Hard SF discussion

Hello everyone.

I was wondering if someone could recommend a book about humans colonizing mars. Something realistic (hopefully no monsters that want to invade earth or kill all humans but i don't mind some fictional difficulties or beings) maybe dealing with real problems that such a big human endeavour would entail: transportation, generating/processing resources, new politics, psychology of first settlers, anything like that. I hope it doesn't sound too realistic, i definitely want fiction, not just a scientific account of what would it take to get there.

If that's too specific then, what books about colonizing mars have you liked?

Thank you

Hilikus wrote: "Hello everyone.

I was wondering if someone could recommend a book about humans colonizing mars. Something realistic (hopefully no monsters that want to invade earth or kill all humans but i don't ..."

The Mars Trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson. (Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars). You might like to at least check out 'Red Mars' Hilikus. I read the trilogy some years ago & then went on to read all of KSR's novels. I would give the trilogy, as a whole, a 4 star rating. Very enjoyable.

Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy is fiction with a real story, but it also has considerable "data dumping". It's highly regarded, but you'll have to see if it's to your taste. There's a fourth book, The Martians, which is short fiction.

Frederik Pohl's Man Plus is about a man who is technologically enhanced in order to handle the Mars environment prior to terraforming. The sequel, Mars Plus, has a population of humans and cyborgs on Mars.

Larry Richardson's The Colonisation of Mars tells of a group of "expendable" scientists sent on a one-way trip to make a Martian colony. It centers on an eccentric loner. It's a sad story, but gives a travelogue of Mars, has descriptions of the steps in building the colony's base, and has other interesting aspects.

I could recommend my own book, Ship of Storms, which deals with an already colonized Mars and rebellion against Earth's authority, but a more popular and highly regarded book, which I haven't read, is The Martian, by Andy Weir. From the reviews I've seen it's pre-colonization, but it describes the technological and physical problems of inhabiting Mars, and from your own description may be just what you're looking for.

Ken wrote: "I could recommend my own book, Ship of Storms, which deals with an already colonized Mars and rebellion against Earth's authority, but a more popular and highly regarded book, which..."

I have a copy of The Martian by Weir also Ken. I've had it recommended to me by several GR friends. The reviews are very favorable too.

Paul wrote: "Ken wrote: "I could recommend my own book, Ship of Storms, which deals with an already colonized Mars and rebellion against Earth's authority, but a more popular and highly regarded..."

Great! Write us a review when you're finished. I keep meaning to put it on my to-read list. (In fact, I just did)

Ken wrote: "Paul wrote: "Ken wrote: "I could recommend my own book, Ship of Storms, which deals with an already colonized Mars and rebellion against Earth's authority, but a more popular and hi..."

Ha. Not sure when i'll get round to reading it Ken. My TBR list currently is running at around 1,000 & that's just what i desperately want to read. Not counting possible 2nd books by any author i might fancy on that list.

I try to keep mine manageable, listing only the books I really want to read. I listed all of Asimov's Foundation Series, and I meant to start it after finishing the robot books, but so far I haven't worked up enough curiosity to do it. Not really an Asimov fan.

Ken wrote: "I try to keep mine manageable, listing only the books I really want to read. I listed all of Asimov's Foundation Series, and I meant to start it after finishing the robot books, but so far I haven..."

That is the list i really want to read. I was into Sci-fi in a big way till around my late 20's (i'm 58 now) & then shifted to pulp/hard-case/psychological thrillers. But now i find myself drifting back into Sci-fi, while still maintaining my interest in other genera that interests me.
I read ALL of Asimov's books. Robot's was good, but i'm not interested in reading other authors interpretations of that line, of which there seem to be quite a few.

I read Foundation some time in the 'sixties, but I remember little about it now except that I liked it. It's why I want to read the whole series. However, I never read the robot stories until recently and wasn't that crazy about it. Probably would have liked it better if I had read it when I was much younger.

I just saw your note, there is a good book, that was followed up a movie, it is called the Martian Chronicles.


Hilikus wrote: "Hello everyone.

I was wondering if someone could recommend a book about humans colonizing mars. Something realistic (hopefully no monsters that want to invade earth or kill all humans but i don't ..."

Jabriol wrote: "I just saw your note, there is a good book, that was followed up a movie, it is called the Martian Chronicles.


