since I was a boy," said Krondar, impressed.

Star E. smiled indulgently. "May I make a recommendation, Mr. Krondar?"

Krondar felt slightly aroused from sucking her legal ring-pop. His eyes drifted to Star E.'s tight Gamma Ray Shack uniform, with its radiation hazard icon over her fashionable multi-breast array. He hoped his wife wasn't monitoring them. "Please do."

"You may wish to purchase the PA-I base support accessory module. After all that proton gets heavy as it approaches the speed of light."

"How heavy?"

"Well, it can go from a mountain, to a continent, to a planet, to a star, to a galaxy, gee, even up to the mass of the universe and beyond. After all, you're talking about something that will get infinitely massive. So you need a solid support for it."

"And how much does that cost?"

"Oh, it's infinitely expensive. It has to support an infinite mass. I hope your credit is good."

Krondar thought about his gravassist underwear. He was behind in his payments already. What difference could one more expense make? "Just charge it," he said forlornly.

"Oh, and you need a BHP too! Silly me, I almost forgot."

"A BHP?" asked Krondar warily, beginning to suspect that Star E. was playing him for a sucker.

"Black hole preventer," explained Star E. "That darn proton will get so heavy it'll collapse into a black hole when it really gets going. You don't want your little boy sucked in. Or the rest of the world."

"How much does that cost?"

"It's free. You just have to pay shipping and handling from Ridiculon--oh, dear--we have a problem."

Krondar's butt felt like a quasar. He fought the urge to scratch it violently. "What now?" He was getting exasperated.

"Your son flunked physics. I'm afraid he's not a qualified hobbyist. We'll have to back out the whole transaction."

"But, but," sputtered Krondar, "Kendar will pitch a tantrum and say rude things to me! I demand to speak to your superior."

A man with mussed white hair and tired eyes seemed to appear from nowhere, startling Krondar. The old man put a pipe to his mouth and puffed it, emitting a noxious stream of smoke. Never before had Krondar seen someone smoke in public, but the fool behaved as if he didn't care about annoying others. The vile-smelling smoke irritated Krondar's delicate nose, which somehow made his butt itch even more.

"Sir?" The old man addressed Krondar with a grave nod.

Krondar didn't back down. "Are you in charge here?"

"I am," said the man calmly.

"Why can't Kendar have what he wants?" demanded the outraged Krondar.

"Because he can't. It's not possible." The supervisor puffed his stinking pipe without the slightest regard for Krondar's sensibilities. "That is my rule. You'll have to break it to him."

Krondar pounded on the counter, startling Star E., who recoiled in shock from the fat man's intemperate display. "I demand to know your name, sir!" shouted Krondar.

"You can call me Al."

"And where may I find your so-called rules documented, Mr. Al? I'm going to report you to your superiors."

"I don't have a superior," said Al. "I told you I'm in charge here. I don't know why you want to see my rules because you can't read, but maybe if you try very hard, you'll eventually get it. They're spelled out here."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of...

THE END

Want to give people a good laugh in the present? Chest up with a guy named Al.


message 41: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments That's a great little story, Mark. Should be required reading in high school physics.


message 42: by Dave (new)

Dave (dcr_writes) | 114 comments Well, I just bought The Dark Colony and I'll give it a go. I generally like that kind of SF, though I don't know what to call it either.

Unfortunately, I can't write anything of the sort; my own most recent book is out and out pulp featuring airships armed with 5.9 inch naval rifles.


message 43: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments Hey no harm in pulp. We call it recycled paper these days, and pass laws mandating it. A 5.9" gun on an airship! I'm impressed. The craft might list a little when you fire it. I hope you enjoy The Dark Colony and will review it if you can. Reviews here and on the retail platform are much appreciated. BTW, if you do like it, there's a sequel... Freedom at Feronia by Richard Penn ... ;-)


message 44: by Dave (new)

Dave (dcr_writes) | 114 comments Richard 2060 wrote: "Hey no harm in pulp. We call it recycled paper these days, and pass laws mandating it. A 5.9" gun on an airship! I'm impressed. The craft might list a little when you fire it. I hope you enjoy The ..."

Actually it's three 5.9" guns on an airship. Imagine a cross between an inverted Narvik class destroyer and the Hindenburg.

It's utter nonsense from a physics point of view, but great fun from a pulp adventure perspective.

I finished the book, and quite enjoyed it. I'll probably be picking the next one up in a week or two.


message 45: by Aurora (new)

Aurora Springer (auroraspringer) | 34 comments You can violate current physics with faster than light. But I decided he "Beam me up Scotty" transportation was just as likely as FLT travel. It's all fiction as far as we know!


message 46: by Richard (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments Yes and both are equally fine fictional devices. They spring from the brows of writers, not the annals of science, like time travel and molecular blasters. I didn't want to suggest that such things are not 'proper' science fiction, but to look for a genre where such things aren't allowed. Hard (or someone suggested 'diamond') seems to be the best we can find.


message 47: by Richard (last edited Dec 22, 2014 11:03PM) (new)

Richard Penn (richardpenn) | 758 comments I've found two more in my travels. One from a reviewer on here (thanks Roy), was 'Mundane Sci-fi' which sounds like a synonym for 'boring,' so I'm not keen. The other was 'borderline science fiction.' This came up in Twitter discussions between scientists about the feasibility of various rockets, and they were using it as a scoff. But in our context, it might be a useful term, I think. There is a 'frontier' connection, which fits pretty well.


message 48: by Jonathan (new)

Jonathan Swords-Holdsworth (jonswordsholdsworth) | 32 comments Mark wrote: "Ken wrote "Want to give people a good laugh fifty or a hundred years from now? Predict that something can't be done. Pushing a proton to lightspeed may become one of those home, do-it-yourself-for-..."

A very cute 'long-smoke' Mark, well done :)

Reminds me of 'Hotel Paradox'.

Jon


back to top