Research and getting it right

[ChrisBfla]

I like hard science fiction with plausable technology and realism (realistic fiction?) anyway this is the genra for both my novels (one publisned and one wating to be published). I used the near future of around 12 years from now.

For the spacecraft used in the first book I had to use existing technology to meet an alien fleet beyond the orbit of Mars. This meant only two plausable propulsion systems, the NERVA rocket motor, developed in the US as well as the USSR in the 1960s. This is a nuclear rocket engine that pumps fuel (ususally liquid hydrogen) through a hot reactor core to produce much greater thrust and longer burn times that could be possible with chemical rockets. The second method is Orion. This involves setting off a series of nuclear explosions behind a big thick steel plate to propel the spacecraft.

Reseach on the alien invaders was interesting. I had to devise a species that was a collective intelligence and highly aggressive. I used the Siafu, the African Army Ant, as a model for the behavior of my aliens.

I had to reseach current articles on laser and particle beam weapons technology, yields from nuclear weapons, launch sites in Russia and China, current and proposed fighter jets as well as solid fuel strap on rocket boosters to kick supersonic aircraft up to 200,000 feet, etc. I wanted my "fiction" to be as accurate as it possibly could be. Also, when doing the reseach, I found many items that could be included as plot twists to the story.

Anyway, I feel that if those of you who want to write hard science fiction in the manner of James Hogan or Ben Bova or Arthure C. Clarke, the reseach is very important and today, it is so easy. You can find just about anything you need on an internet search. Why is this important? Whlie reading some books on writing fiction, I came upon the incident with a writer whose story takes place in the American West in 1855. Unfortunatly the gun she gave one of her main characters was not produced until 1857. You'd think that would not matter BUT, this writer got BAGS of mail from avid readers of this genra, blasting the inaccurate use of this firearm.

Chris

[WafflesToo]

MST3K Mantra...

[Sapheron]

Bit pedantic, but it's genre, not genra.

As for where you're coming from, yeah, I can see it. However, things don't really have to be realistic, they have to be believable. The two are completely seperate. Well, near enough. In your example, the writer in question got a historical fact wrong. This is quite different from inventing some future technology that has a few loopholes in the physics. I mean, I don't know about most other people out there, but when I play Halo, I don't wonder if making a personal force field is really possible. Plasma guns are just weapons. Interdimensional Space Travel, or whatever it exactly is, is a plot device. I don't really mind what the science are, so long as its handled half seriously, as long as it seems like something that could be plausible based on common sense.

On the other hand, a story could well benefit from a lack of realism. Hats off to Douglas Adams for creating the least realistic, most bizarre and possibly most amusing science fiction world ever.

[chrispenycate]

There exists a type of reader who gets a kick out of discovering discrepancies in stories; I would know because I happen to fall into this category.

I remember, at the age of about thirteen finding a technical error in an Arthur C Clarke book (Earthlight) , and discussing it with my physics professor before sending a letter to the great man himself, and receiving in return an admission that I was not the only one to have spotted the point. It wasn't corrected in later editions, though.

Which means, of course, that my SF isn't allowed to give these possibilities to others.

If you consider Jupiter as a failed star (quite easy for a gas giant planet) you can see how it would be quite possible for a binary or even a trinary star system to have planets, moons, even an asteroid belt. There's no reason not to have a habitable planet or moon, though seasons might get a bit extreme.

Grins wickedly Orion technology to meet an invading alien force; bit "Footfall", isn't it?

[Peter Graham]

I think Sapheron is bang on. It's what I call "Sci-fience" - provided it looks credible and complex and you use the letter X enough in proper names, that will be enough for most readers.

Joking aside, at the end of the day you're writing a piece of creative fiction and not an instruction manual. Personally, I love Dark Ages history, but there isn't a fictional book set in the Dark Ages which isn't riddled with massive inaccuracies. But so what? If it's a good read, I'll enjoy it anyway.

Nonetheless, Chris has a valid point. There are those readers who actively enjoy spotting factual inaccuracies in a piece, but that is just part of their reading experience, so good luck to them. I don't know that anyone would ever refuse to actually buy or read a book just because the science isn't right, but perhaps Chris could clarify? And even if they did, what can you do about it? Unless you know more about physics, chemistry, micro-biology, natural history, human biology, chaos theory and astronomy than all of your readers, there's always going to be someone who says "Ha ha! You got that wrong! Pluto actually has three invisible moons, not two, and they are made of Roquefort, not Cheddar!"

So always concentrate on the story and the character. The backdrop has to be convincing enough to allow the average reader to suspend their disbelief, but I'm not sure it needs to be anything more than that.

Regards

Peter