Mark Brake

In the introduction author Mark Brake sets out his stall by saying “the point of this book is not to take the Bond tales scientifically literally..” Unfortunately I think that is exactly what I wanted from this book. I wanted to know how the absurd gadgets, machines, secret bases etc. could, or couldn’t, work. I wanted the science of Bond’s hyper-realistic world explained. Don’t get me wrong, what science there is here is often fascinating and thoughtful, but there just isn’t enough of it and it tends to be broad in scope.

Unfortunately the book has two other flaws that made it a slog for me to get through.

It is organized as a chapter per film, yet often the narrative takes major diversions away from the movie under discussion to explore either trends across the movie series as a whole, or cultural or scientific background that jumps around in historical context. Each of these are fine essays, but they should have been interstitial pieces rather than tied to a particular movie.

Secondly most of the movie entries contain minor factual errors as if they are being written about from recent memory rather than a close study. None of the mistakes is egregious on its own, but for me they had a cumulative effect causing a degree of frustration with the text.

There’s a good book in here, but it’s hampered by the framework it’s delivered in, and the expectation set by its title.… (mais)

To be good, The Science of Star Trek would need to get its Star Trek facts right and its science facts right. As a life-long, die-hard Trekkie that’s seen everything Star Trek (except Discovery, that one doesn’t really count) numerous times, I can attest that it got multiple Trek facts wrong. I’m pretty picky about getting all the Trek facts right, so this is a dealbreaker for me. As a scientist, I also noticed some science facts that weren’t really described quite right (mostly in a fairly minor way).

Otherwise, it was very well written. The writing style is good. It has a good voice. It’s interesting, with good flow cover to cover. It wasn’t boring at any point. It has a lot of really good, interesting, thought-provoking discussions of things from Trek and how they relate to real-world science theories, history, and philosophy. It would be very accessible and informative to a layman without a scientific background.

If you’re a really serious Trekkie and a few minor inaccuracies in the Trek facts (which honestly never really interfere with the point being made about each Trek to science comparison) are going to drive you absolutely crazy, then this isn’t the book for you. If not, you’ll probably enjoy this book quite a bit.

I received a free eARC of this book via NetGalley. I am writing this review completely voluntarily and honestly.… (mais)

This book poses the kinds of questions that budding scientists really want to know the answers to -- When did the universe start? Is what I'm seeing actually there? Is space smelly? Are there holes in space? Would aliens want to steal our stuff? -- and provides enthusiastic, conversational answers that avoid technical terms unless they are fun ("spaghettification" makes the cut). It may sound like it's patronizing to the reader, but it's really not; the answers are very clear explanations, delivered in captivating language. The book is also salted with "Brain burn" questions that invite readers to perform their own thought experiments: What if science fiction writers really had the power to "write" the future? What if aliens have already visited Earth, way back in the distant past? The illustrations are enjoyably retrofuturistic cartoons on brilliantly colored pages. My only quibble with the book is that some of these colorful pages are so dark, behind black text, that they can be difficult to read.… (mais)