All about the Sci-

Since -Fi is pretty well up to the author. . . I was curious about how much actual science fact David absorbs over the course of his days? By days I really mean years, and by science I really mean the human races' understanding of all things beyond our thin, ever depleting atmosphere?

Also those besides David feel free to jump on their favorite new facts.

Example: Speed of light broken? Warshawski, we are now ready for you.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/8782895/CERN-scientists-break-the-speed-of-light.html

At the risk of de-railling the thread before it has even gotten started, may I offer a small observation on definitions.

Science Fiction :- A story utilising technology or phenomena which is seen as theoretically feasible given the state of understanding of the universe at the time of writing.

Science Fantasy :- A story utilising technology or phenomena which is not seen as theoretically feasible given the state of understanding of the universe at the time of writing.

Fantasy :- A story utilising phenomena known to be incompatible with the state of understanding of the universe at the time of writing.

Okay. Back to the thread.

Weber has already done 2 major science-induced retcons in the Harrington series. The first is the great resizing which happened after it was pointed out that the weight and sizes of the SD's in early books meant that they had a density approximately the same as cigar smoke. The second was smaller and related to the grav-tech after a realworld experiment strongly indicated that gravity propogates at lightspeed. Weber promptly inserted the "fact" that the Grav-sensors used in the Honorverse detected gravetic sources via "ripples" along the Alpha Wall, something which may become a plot point with regard to the Spider Drive...

I wasn't referring to the book synchronicity so much as how much science David actually takes the time to absorb, osmose, or otherwise make his own.

The definition of science fiction you've given would demand a high degree of cutting edge scientific study on the part of an author.

But I mostly wanted to know what interests him most? Is there any particular source he favors for discerning theoretical potential?

Phwop wrote:Since -Fi is pretty well up to the author. . . I was curious about how much actual science fact David absorbs over the course of his days? By days I really mean years, and by science I really mean the human races' understanding of all things beyond our thin, ever depleting atmosphere?

Also those besides David feel free to jump on their favorite new facts.

Example: Speed of light broken? Warshawski, we are now ready for you.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/8782895/CERN-scientists-break-the-speed-of-light.html

A long time ago an author, Larry Niven, wrote a story called The Coldest Place. Between the time that the story was printed and released, the science that it was based on, was proven wrong.