Solid science - In fiction

[Halb]

Eric Mc said:

Stephen Baxter's books have a lot of hard science and engineering in them.

He has a co-effort with Terry Pratchett coming out next month.

[1a35]

Stephen Baxter has also collaborated with Arthur C Clarke. Well worth reading

[MartG]

James P Hogan's work is usually well grounded in science fact ( or believably extrapolated from what is currently known )

[Eric Mc]

1a35 said:

Stephen Baxter has also collaborated with Arthur C Clarke. Well worth reading

That's how I discovered him in the first place.

[ATV]

APanda said:

As a reader of plenty of science books and fiction books, I've found myself wanting to read something that bridges the two. The problem is, I'm not keen a lot of the sci-fi genre, most are set in the future and not entirely believable. As much as I love Sagan, Contact was pushing it a bit for me. Are there any Fiction books any of you know of with pretty solid science, set in the present? I'd be OK with most of the more complicated theories etc. One book I did enjoy was Flashforward by Robert J Sawyer, which comes quite close to what I'm looking for.

Cheers

Robert J Sawyer is not a well respected "hard science" author in his own field. I've not come across many fellow authors that particularly like him or his work. Plus he looks like the kind of guy that would eat your gran and then smile about it. http://www.sfwriter.com/

Stephen Baxter has already been mentioned is a good one. Paul J. McAuley is another recommended one.

My favourite hard science author is Greg Egan. Phenomenal stuff, I'd particularly recommend getting his short story collections. "The Infinite Assassin", "Reasons to be Cheerful", "Learning to Be Me" are a few I'd recommend. http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/

[Mr E]

Baxter and Egan both write compelling books.

If you fancy something that is pretty hard sci-fi and somewhat 'unusual', can I reccommend Peter Watts "Blindsight".

Odd. Interesting. Compelling and disturbing in equal amounts.

And I think free to download if you go hunting about on his site;
http://www.rifters.com/blindsight/BS_main.htm

[Mr E]

(found it)
http://www.rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm

Gargamel said:

I enjoyed Cryptonomicon - but it might not be everyones thing. In fact Neal Stephenson in general is good stuff.

I like Neal. Another author who absolutely does the research.
Crytonomicon is wonderful (as is the Baroque Cycle and Ananatham), but might I suggest Snow Crash be an easier starting point? (And also the best named character in fiction along with an opening couple of chapters that I'd love to see on the big screen).

[Famous Graham]

Mr E said:

(found it)
http://www.rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm

Gargamel said:

I enjoyed Cryptonomicon - but it might not be everyones thing. In fact Neal Stephenson in general is good stuff.

I like Neal. Another author who absolutely does the research.
Crytonomicon is wonderful (as is the Baroque Cycle and Ananatham), but might I suggest Snow Crash be an easier starting point? (And also the best named character in fiction along with an opening couple of chapters that I'd love to see on the big screen).

As I was scrolling down, I was wondering if Stephenson would come up. I was going to post it, if not.

So, essentially, that's a longer way of saying : +1

[APanda]

Cheers for the suggestions. After reading up on a few, I went for Distress by Greg Egan. Anyone read it?

[Nimby]

I'd thorougly recommend Larry Niven's "Known Space" series for hard SF. Even in his "magic" series the Laws of Thermodynamics are maintained.

[GadgeS3C]

Beaten to it - I was going to recommend Larry Niven. Also I'll add my vote for Haldeman and the Forever War - probably my all time fav book.

[pip t]

More biology and forensics than physics and engineering type science, but pretty much anything by Kathy Reichs is very accurate. Her books are what the series 'Bones' is (very loosely) based on. She is a forensic anthropologist as well as an author, so all the science in her books is fact.

[NickyTwoHats]

I'll Second Neal Stephenson and rise you a William Gibson (though less pure science and more societal extrapolation with good science underpinnings)

N2H

[otolith]

You might enjoy Richard Preston's The Demon In The Freezer and The Hot Zone, though largely non-fictional. The Cobra Event is fiction, but I've not read it.

[Zumbruk]

GadgeS3C said:

Beaten to it - I was going to recommend Larry Niven. Also I'll add my vote for Haldeman and the Forever War - probably my all time fav book.

Don't bother with the sequel(s). Haldeman appears to have caught religion.

[Zumbruk]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_science_fiction

[Alfanatic]

APanda said:

I've been recommended Michael Crichton before but never read one. Anyone have any thoughts on those?

I've read Timeline, which I thoroughly enjoyed and would read again, and Prey, which I didn't enjoy. That's all just personal preference though. The science in both sounded OK to me in general.... if you can get your head around quantum time travel (essential to the plot, too) for Timeline. I remember Prey making me WTF a few times but really Crichton probably knows more about science than I do.

EDIT: Oh, it turns out I've also read Airframe, which was pretty good, but not really science fiction.

Edited by Alfanatic on Thursday 7th June 12:44

[hairykrishna]

I found the Crichtons where I did understand the science painful to be honest. I got the impression he's good at blagging plausible sounding detail but it all falls to pieces if you think about it too much. That said, Andromeda Strain is a favourite of mine.

[Eric Mc]

I read Jurrasic Park a couple of years before I saw the film. The book is MILES better.

[Huff]

Much of Crichton's stuff is utter toss from a science POV. I didn't particularly enjoy the few I tried.

Kim Stanley Robinson's stuff is pretty darn good, esp. his first, Red Mars. the science is solid, and he's also one of the few authors in the field who has a real understanding of societal dynamics too. Makes for a good read to me.