Hilikus wrote: "Hello everyone.

I was wondering if someone could recommend a book a..."

That would be by Ray Bradbury, a classic. I'm sure I've read it at least once over the years, but can't remember anything about it.

Thank you everyone. I will take a look at all the suggested titles

I'm reading The Martian right now and the science is great. However, as good as the science is, the author had one pretty big error. So if you are interested in the books to gather information on Mars, perhaps for your own book, note the error.

The density of the atmosphere on Mars is about 1/100th that of Earth. This equates to a force on the body that is 1/10th that on Earth. In the book a 175 kph wind tears things up, but this would feel to a human, much like a 17.5 kph wind or about 11mph. That's not likely to give anyone any problems. This is back-of-the-napkin kind of calculating. Actual calculations would vary depending on the actual density which varies with altitude, temperature, etc. But it looks like even 400 mph winds during Mars' violent storms would barely knock a person over. Incidentally, this is why they don't use wings to land craft on Mars. The wings would have to be as long as the Empire State Building is tall. That's why NASA used a "rocket powered sky crane" to land a probe on Mars. That has to be one of the coolest phrases I've ever heard. Hope this helps.

Russell wrote: "The density of the atmosphere on Mars is about 1/100th that of Earth. This equates to a force on the body that is 1/10th that on Earth."

Would you care to explain where that 1/100 → 1/10 transition comes from? Intuitively, I would guess that you have to raise the coefficient to the power 2/3, not 1/2 (since you're going from 3 to 2 dimensions, since pressure acts on 2-dimensional surfaces).

I think you're on the wrong track.
You square wind speed to get the force so with 1/100 the density (which may underestimate Mars density a bit), you need 10/1 the wind speed to get an equal force. At an equal speed though, you get 1/100 the force.

Sometimes a little technical ignorance is a blessing fellas:)
The question for me, when reading anything, Sci-fi or otherwise, is "Is this story enjoyable?" -"Is it well written?" It is fiction after all.
A little 'poetic license' is OK by me.

I looked up the density of the atmosphere on Mars on the net and found that it was about 1% that of Earth's. Then I did the same for the cross-sectional area of a human. Then I reminded myself of the equation for drag. I solved for the velocity instead of the force and put in the values on Earth. Repeated with a density equal to 1/100th and found that the velocity to produce the same force was 1/10th. Then I realized that I was being stupid because I could have figure it out with only the density value by realizing that drag goes up with the square of the velocity. Pretty sure I'm right. But if you find any errors, my wife actually calculated this.

Paul wrote: "Sometimes a little technical ignorance is a blessing fellas:)
The question for me, when reading anything, Sci-fi or otherwise, is "Is this story enjoyable?" -"Is it well written?" It is fiction aft..."

I couldn't agree more as a reader, but as a sci-fi author technical ignorance is not acceptable, otherwise it's just fiction.

Russell wrote: "Paul wrote: "Sometimes a little technical ignorance is a blessing fellas:)
The question for me, when reading anything, Sci-fi or otherwise, is "Is this story enjoyable?" -"Is it well written?" It i..."

I agree Russell. I was, of course, speaking purely as a reader. It's annoying when there are glaring & illogical mistakes made, in a novel, especially Sci-fi. The same applies in any fiction. I've read a few novels in genera other than Sci-fi where I've wondered whether they've been proof read.

I've seen the same thing. I'm an author and I research answers to questions I have about unfamiliar topics. if I can't find the answer then I make sure I write it vague enough to be plausible. I wish others would do that.

In one sense, I understand I might enjoy a historical novel more if I was oblivious to errors such as a novel giving the name of the writer of the Declaration of Independence as Jefferson Davis (not Thomas Jefferson). However, how can someone who knows better not say "WTF???" And then there's the oblivious ones who will believe the novel and teach his kids about Jefferson Davis in 1776.

Good point.

I relates a little to the Martian topic, in the sense that I recall reading science fiction growing up and there seemed to be a lot more hard science fiction out there then. I learned a lot of science from reading science fiction. The original poster, I think was hoping for that kind of thing. Had he asked the question 30 years ago, I think there would have been a lot more answers. Today, I think authors don't take the time to research and just fudge the science with "fantasy" or even "magic."

