3 ms·

> Highly recommended for fans of hard sci-fi. Only if they are willing to believe that entanglement enables superluminal communication and that protons can be

by T-A 8y ago

> Highly recommended for fans of hard sci-fi. Only if they are willing to believe that entanglement enables superluminal communication and that protons can be "unfolded" to macroscopic branes.

mr_luc 8y ago
Aha! This is the perfect place to ask this! I've dipped back into reading SF after a long time of only reading the classics (Heinlein et al), and the Three-Body Problem, which I read a few days ago, did seem to me to fit into that mould. But what are some other modern "hard SF" books you've enjoyed?
- ghaff 8y ago
  Perhaps most obviously The Martian.
- SonOfLilit 8y ago
  Greg Egan is my favorite, start perhaps with "Permutation City".
- hindsightbias 8y ago
  Recent - James Corey (what the Expanse is based off of). Daniel Suarez would be popular in these circles, but more Crichton-y science than next 100 years. Some of Stephenson's books (Seveneves, etc). Others Stephen Baxter, Richard Morgan (Altered Carbon). All great, but I'm more old-school, William Gibson, James P. Hogan, Greg Bear (Eon series), Mary Doria Russell (The Sparrow).
- davrosthedalek 8y ago
  I liked the Bobiverse.
jerf 8y ago
Even "hard" sci-fi can make a few changes to the universe, or speculate about something. Hardness is a spectrum anyhow, but a lot of us see hardness as being more about having rules, following them carefully, and letting the rules participate in the driving of the story itself, rather than that the rules must be exactly and only the rules we currently believe the universe follows. (Which are, incidentally, known to be incomplete, so even that's not really attainable.) Greg Egan, for instance, has several stories that can only be described as quite hard, but are based around entirely different physics, not merely tweaks to ours, or are based around particular models of black holes that can't be proved, etc.
rmu09 8y ago
I was really upset about the entanglement thing. It wasn't even necessary for the plot.

by T-A 8y ago

> Highly recommended for fans of hard sci-fi. Only if they are willing to believe that entanglement enables superluminal communication and that protons can be "unfolded" to macroscopic branes.

mr_luc 8y ago

Aha! This is the perfect place to ask this! I've dipped back into reading SF after a long time of only reading the classics (Heinlein et al), and the Three-Body Problem, which I read a few days ago, did seem to me to fit into that mould. But what are some other modern "hard SF" books you've enjoyed?

ghaff 8y ago
Perhaps most obviously The Martian.
SonOfLilit 8y ago
Greg Egan is my favorite, start perhaps with "Permutation City".
hindsightbias 8y ago
Recent - James Corey (what the Expanse is based off of). Daniel Suarez would be popular in these circles, but more Crichton-y science than next 100 years. Some of Stephenson's books (Seveneves, etc). Others Stephen Baxter, Richard Morgan (Altered Carbon). All great, but I'm more old-school, William Gibson, James P. Hogan, Greg Bear (Eon series), Mary Doria Russell (The Sparrow).
davrosthedalek 8y ago
I liked the Bobiverse.

jerf 8y ago

Even "hard" sci-fi can make a few changes to the universe, or speculate about something. Hardness is a spectrum anyhow, but a lot of us see hardness as being more about having rules, following them carefully, and letting the rules participate in the driving of the story itself, rather than that the rules must be exactly and only the rules we currently believe the universe follows. (Which are, incidentally, known to be incomplete, so even that's not really attainable.) Greg Egan, for instance, has several stories that can only be described as quite hard, but are based around entirely different physics, not merely tweaks to ours, or are based around particular models of black holes that can't be proved, etc.

rmu09 8y ago

I was really upset about the entanglement thing. It wasn't even necessary for the plot.