This book by Malka Older was reviewed by James Nicoll a while back, so
I won't do much summarizing.

https://jamesdavisnicoll.com/review/out-in-the-rain

As James notes, the science is problematic. Notably the human
habitations ought to be experiencing gravity of about 2.5g. Also
there's a lot of weirdness about the atmosphere and weather and such.
It's best just to think of it as science-fantasy and not worry your
little brane about it too much. I say this as an Astrophysics Major in
the long gone by.

The habitable area is is created by large metal circular formations
that are in geosynchronous orbit, each of which has a monorail train
that circles the planet.

It's an odd mix of high and low tech. For the most part, people are
living in kind of an atmospheric (no pun) idyllic late 19th Century
environment.

James did complain about Investigator Mossa not considering an
accidental death, but I think he missed this bit:

"The parapet edging the platform was the regulation height, enough to
rule out any but the most outré of accidents."

Anyway, in spite of the science situation, I enjoyed the setting and
the Jovian Sherlock/Watson duo. I'm always kind of a sucker for SF
mysteries.

Brian

On Tuesday, May 9, 2023 at 11:03:35 PM UTC-4, Default User wrote:
> This book by Malka Older was reviewed by James Nicoll a while back, so
> I won't do much summarizing.
>
> https://jamesdavisnicoll.com/review/out-in-the-rain
>
> As James notes, the science is problematic. Notably the human
> habitations ought to be experiencing gravity of about 2.5g. Also
> there's a lot of weirdness about the atmosphere and weather and such.
> It's best just to think of it as science-fantasy and not worry your
> little brane about it too much. I say this as an Astrophysics Major in
> the long gone by.
>
> The habitable area is is created by large metal circular formations
> that are in geosynchronous orbit, each of which has a monorail train
> that circles the planet.

James hypothesizes that the planet 'Giant' is Saturn, but has that idea spoiled
by it having Io as a moon.

If the habitat is in geosynchronous orbit, and rotates with the same period
as the planet, (if not, how does it stay in that very specific and desirable orbit?),
then the people in the habitat experience freefall, not 2.5 g. 2.5g is about
the surface gravity of Jupiter. Astonishingly (to me), the surface gravity of
Saturn is about the same as Earth.

Perhaps the author didn't do adequate research, and started out writing with
the habitat around Saturn, but later switched to Jupiter. Another problem with
Saturn is that its geosynchronous orbit lies within the ring system, which would
lead to some interesting issues.

I wonder if he addresses the radiation problem: Jupiter's is
so dangerous that probes have to keep their electronics inside shielded boxes,
and use orbits that keep them out of harm's way most of the time.

pt

In article <c5489464-16d5-4bfa-8b4f-c80866fc43e3n@googlegroups.com>,
pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Tuesday, May 9, 2023 at 11:03:35 PM UTC-4, Default User wrote:
>> This book by Malka Older was reviewed by James Nicoll a while back, so
>> I won't do much summarizing.
>>
>> https://jamesdavisnicoll.com/review/out-in-the-rain
>>
>> As James notes, the science is problematic. Notably the human
>> habitations ought to be experiencing gravity of about 2.5g. Also
>> there's a lot of weirdness about the atmosphere and weather and such.
>> It's best just to think of it as science-fantasy and not worry your
>> little brane about it too much. I say this as an Astrophysics Major in
>> the long gone by.
>>
>> The habitable area is is created by large metal circular formations
>> that are in geosynchronous orbit, each of which has a monorail train
>> that circles the planet.
>
>James hypothesizes that the planet 'Giant' is Saturn, but has that idea spoiled
>by it having Io as a moon.
>
>If the habitat is in geosynchronous orbit, and rotates with the same period
>as the planet, (if not, how does it stay in that very specific and
>desirable orbit?),
>then the people in the habitat experience freefall, not 2.5 g. 2.5g is about
>the surface gravity of Jupiter. Astonishingly (to me), the surface gravity of
>Saturn is about the same as Earth.

This is true for all the large planets except Jupiter. More mass but
much lower density.

>Perhaps the author didn't do adequate research, and started out writing with
>the habitat around Saturn, but later switched to Jupiter. Another problem with
>Saturn is that its geosynchronous orbit lies within the ring system,
>which would
>lead to some interesting issues.
>
>I wonder if he addresses the radiation problem: Jupiter's is
>so dangerous that probes have to keep their electronics inside shielded boxes,
>and use orbits that keep them out of harm's way most of the time.

I do not think I did, if the he above refers to me. I think I just
assumed anyone living near Jupiter has some way to deal with
radiation or they'd spend the story dead.