Beware Hilikus, it may be a nice way to learn about the colonization of Mars, but you might wind up learning that Jefferson Davis wrote the Declaration of Independence in 1776.

well, personally i don't mind inaccuracies in sci-fi as long as they are of a numerical nature (like the one described here, I'm not going to double check numbers) and not of a logical nature

I don't mean to belabor the point, but I actually made the calculation because I wondered how wind on Mars would have any effect at all because I thought that the atmosphere was so thin as to be essentially outer space. So for me it was a logical error.

But I understand where you are coming from and while it bothers me a little bit, because the rest of his science is so accurate, it doesn't detract from the story at all. I'm a little over half way through and so far it's 5 stars. It's exactly the kind of story I like to read, so I hope he has more. And if anyone can recommend an author that writes like him, hit me up.

Sorry I can't suggest any more books regarding Mars colonization because the ones I was going to suggest have already been mentioned.

Good luck!

Any sci-fi relies on things that aren't real - technologies that don't exist, events that did not occur. In this case it relies on the premise of a Mars with a windstorm more powerful than we ever recorded. I don't think that's difficult to accept. For me it would be far more difficult to accept if the author wrote in a wizard who casts a wind spell and knocks things over, for example.

I don't think that the point of hard sci-fi is to be as realistic as possible in setting up the world. I think it's to have smart and resourceful heroes and heroines who act rationally in a world that can be logically understood within the confines of the premise and the narrative.

Well, any sci-fi that relies on the science to capture a reader is probably bad science fiction, so you're right that the story should come first. Science is just the backdrop on which the story is told. My comments were specifically directed to someone that sounded like he was interested in learning about the colonization of Mars, but in a novelized fashion. I wanted to point out that by doing so he might draw some conclusions based on those things, as you mentioned, that aren't real.

In the case of The Martian, I believe he would be getting exactly what he wanted, with the one exception. That is all.

Finally, the wind speeds in the book were 175 kph and because I'm an engineer, I had to go look. I thought I heard somewhere (Cosmos?) that the winds on Mars could get up to 400 mph, but you prompted me to go check and as it turns out, they are much lower. They've only ever recorded about 60mph winds. Maybe I had the wrong planet. Gee, the wrong area, I can understand, but the whole wrong planet!

I know there are at least two different interpretations of what constitutes "hard SF". At least some of us use it to mean SF which maintains scientific plausibility. It wouldn't be SF if it were exclusively current tech, science and circumstances. So, some extrapolation is needed. What does or doesn't make "plausible" extrapolations isn't always black and white. But those who want to explore *possible* futures through fiction would like to avoid doubtful science.

I did a search on Hard Science fiction and simply could not conclude a strict definition. As you said there are at least two interpretations, but I think there were many more. Either way I think this thread has been jacked! Sorry Hilikus.

Russell wrote: "I did a search on Hard Science fiction and simply could not conclude a strict definition. As you said there are at least two interpretations, but I think there were many more. Either way I think ..."

Ha ha... indeed:))

Earlier, I mentioned Frederik Pohl's Man Plus as a possible choice for Mars colonization novels. That book has a sequel, Mars Plus, which takes place in an established Mars colony. So, that may be closer to what you want than Man Plus.

You might want to try Marsbound by Joe Haldeman or Moving Mars by Greg Bear. They are both enjoyable.

David wrote: "Earlier, I mentioned Frederik Pohl's Man Plus as a possible choice for Mars colonization novels. That book has a sequel, Mars Plus, which takes place in an established Mars colony. So, that may b..."

I acquired both of those yesterday David, following your recommendation.

Hi, I've just joined this group. I'm a Hungarian SF author, my novel about Mars Colonization (and about a deadly Mars-epidemic) is out in English and available on Amazon in Kindle Version fter two years of translation and edition work.

http://www.amazon.com/Cluster-Unmei-S...

Read the Kindle free sample, and buy if you like.
Thank you
Regards to all of you in the Group
Stephen

You can also find my Short Story Collection book the Death in the Stars from the same colonized Solar System
http://www.amazon.com/Death-Stars-Ste...

My third book also takes you to the Mars (The Seed) is curently under translaton ut you can see a pro teaser about te book here>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neR11...

