Sci-Fi, fantasy and speculative Indie Authors Review discussion

This topic is about
Freedom at Feronia
Your genre of choice
>
Engineering Fiction
date
newest »


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.


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!]


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.

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/
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...
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...

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
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.
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.

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.
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.
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.


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."!

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.

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."

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?

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'. ;)
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'. ;)

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.
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.
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.
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.
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.

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.

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.
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.

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.
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.

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

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.
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.

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**)
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.

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.

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.

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.



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.



Books mentioned in this topic
Freedom at Feronia (other topics)The Dark Colony (other topics)
Blue Remembered Earth (other topics)
Gradisil (other topics)
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>