Spider Star
The human colony on the planet Argo has long explored and exploited the technology left behind by an extinct alien race. But then an archaeology team accidentally activates a terrible weapon...
Read More.Praise for Star Dragon
"Seldom does a storytelling talent come along as potent and fully mature as Mike Brotherton. His complex characters take you on a voyage that is both fiercely credible and astonishingly imaginative. This is Science Fiction."
-- David Brin"Star Dragon is terrific fare, offering readers a fusion of hard science and grand adventure."
-- Locus Magazine"Star Dragon is steeped in cosmology, the physics of interstellar travel, exobiology, artificial intelligence, bioscience. Brotherton, author of many scientific articles in refereed journals, has written a dramatic, provocative, utterly convincing hard science sf novel that includes an ironic twist that fans will love."
-- Booklist starred review"Readers hungry for the thought-provoking extrapolation and rigorous technical detail of old-fashioned hard SF are sure to enjoy astronomer Brotherton's first novel."
-- Publishers Weekly"Mike Brotherton, himself a trained astrophysicist, combines the technical acuity and ingenuity of Robert Forward with the ironic, postmodern stance and style of M. John Harrison. In this, his debut novel, those twin talents unite to produce a work that is involving on any number of levels. It's just about all you could ask for in a hardcore SF adventure."
-- Paul di Fillippo, SCI-FI.COM
Search
After I’ve Considered That…
May 23rd, 2012
I’ve seen this on facebook recently, and another friend just emailed it to me, so let me post it here to launch a couple of points for discussion:
So how about if I knew all that already? And could even make some minor corrections? Do I get to be certain?
A quick google fails to bring up the origin of the graphic or quote. Anyone know? Might make its meaning clearer, as cool as it is on its own.
To me, this seems to be a message to be uncertain in a complex world that is much more than it seems. I’m ok with that message, although it’s a little hard to know who exactly it’s directed at. I suspect it’s directed at the scientifically illiterate who are nevertheless positive they have all the facts about our world. But thinking more deeply, I wonder…
There’s a part of me that sees possible irony here, too, however. Science makes a point of building more and more reliable theories, but rarely comes out with “absolute certainty.” The things to consider here, however, are all essentially scientific “facts.” Are they right? Absolutely certain?
What if we’re all part of a computer simulation, or the dream of a dragon?
I’d also be interested in replacing the headline with, “Science shows us wonders you can’t even perceive, and that your perceptions are wonders in themselves.”
Finally, this is a nice reminder for us thinking about and writing about non-human intelligences (science fiction writers, SETI scientists, etc.) that our senses and our knowledge create our experience of the world, and it can differ drastically from being to being. What color are radio waves? What does infrasound sound like? What is real and what is perceived? Is it possible to communicate in any meaningful manner with beings that don’t share our senses?
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit taking acid…
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
I usually see these forwarded by the same people who forward that you can manifest hundred-dollar bills and parking spaces with magical thinking. I believe the intended message is, “There are all these things that are hard to believe, so… believe in what I’m about to tell you.” Metaphysics follows.
Yeah, that’s sort of the vibe I get from the headline, and then the body of the message is all this hard science stuff. They may be hard to believe, but the evidence for them is overwhleming. For the “metaphysics” stuff someone would also have you believe, there’s usually zero evidence or even evidence to the contrary. It’s a logical fallacy if that’s the reasoning.