Thank you all, enjoy reading, and let's colonize the mars!
Stephen (SPT)

I hate to beat my own drum, but I have a new book coming out, More than Human: The Mensa Contagion. Here’s the blurb I wrote for it: “People of Earth! You’ve just won a complete makeover of your society that brings peace and prosperity. What will you do next?” “Why, go to Mars, of course!” This epic sci-fi tale relates how an invading ET virus affects Earth’s social structures and subsequent space exploration. Soon to be released, you should watch for it if you want sci-fi about Mars colonization.
Of course, there are classics around. Although it's YA, Heinlein's Podkayne series takes place there, and there's C. S. Lewis' Out of the Silent Planet and Edgar Rice Burrough's Mars series, but they're not exactly about colonization. Bradbury's Martian Chronicles, made into a terrible TV miniseries, is another classic. I googled "scifi about mars colonization" and found all kinds of stuff, so I assume that would contain some more recent stuff (like my book eventually LOL). I notice a lot of that above.
r/Steve

Actually, someone might have caught an air...my Mars Lander has wings, big ones, but maybe not as big as the Empire State Building. I don't think I'll change it until I think through the following (besides, if Weir can make that mistake, I don't feel so bad):
Here's the question: drag doesn't necessarily go like vee-squared, but what's important is the drag coefficient, which is often a function of altitude and air density. I'm not sure how that all works out on Mars. Is there a NASA aeronautics engineer in the group? LOL.
I used a lot of references in my book (both the NY Times and Science News have had recent articles on Mars colonization), many of them listed at the end, but I can't remember any of them considering this little problem. I focused more on the psych problems colonists will have and the political baggage they might bring from Earth.
Good discussion!
r/Steve

Ha! "Caught an air..." should have been "caught an error...." I was clearly already thinking about the atmosphere and drag coefficients. Oh well....
r/Steve

@Russell,
I haven't changed my Mars landing scenario just yet. I can't get my head around the math/physics, but the 2D-assumption seems suspect. Besides, it isn't only drag but airflow and a lander could use braking rockets. Too many variables. I did change my density number--one of my beta-readers caught that as well as my statement about Mars' diameter.
Lessons learned: Beta-readers are invaluable, and the author can always create her/his own errors even with the best references.
r/Steve

How do I apply to become one of your beta readers, Steve?
Thomas

Hah, how embarrassing. I read just Steve Moore's part of this post.
BTW this is a great post. Lots of interesting suggestions on here.

@ Thomas,
Beta-readers are entirely voluntary in my case because I write on a bare-bones budget. And, even as an indie writer, I usually try to keep on schedule--my muses (AKA banshees with tasers) know I have a lot of stories in me and want me to keep writing them in a timely fashion. I do give my beta-readers credit right along with my formatter and cover artist and my main marketing lady who does the PR when I release a new ebook. Moreover, everybody gets a free ebook when it comes out.
That said, are you interested in just my far-out sci-fi or also thrillers that are a bit sci-fi-like ("The Chaos Chronicles Trilogy" and my new sci-fi novel are in the first category while "The Clones and Mutants Trilogy" and "Mary Jo Melendez Mysteries" are in the second)? You'll be waiting a wee bit for hard sci-fi now, but #6 in the "Detectives Chen and Castilblanco Series" is about ready for beta-readers. Let me know your preferences if still interested. Another caveat emptor: you'll be reading a Word MS on your laptop.
Thanks for your interest. Another pair of eyes would always be welcome.
r/Steve

@ Sebastian,
A recent letter-to-the-editor or op-ed column in the Times basically asked: Why would we want a colony on Mars? I offered one reason, but I suppose every author has to answer that question. I checked out your book. Putting the onus on the Morphians is clever, but why FBI? That's an interesting twist! At any rate, I'll put your book on my TBR list.
So far, I haven't been beat up by readers over the gaffe mentioned above, a gaffe the beta-readers didn't catch. As far as the story goes, it's a minor one, but I'm a perfectionist. In hard sci-fi, details on the side are important, but the story is still the entree on the menu.
I'm anxious to see whether the movie The Martian is as boring as the book! Matt Damon saved Elysium--maybe he'll save this one too.
r/Steve

