[ SECRET POST #2557 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2557 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.



__________________________________________________


11.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 013 secrets from Secret Submission Post #364.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[cbrachyrhynchos]

Hard sci fi will often provide specific details: numbers, angles, sizes, trajectory speeds, ect, and if you do the math and study the specific details given they will all make complete sense in terms of math and science.

Except that it doesn't. Asimov got it wrong, but he wasn't even trying to describe robots except as a literary plot device. Niven got it wrong, demanding unobtainium, FTL, and magic propulsion systems for Ringworlds to work.

[(Anonymous)]

I stand corrected! My intro to hard sci fi was Niven, and I never realized he was wrong in Ringworld (though I do remember there were things he corrected after publishing it) and of course there's things that there's very little actual science fact on too, coming to think of it, like I don't know how biologically sound the Moteys from The Mote in God's Eye are are.