
Science Fiction by Scientists - edroche
https://www.humblebundle.com/books/science-fiction-by-real-scientists
======
mrob
I recommend "Blindsight" by Peter Watts, who was a marine biologist before he
was an author. He's the only author I can think of who uses academic style
citations for hard scifi credibility. You can read Blindsight online or
download ebook versions here:

[http://www.rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm](http://www.rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm)

He also shared his Rifters trilogy, which I enjoyed although it's not as good
as Blindsight, as well as several short stories:

[http://www.rifters.com/real/shorts.htm](http://www.rifters.com/real/shorts.htm)

~~~
jstelly
I usually agree with other posts here that too much science makes for fiction
that I enjoy less. Blindsight was an exception for me. I liked the science
ideas and the fiction.

If you like this kind of thing you may also like Darwin's Radio by Greg Bear.
He wrote an article about the science ideas here:
[http://gregbear.com/pages/newbiology.php](http://gregbear.com/pages/newbiology.php)

I didn't enjoy this one as much, but the hard-science part was done fairly
well.

------
johnfjacobi
I wonder if other people share my perception that most science fiction written
by scientists is not excellent fiction (especially when the first desire is
realism).

It seems to me that crafting a story is a quite different tool set from being
an engineer, physicist, etc., which is why at least seems rare to find a great
physicist who is also a great writer. Perhaps the best balance, then, would be
achieved by someone who writes stories deferring to actual scientists for
review...?

Also, I'm interested in being refuted here. These are unexamined perceptions
I'm writing out here.

~~~
VLM
What no love for Knuth's Surreal numbers?
[https://cs.stanford.edu/~knuth/sn.html](https://cs.stanford.edu/~knuth/sn.html)

I think if you're not into sci fi, you've discovered what most call the
distinction between hard and soft sci fi. Soft sci fi is the usual boring
eternal "human condition" story thats been told a million times before, but
maybe if I put space ships in as my gimmick I can sell more copies. Hard sci
fi is what if this really thought provoking component datasheet or speculative
theoretical physics paper were true, maybe I could sell more copies if I put
some humans into the story as filler for my gimmick. I'm personally pretty
bored with human condition stories; I've read them all or lived thru the
experience myself over the decades, but sci fi still delights me with glorious
creativity even if the bolted on characters are sometimes one dimensional
cardboard cutouts.

The system you suggest of a human story teller deferring to the scientists is
usually screwed up by one side or the other; when it isn't, its noteworthy.
One example of an English Lit major not screwing up the science would be KSR's
famous Mars Trilogy from around the turn of the century. That's a really good
trilogy! Proving that at least theoretically your system is possible, having
been successfully implemented at least once historically.

~~~
mklim
>soft sci fi is the usual boring eternal "human condition" story thats been
told a million times before, but maybe if I put space ships in as my gimmick I
can sell more copies.

This is a pretty unfair description of the category. Soft scifi is a story
that has fantastical tech/physics that aren't completely explained. The tech
is usually crucial to the story in some way, but the _how_ of the tech's
functioning is left unsaid. I find it unlikely that you've somehow lived
through the entire range of events and emotions that can comprise the "human
condition", but that aside: a lot of the soft scifi stories out there are
focused around hypothetical _inhuman conditions_ for which the fantastical
tech is crucial. _Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?_ is focused on whether
artificial sentience is less worthy than organic, Whedon's _Dollhouse_ on the
potential personal and societal ramifications of being able to save/load our
brains digitally, _Ancillary Justice_ on what it might feel like to have your
consciousness simultaneously inhabiting multiple bodies, "The Measure of a
Man" from TNG on what it means to be sentient and if artificial sentience is
possible (or even possible to measure once achieved), _Her_ exploring how a
truly sentient AI would relate to humans and impact our society. There are a
lot of vague stories out there that use spaceships as an attention-grabber,
but that isn't what defines the genre.

------
egeozcan
I'm not sure how I feel about such marketing. A more believable sci-fi novel
does sound more interesting, but isn't it like promoting a movie involving a
plane crash as "directed by aviation personnel".

~~~
ianai
Stating a movie is based on an actual account from witnesses/survivors/etc
generally makes it sell better.

~~~
JadeNB
> Stating a movie is based on an actual account from witnesses/survivors/etc
> generally makes it sell better.

Although, which is perhaps egeozcan's point, it doesn't necessarily make it
_actually_ better.

------
dmckeon
Try this writer:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._Forward](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._Forward)

~~~
UncleSlacky
I recently read Dragon's Egg - quite thought-provoking and well-written,
except for the somewhat clichéd human characters.

------
DanBC
Has anyone read any of these? Are they any good?

~~~
dsr_
I would like to think that I am exceptionally well read in SF... and I have
never heard of any of these folks.

They may be great. I dunno.

I was expecting:

Asimov (biochemist), Sagan (physicist), Brin (astrophysics, space science),
Forward (physicist), Czerneda (biologist), Watts (biologist), Benford
(astrophysicist), Taylor (physics, space science), Brotherton
(astrophysicist), Asaro (physics and chemistry), Kondo (astrophysicist),
Landis (physics), Rajaniemi (mathematical physics)... those are the ones off
the top of my head, I'm certainly missing many.

I can vouch for all of the above authors being able to tell a story.

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
> I have never heard of any of these folks

I also read a lot and I haven't heard of any of them either.

------
yazr
Revelation Space - by Alastair Reynolds – 2000

An epic volume 1 Volume 2 - Chasm City - brilliant with a dark and heart
stopping culmination

Reynolds is a British astro-physicists I dont know if he is popular in the US
as he is in the UK

~~~
weerd
Revelation Space is excellent! I came here to recommend it.

Chasm City is good but it almost felt like a mediocre action movie. The hero
wielding the big guns, flat dialog, an obligatory and passionless sex scene...
but the environment and society really make it interesting.

~~~
yazr
I agree Chasm City feels very pedestrian and long. But i got a real thrill
when it finally converged.. It was well worth the wait ;)

------
rayalez
I'm working on a similar project,
[http://rationalfiction.io](http://rationalfiction.io), where you can read
hard scifi written mostly by hackers.