@ Sebastian,
The Martian was/is certainly popular as a book. I don't know why;I found it boring. Others opinions obviously differ. For me, it reads like a boring manual on how to survive on Mars, a bit like Moby Dick being a DIY manual for turning whale blubber into lamp oil, or 20,000 Leagues under the Sea a dated lesson on undersea flora and fauna. I can't imagine how the movie The Martian will be. Let's hope Hollywood can work some magic and improve the book.
On the other hand, cerebral sci-fi is often changed so much by Hollywood that one has to really do a memory erase to enjoy the movie. Blade Runner was a great exception. I enjoyed I, Robot, too, but the only thing common with Isaac Asimov's robot stories was the robot expert's name!
You mentioned Terminator in your book blurb. That series had its ups and downs. #1 and #4 were probably the best--I'm still trying to get my head around everything that happened in #4. Of course, they were all original screenplays. Maybe translating from one media to another is the problem.
Another Phillip K. Dick story was turned into Total Recall, another Schwartzennegger (sp?) success. There the Martian colonies were basically gulags where the prisoners were mining ore from the Red Planet. In some distant future, that might be justified (the ore mining, not the gulags).
r/Steve

The Martian is sci-fi in the same way the movie Gravity is sci-fi. Sure, it has science and is fiction, but it's not especially speculative beyond "we can go to Mars now". It's absolutely not the kind of cerebral sci-fi that Steven talks about. In my opinion it's an entertaining thriller, and not boring, but it doesn't expand your mind.

Tobias wrote: "The Martian is sci-fi in the same way the movie Gravity is sci-fi. Sure, it has science and is fiction, but it's not especially speculative beyond "we can go to Mars now". It's absolutely not the k..."

Steven wrote: "@ Sebastian,
The Martian was/is certainly popular as a book. I don't know why;I found it boring. Others opinions obviously differ. For me, it reads like a boring manual on how to survive on Mars..."

I want to give a bit of a different take. I agree in part with both posts above. It is a great book and a fun read. Not boring, of course it is up to personal preference. It is cerebral, but in a different way than much of the "thinking" science fiction out there. It is a practical problem solving book as compared to "what is life". It will be that kind of thinking that will be needed when it comes to surviving on Mars. the book does address how the crew feels about leaving one of their own behind and the bigger question about whether to tell them to begin with. It also addresses the idea of fraternization which is going to happen when you have people spending an inordinate amount of time together.

So it is not boring and it is not speculative in general, but it is a great read based on practical engineering.

As for the movie, it has great potential.

Papaphilly,
I respect your opinion. I guess a lot of people think like you. Maybe I'm just weird?
I'll probably see the movie because I like Mat Damon. He's saved quite a few movies. But maybe this one doesn't need saving. Who knows?
One of my beta-readers mentioned to me that parts of my new ebook reminded her of The Martian. I did a second read of Weir's ebook to refresh my memory and see if that's true. About halfway through, I confirmed my original negative impression.
I guess I shouldn't disparage success, though. Mea culpa. Having a successful ebook is like winning the lottery. Weir certainly won it!
r/Steve

Steven wrote: "Papaphilly,
I respect your opinion. I guess a lot of people think like you. Maybe I'm just weird?
I'll probably see the movie because I like Mat Damon. He's saved quite a few movies. But maybe ..."

Remember this, nobody says you have to like a book because everybody else does. It is your opinion and you have the right to that. You have not been disrespectful to anyone on this thread. So what is the problem? So you did not like the book, big deal. I do not like The Catcher in the Rye and it is a true modern classic. I can see it is very well written, but I still do not like it. I just do not "get" the book and I never have either. So what, that is my opinion and it is valid.

As for the movie, I think if it is done well, it can be very good just based on the book. There is enough action to satisfy that itch. Matt Damon does not need to save the film if it is done right. Now note, IF IT IS DONE RIGHT. That is the caveat.

@ Papaphilly, Yep, that's a big caveat. Hollywood manages to ruin a good story more often than not, it seems.
I share your sentiments about Catcher. My two favorite catchers were Yogi Berra and Roy Campanella (RIP)--heroes, actually, as a kid (I played catcher).
All the hype about Go Set a Watchman turned me off too--I never liked Mockingbird, and Go Set was the failed original MS of Mockingbird.
Yep, tastes in reading are highly subjective. Those diverse tastes are just another facet of our wonderful human diversity.
r/Steve
PS. Maybe I wasn't disrespectful, but I might be part of the minority opinion on The Martian. Wouldn't be the first time, though. :-)