Book Review: The Expanse (Complete Series)

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 16 ноя 2024

Комментарии •

  • @LazyNinja0714
    @LazyNinja0714 Год назад +1

    Loved your video and excitement for the series. You always make me want to read something, I shared your video with a friend. Your doing a great job!

    • @HasteWriting
      @HasteWriting  Год назад +1

      Thank you for saying so, glad you're enjoying the videos.

  • @CHMichael
    @CHMichael Год назад +1

    I very much enjoyed the combination of book and show. The books explain details and physics and the show demonstrates the effects.
    I had to explain another of background to my friends that didn't read the books to elevate the importance of some scenes. Read in 3s 3 books - one season.

    • @HasteWriting
      @HasteWriting  Год назад +3

      They are quite complimentary in many respects, not something that can be said about many adaptations!

  • @c187rocks
    @c187rocks Год назад +1

    While they're hella vague in the books (main ones, at least, I never did the novellas) about how the Epstein Drive worked, it never violated the rocket equation. The magic was always with the efficiency of the system, both in thrust and heat distribution. It hinted that the drive cones are where that efficiency is since taking one out often requires dumping the reactor core (got to get rid of that heat before you cook). A system that efficiently would work and get the curse speeds as described with the mass of the ships described for the most part. What's impressive is the writes knew that to get the high G rates, they would need extra reaction mass, which is why they bring it up after our heroes do long sustained burns.

    • @HasteWriting
      @HasteWriting  Год назад

      You're totally right. I misled in that bit for effect on the assumption that if anyone knows anything about the rocket equation it is the problem of carrying reaction mass leading to the need to carry more reaction mass to push around the extra reaction mass and basically you need a ton of reaction mass, which I perceived as the main issue the authors were circumventing. I didn't actually think as much about the heat dissipation. Thanks for pointing that out.