I recommend "Blindsight" by Peter Watts, who was a marine biologist before he was an author. He's the only author I can think of who uses academic style citations for hard scifi credibility. You can read Blindsight online or download ebook versions here:<p><a href="http://www.rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm</a><p>He also shared his Rifters trilogy, which I enjoyed although it's not as good as Blindsight, as well as several short stories:<p><a href="http://www.rifters.com/real/shorts.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.rifters.com/real/shorts.htm</a>
I wonder if other people share my perception that most science fiction written by scientists is not excellent fiction (especially when the first desire is realism).<p>It seems to me that crafting a story is a quite different tool set from being an engineer, physicist, etc., which is why at least seems rare to find a great physicist who is also a great writer. Perhaps the best balance, then, would be achieved by someone who writes stories deferring to actual scientists for review...?<p>Also, I'm interested in being refuted here. These are unexamined perceptions I'm writing out here.
I'm not sure how I feel about such marketing. A more believable sci-fi novel does sound more interesting, but isn't it like promoting a movie involving a plane crash as "directed by aviation personnel".
Revelation Space - by Alastair Reynolds – 2000<p>An epic volume 1
Volume 2 - Chasm City - brilliant with a dark and heart stopping culmination<p>Reynolds is a British astro-physicists
I dont know if he is popular in the US as he is in the UK
I'm working on a similar project, <a href="http://rationalfiction.io" rel="nofollow">http://rationalfiction.io</a>, where you can read hard scifi written mostly by hackers.