Quote:
Originally Posted by bill_mchale
Hi Marc,
Well obviously, the categories are a little fluid, but I think there are a few hallmarks of hard science-fiction.
1. The fewer departures from known physics, chemistry and biology the better; even better if the departures you do make are at plausible given current theories (i.e., FTL travel via worm-hole or similar).
2. The science is often a driving force of the stories. This is probably more true than item 1. Often authors will assume a certain basic world and then ask what if about it. Greg Bear's Darwin's Children series is about what happens if evolution happens fast. Jurassic Park (yes I think it is reasonably hard sci-fi, even if it is never included on the SF shelves) is about what might happen if you cloned dinosaurs, etc.
3. The solutions are often scientific too. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress maybe more adventure story than about science, but the idea of the Moon fighting the Earth by taking advantage of its position at the top of Earth's Gravity Well is a classic SF idea.
--
Bill
|
That, brill', Bill! Thanks for that.
So, although it takes it out to extremes, would the Revelation Space universe be considered a "hard SF" universe? It seems very focused on teasing out the scientific explanations for things beyond the particpants' current knowledge, while also placing them within a scientifically explainable (and very often explained) context/culture/technology. And if that does it, then I recommend it.
Cheers,
Marc