Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Pbartender" data-source="post: 5352506" data-attributes="member: 7533">To a certain degree, yes...&nbsp; A lot of hard sci-fi has a lot of pseudo-science in it.&nbsp; Primarily because it's trying to predict fictional future science based on current science.&nbsp; Often, because most sci-fi authors aren't professional scientists, the predicted science is purposefully or unintentionally based on details that are scientifically and logically wrong, but are plausible enough from the view point of a entertaining fictional plot.&quot;Hard sci-fi&quot; is sci-fi heavily founded in the &quot;hard sciences&quot;, most notably physics, astronomy and their derivatives, whereas soft sci is primarily concerned with the social sciences, anthropology and sociology and the like.&nbsp; Of course, it's never been a perfectly fine line between the two...The thing to remember is that Hard sci-fi makes no contentions about how true to the source it sticks.&nbsp; Sure, it's SCIENCE fiction, but it's also science FICTION.&nbsp; A lot of hard sci-fi starts out with a perfectly reasonable science-based premise in general, and then mucks it up when they try to fill in the details.Star Trek and Star Wars are two very good examples of what started out as Soft Sci-Fi with just enough Hard Sci-Fi to excuse the gimmicks, but then later got all goofy when fans and authors tried to make them Harder than they should have ever been.What I'm saying is, Firefly is one of those sci-fi settings where it's probably better off to not worry about the hard science too much.&nbsp; Delving into those details too far ruins the setting, because it reveals all the little scientifically inconsistent details that you then have to go out of your way to find a not-quite-entirely plausible explanation for.We don't need to know how or why there are dozens of habitable planets floating around a single star system...&nbsp; Only that there are, and that most of them are habitable but not necessary hospitable.We don't really need to know exactly how or why Firefly's interplanetary drive works, or even how fast it goes...&nbsp; Only that it works until the irreplaceable doohickey breaks down or it runs out of go-juice, and it either gets you there in the nick of time or maybe not quite.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Pbartender, post: 5352506, member: 7533"] To a certain degree, yes... A lot of hard sci-fi has a lot of pseudo-science in it. Primarily because it's trying to predict fictional future science based on current science. Often, because most sci-fi authors aren't professional scientists, the predicted science is purposefully or unintentionally based on details that are scientifically and logically wrong, but are plausible enough from the view point of a entertaining fictional plot. "Hard sci-fi" is sci-fi heavily founded in the "hard sciences", most notably physics, astronomy and their derivatives, whereas soft sci is primarily concerned with the social sciences, anthropology and sociology and the like. Of course, it's never been a perfectly fine line between the two... The thing to remember is that Hard sci-fi makes no contentions about how true to the source it sticks. Sure, it's SCIENCE fiction, but it's also science FICTION. A lot of hard sci-fi starts out with a perfectly reasonable science-based premise in general, and then mucks it up when they try to fill in the details. Star Trek and Star Wars are two very good examples of what started out as Soft Sci-Fi with just enough Hard Sci-Fi to excuse the gimmicks, but then later got all goofy when fans and authors tried to make them Harder than they should have ever been. What I'm saying is, Firefly is one of those sci-fi settings where it's probably better off to not worry about the hard science too much. Delving into those details too far ruins the setting, because it reveals all the little scientifically inconsistent details that you then have to go out of your way to find a not-quite-entirely plausible explanation for. We don't need to know how or why there are dozens of habitable planets floating around a single star system... Only that there are, and that most of them are habitable but not necessary hospitable. We don't really need to know exactly how or why Firefly's interplanetary drive works, or even how fast it goes... Only that it works until the irreplaceable doohickey breaks down or it runs out of go-juice, and it either gets you there in the nick of time or maybe not quite. [/QUOTE]

Verification