Zach Weinersmith

Entertaining enough though it gets a bit repetitive, since the answers are “not at all presently,” “probably not,” and “definitely not.” It’s a deliberate answer to boosters: “reading about space settlement today is kind of like reading about what quantity of beer is safe to drink in a world where all the relevant books are written by breweries.” Not only are they worried about military conflicts over space resources, but space is a really dangerous place; we can barely show more make the necessary high-tech supplies on Earth, and being self-sustaining would require incredible amounts of energy and technical innovation. And that’s before you get into the human factors: a company town in a “poisonous hellscape” six months away from any alternatives is not a recipe for successful human interactions. For five generations of a self-sustaining population, you’d want about thirty thousand people, and even that is low. “[T]he most autarkic countries on Earth have much more than 1 million people, are not the most economically desirable places on Earth, and incidentally would both like to be less autarkic.” But even that understates the challenge, given the resource constraints. “Even if you have 99 percent reuse of something like water, that loss of 1 percent mass adds up to 40 percent of your mass over fifty years.”

Ultimately, though, they’re really worried about governance. Going off Earth might just give us more ways to destroy ourselves, up to and including throwing rocks down the gravity well. show less

This is the month that the internet becomes book form and then I read it? Except, in contrast to the other book-form internets that I've read this month, Soonish isn't based on a blog, but rather the webcomic Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal. Which is one of those things that makes me feel a little less lonely: there are a nonzero number of people out there who, like me, eagerly wake up in the morning to read the newest math/D&D/physics/astronomy joke-based comic strip. I'm not alone in the show more universe.

Soonish is actually primarily by the wife of the SMBC guy, Dr. Weinersmith, who is a PhD in parasitology and her scholarly publication list certainly dwarfs her lay publications. In my opinion, the scholarly bent showed: it's easy to go off of the scifi deep end here, but Dr. Weinersmith both explained things clearly, but also evidently spent a lot of time interviewing the top scholars in the field and making sure she was accurately depicting the current state of each field as well as the promises that it might contain. Ultimately, because the book focuses on multiple future technologies in a fairly rapid fire way it was light reading, but I don't think overly simplified.

I always have pause to see my own field depicted in the lay literature: here in the form of CRISPR, synthetic DNA and precision medicine, but I found it mostly well done, with a couple of metaphors that didn't quite work out. If that's the barometer for the overall scientific rigor of the book, I would say it's in about the 95th percentile of pop science writing.

And the illustrations certainly helped! As a reader of SMBC, I found the comics absolutely consistent with the tone of the webcomic -- funny and a little dry. show less

Dr. Kelly Weinersmith is an actual scientist, albeit a parasite biologist rather than a space specialist. And Zach Weinersmith is the artist behind Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, a nerd webcomic that I've reading for almost two decades now.

"Dad, I have ennui"

Space colonization has been a perennial topic of science fiction practically since there was science fiction, and a more or less serious policy proposal since the 1950s. With SpaceX and the dramatic reduction in the costs of reaching show more orbit, as well as it's CEO Elon Musk's well known desire to settle Mars, space colonization has gotten a second kick. So is it a good idea? The Weinersmiths went in as optimists, and came out with a "nah".

There are four main barriers to space settlement, two biological, one legal, one economic. As much progress has been made on rocketry, space medicine is still profoundly in its infancy. The longest single stay in space is 487 days. The longest total stay is 886 days (and counting, record holder Oleg Kononenko is still in orbit as of this review). We know that astronauts suffer many health effects, including bones density loss and mysterious changes in eyeball shape. We also know that even inside Earth's protective magnetosphere, astronauts are constantly irradiated, with a likely elevated risk of cancer. We have no idea if babies can be born in space, or if human beings can reach maturity without gravity. Answering these questions is not a priority for any space agency, and there are clear ethical issues for experimentation.

Second, we still don't know how to run a closed-cycle biosphere. The infamous Biosphere 2 experiment was a failure, and nothing has come close to its scale. A space settlement needs near total recycling of water, oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, and a host of other key elements. We know even less about living in close proximity to lunar dust, an abrasive that could likely cause silicosis and which one astronaut was allergic, or on Mars, where the soil is about 1% poisonous perchlorates.

Third, the legal environment is incredible hostile to the idea of space colonization. The Outer Space treaty is a vague framework, but one thing it is clear on is that national claims of a solar system body are illegal. A nation can claim a specific facility, but not the lunar land it is built on. And forget private efforts, because a station staffed with Americans, launched from a US facility, and commanded by an American CEO, would be under American jurisdiction, and pragmatically you are unlikely to find anyone to argue otherwise.

Finally, it would be immensely difficult to see any return from space colonization, given the distances, time, and expense involved. While the colonies of the age of imperialism were often money-losers for their governments, they were immensely profitable for many people involved. But who would accept life in an absolute company town where the boss controls everything down to the air? And who would fund a venture where getting anything there and back costs millions of dollars?

One of the better arguments for space colonization is the security of multiplanetary species, an argument which the Weinersmith's demolish. Any space colony would be highly dependent on Earth for decades, if not centuries. And while there is lots of room on the moon and Mars, there are far fewer reasonable options for settlement. Space colonies hardly aid national security if we're shooting each other over the very finite amounts of lunar ice. And while dinosaur killing asteroids are a risk, given human nature, space terrorists are going to crop up far sooner than another mega impact.

Marcos Inaros from The Expanse
"Every time we demand to be heard, they hold back our water, owkwa beltalowda, ration our air, ereluf beltalowda, until we crawl back into our holes, imbobo beltalowda, and do as we are told!

Another argument is a version of Turner's frontier thesis, that the harshness of space will inspire innovations both scientific and technological. The Weinersmiths offer an analogy to Earth biosphere, the Necrosphere, an immense expanse of vacuum surrounding a small hab, with very finite resources, more accessible with only the greatest difficult, and the whole thing bombarded with ionizing radiation. Would we expect advances from the inhabitants, or would we expect them to die?

Like the Weinersmiths, I've long been an idealistic if uncommitted proponent of space colonization. And after reading this book, I'm convinced that it's a scam. The outer solar system is best left to robots. And while we should continue to push space science, including closed cycle ecosystems, colonization is a matter of centuries, not decades. show less

Personally, as a grown-up, I thought this was fantastic. When I first started reading it, though, I thought there is no way an average kid is going to read this. So many strikes against it:

1. It's poetry. True, the poetical nature is somewhat disguised by the graphic novel format, but there's no denying the text can be hard to understand because it's written in a style similar to Beowulf.

2. Generally speaking, Beowulf doesn't have the same appeal as, say, Greek mythology or fairy tales.

3. show more Despite the shiny cover, the illustrations are black and white inside. Lots of kids want to see full-color illustrations when they look inside a graphic novel.

But I will tell you that I read this aloud to my 8-year-old and she did not complain. (It was so fun to read this out loud because of the poetry of it -- the rhythm, the alliteration, the patterns that repeat once you get farther along in it.) My daughter was patiently tolerating it at first, but I dare say she was enjoying it after a bit.

This may be a hard sell to most kids, but it is such a fun experience to read it all the way through, just letting the inscrutable parts wash over you. You don't have to understand every word to appreciate the style, the drama, the epic-ness.

What an achievement by Weinersmith! I think this will be in Newbery discussions, though it does put in mind of [b:Good Masters! Sweet Ladies! Voices from a Medieval Village|607931|Good Masters! Sweet Ladies! Voices from a Medieval Village|Laura Amy Schlitz|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1320407671l/607931._SX50_.jpg|594437], which to this day I cannot entice any child to read. show less