Greg Egan

It's actual science fiction. You can tell because it's fiction about science[1]. I haven't read any of that for ages and ages.

On the other hand, why does complex consciousness/physics related fiction always tend to be confusing and depressing? Why can't more of it be upbeat?

[1]

[1] Hard science fiction in that the fiction explores a science idea, and that that idea is rooted in real-life science. Although not exactly immediately realizable -- but then you could say that about Verne too, it's only in retrospect it becomes clear. I think those three are a rough description of what makes hard science fiction?

As it happens, I like both hard science fiction and space opera. I'm not sure if that really makes sense. I guess I like the superficial "in space" aspect, and the typical awe of it all, and other aspects of each.

I haven't seen much hard science-fiction recently. I guess it's hard because recent science, especially physics is too complicated to break down easily for an average reader (though there's always interesting thoughts about biologicals, and people still hammering away at the idea of IT and cyberspace).

There are plenty of books that explore fictional physics (including fictional theology/magic) to a greater or lesser extent. The boundary is fuzzier than you might imagine -- think of Vinge, where the physics is (a) almost certainly little to do with ours (b) not especially much self-consistent but (c) not inconsistent with ours (d) thought out and (e) completely integral to the plot.

Torchwood

( Spoilers )

What's the word for?

I remember when I was about 10, sometimes demanding to know "The word for". I thought a thesaurus was a great invention, I just was disappointed that there there weren't hundreds of entries for common words (eg. "yes", I wanted to say "Yes" a different way each day when the class register was called) and disappointed that many supposed synonyms weren't actually identical.

Later on, I really quite liked the idea that each word was unique, and using exactly the right combination conveyed a meaning best. I am very fond of defining words precisely[1], more for the fun in doing it than anything else[2].

Now I regularly see people posting on message boards saying "What is the word for concept X?" They invariably mean "I think concept X should have a word, let's make one", or "I seek validation for X being a useful concept, demonstrate its pre-existence" or "I want to make an assertion that X, but post it an ostensibly question-answering forum," or "I want to be a language geek." So embrace those ideas whole-heartedly, rather than linguifying! :)

[1] I remember being annoyed in class because everyone else could answer requests to define words quicker than I could -- because they gave an example rather than a definition, and I didn't see how an example was a definition because it obviously left out everything but the first order meaning. In retrospect, I was basically right about that, but the lesson I wasn't getting was to hear that what was really being asked was to show we understood a word so we could move on, rather than interpreting the question literally. I've got better at this :)

[2] Eg. "Filk" -- I think this is best described as "Originally songs made by fantasy/scifi fans, about scifi/fantasy, based on well-known tunes, but now anything related to this genre or subgroup." I think this is a good definition because it tends to include things that are called Filk, and not things that aren't, and am satisfied because it was hard to establish. Other people have simpler definitions, though to me seem inadequate because it's hard to tell from the definition what's Filk and what isn't.

God is a coward

Sorry, not really. (Well, not necessarily. Uh, I mean, I didn't have any reason to say that, other than as a humorous example of a controversial subject. Argue amongst yourselves if you so wish, but don't blame me. Just look at this bracket, it's amazing how many words saying nothing takes up :))

Where is everyone? My "inbox" has been nearly unclogged of lj updates recently -- have you all become productive or something? Have you all moved to chiark or myspace?

ETA: OK, that seemed to work :)

Measure theory in real life

Indeed, beyond hard science fiction, Egan traipses all the way into hard maths fiction. Tell me how hard that is -- most fiction is so mathematically soft it can't divide distance by time and get an answer in the right units let alone within ten orders of magnitude of the right answer.

There are a few approaches. You can have mathematician characters and gloss over the details *in a plausible way* (some of which are great, either with real or made up maths, I'm including Cryptonomicon, because the exposition isn't necessary, and Atrocity archives, because it's plausible, but definitely made up. You'd also get things like Beautiful Mind), or be dull, or attempt to push the maths across in an interesting way, which is really hard. There's, um, flatland, that's definitely hardish mathematics. And Egan. And some parodies. Is there anything else?

Anyway, Egan wins my award of the year for actually writing a short story where the plot is based on Measure Theory. Ian -- sorry for doubting :)

Measure theory in real life

( A maths question, unfortunately with spoilers for aforementioned short story. )

Jack's happy post

Goodle news

* World Peace sparks outpourings of joy
* Bush takes XTC, goes to rave
* Reuters: Economists retire
* George Lucas to re-film all three Star Wars prequels
* Asylum Seekers "more than welcome"
* Spam drying up
* Rivers, lakes of wine and beer

Who says negative humour is better? (OK, maybe it's easier. I do try.)