Do you Sci-Fi?

cyberwolf77

I am curious to know if any of you folks out there enjoy reading science fiction.
I am referring to those books that actually attempt to be serious about their scientific principles and aren't just pulling things out their posteriors that sound right. A prime example would be John Ringo's Looking Glass series. True, it features a stuffed animal that might be God but it's science does appear to be reasonable to me. Then again, I couldn't tell a meson from a boson if they wore nametags. Might be helped by the fact that the main science consultant and co-author is this guy.
BTW that gent in the link makes me feel very lazy.

Ostrom

I quite liked Asimov's Foundation series. The first introduces social science as the highest form, which has evolved to a predictive science capable of mapping the course of events far into the future. It is an interesting reflection on the way practitioners of the time viewed it's potential, as well as a prescient view of the 'big data' revolution (I hate this latter term myself as it has largely been appropriated as metaphor by cultural theorists with little data skills). I believe predictive capacity is a poor measure of social scientific progress - and a pointless goal, but the book is fascinating.

cyberwolf77

I read the Foundation books years ago. Always found them a bit dry for my taste.

Black Swan

Jules Verne moon gun 1865 novel From the Earth to the Moon. Although there appears to be some engineering behind his story according to Encyclopedia Astronautica.

cyberwolf77

Black Swan wrote: »

Jules Verne moon gun 1865 novel From the Earth to the Moon. Although there appears to be some engineering behind his story according to Encyclopedia Astronautica.

You referring to the space gun idea right Swannie? A cannon capable of launching satellites into orbit for a fractional cost of a manned shuttle mission or rocket launch. Monsieur Verne was also frighteningly accurate in describing the workings of an electrically powered submarine submarine

Black Swan

cyberwolf77 wrote: »

You referring to the space gun idea right Swannie? A cannon capable of launching satellites into orbit for a fractional cost of a manned shuttle mission or rocket launch.

The US Navy now has the rail gun (different technology, but still a gun), and who knows if it could be used to launch satellites for less cost? Doubt that astronauts could also be launched into space with the Verne Moon gun (or Navy's rail gun) given the extraordinary Gs at gun ignition.

cyberwolf77

I could see a satellite launch via railgun

Manach

As per the OP, I enjoy some of the less odd works of Mr. Ringo. But as per Jules Verne moon gun book, there is actually a SciFi story based on this "King David's starship" written by Dr. Jerry Pournelle, an ex-Nasa consultant.

Capt'n Midnight

cyberwolf77 wrote: »

You referring to the space gun idea right Swannie? A cannon capable of launching satellites into orbit for a fractional cost of a manned shuttle mission or rocket launch. Monsieur Verne was also frighteningly accurate in describing the workings of an electrically powered submarine submarine

Jules Verne wrote hard science fiction. Most of the stuff was real or extrapolated from existing technology. Given the scientific knowledge of the day there was very little reliance on "science fantasy"

Was a BBC documentary that showed an early French prototype underwater breathing apparatus, lots of copper on the they tested in a river.

Black Swan wrote: »

The US Navy now has the rail gun (different technology, but still a gun), and who knows if it could be used to launch satellites for less cost? Doubt that astronauts could also be launched into space with the Verne Moon gun (or Navy's rail gun) given the extraordinary Gs at gun ignition.

see also light gas gun which have got to 7.5Km/s .

Neglecting gravity drag (short time) and air resistance (pesky air) orbital velocity is 7.8Km/s

And this from the 1960's
http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/05/980500-bull.htm

Development of these cannon-launched projectiles proceeded to the point where subsystems were test-launched, demonstrating survival under accelerations of up to 10,000 gees. Subsystems included solid-rocket motors, an IR horizon sensor, a spin-rate sensor, Sun sensors, NiCad batteries, a solenoid-operated cold gas thruster, and various support electronics modules.

Acceleration with these things is a tad severe. Humans could survive a lot more g's if immersed in some sort of perfluorocarbon breathing fluid though the different density would still mean acceleration would have to be limited to something like maglev or perhaps combustion gas gun

It would be cool to launch a space elevator this way , cable has to be super tough anyway.

cyberwolf77

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

It would be cool to launch a space elevator this way , cable has to be super tough anyway.

Why not make the barrel of the space gun into the shaft for the elevator while it under construction? Keep launching the next bit up as you go.