--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On Wednesday, May 10, 2023 at 10:28:26 AM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
> In article <c5489464-16d5-4bfa...@googlegroups.com>,
> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, May 9, 2023 at 11:03:35 PM UTC-4, Default User wrote:
> >> This book by Malka Older was reviewed by James Nicoll a while back, so
> >> I won't do much summarizing.
> >>
> >> https://jamesdavisnicoll.com/review/out-in-the-rain
> >>
> >> As James notes, the science is problematic. Notably the human
> >> habitations ought to be experiencing gravity of about 2.5g. Also
> >> there's a lot of weirdness about the atmosphere and weather and such.
> >> It's best just to think of it as science-fantasy and not worry your
> >> little brane about it too much. I say this as an Astrophysics Major in
> >> the long gone by.
> >>
> >> The habitable area is is created by large metal circular formations
> >> that are in geosynchronous orbit, each of which has a monorail train
> >> that circles the planet.
> >
> >James hypothesizes that the planet 'Giant' is Saturn, but has that idea spoiled
> >by it having Io as a moon.
> >
> >If the habitat is in geosynchronous orbit, and rotates with the same period
> >as the planet, (if not, how does it stay in that very specific and
> >desirable orbit?),
> >then the people in the habitat experience freefall, not 2.5 g. 2.5g is about
> >the surface gravity of Jupiter. Astonishingly (to me), the surface gravity of
> >Saturn is about the same as Earth.
> This is true for all the large planets except Jupiter. More mass but
> much lower density.
> >Perhaps the author didn't do adequate research, and started out writing with
> >the habitat around Saturn, but later switched to Jupiter. Another problem with
> >Saturn is that its geosynchronous orbit lies within the ring system,
> >which would
> >lead to some interesting issues.
> >
> >I wonder if he addresses the radiation problem: Jupiter's is
> >so dangerous that probes have to keep their electronics inside shielded boxes,
> >and use orbits that keep them out of harm's way most of the time.
> I do not think I did, if the he above refers to me. I think I just
> assumed anyone living near Jupiter has some way to deal with
> radiation or they'd spend the story dead.

I was thinking of Malka Older. SF written before the Pioneer missions to Jupiter
in 1973 get a pass on radiation issues, but anything after that should be dinged
for ignoring it. If Older really thinks that there is gravity on something in
geosynchronous orbit, they should be slapped (along with their editor).

pt

pete...@gmail.com wrote:

>James hypothesizes that the planet 'Giant' is Saturn, but has that
>idea spoiled by it having Io as a moon.

Also Europa.

>If the habitat is in geosynchronous orbit, and rotates with the same
>period as the planet, (if not, how does it stay in that very specific
>and desirable orbit?), then the people in the habitat experience
>freefall, not 2.5 g. 2.5g is about the surface gravity of Jupiter.
>Astonishingly (to me), the surface gravity of Saturn is about the
>same as Earth.

I was thinking about that as well. As I said, the science is bad no
matter how you slice it, so best not to worry too much.

Brian

On Thursday, 11 May 2023 at 00:25:11 UTC+1, Default User wrote:
> pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> >James hypothesizes that the planet 'Giant' is Saturn, but has that
> >idea spoiled by it having Io as a moon.
> Also Europa.
> >If the habitat is in geosynchronous orbit, and rotates with the same
> >period as the planet, (if not, how does it stay in that very specific
> >and desirable orbit?), then the people in the habitat experience
> >freefall, not 2.5 g. 2.5g is about the surface gravity of Jupiter.
> >Astonishingly (to me), the surface gravity of Saturn is about the
> >same as Earth.
>
> I was thinking about that as well. As I said, the science is bad no
> matter how you slice it, so best not to worry too much.

From James's account I assumed that the habitat(s)
enjoyed neutral buoyancy in the gas giant atmosphere,
like Cloud City in _Star Wars Episode 5: The Empire
Strikes Back_, instead of being in orbit. You can fall.

On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 12:42:19 AM UTC+10, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
> If Older really thinks that there is gravity on something in
> geosynchronous orbit, they should be slapped (along with their editor).
>

You might want to reword that

Robert Carnegie wrote:

>From James's account I assumed that the habitat(s)
>enjoyed neutral buoyancy in the gas giant atmosphere,
>like Cloud City in _Star Wars Episode 5: The Empire
>Strikes Back_, instead of being in orbit. You can fall.

It's a little vague but here are the few passages I found that are
indicative:

"The bright shuttles with their hidden arcs slid past, more frequent
but slower as they approached the surface and their geosynchronous
orbit."

"Curious, I joined her, but the metal rail that circled the
planet—that, with its fellows, kept us at a livable orbit of this
inhospitable world—was the same burnished steel beneath as on the top."

Brian

pete...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 9, 2023 at 11:03:35 PM UTC-4, Default User wrote:
> >
> > The habitable area is is created by large metal circular formations
> > that are in geosynchronous orbit, each of which has a monorail train
> > that circles the planet.
>
> If the habitat is in geosynchronous orbit, and rotates with the same period
> as the planet, (if not, how does it stay in that very specific and desirable orbit?),
> then the people in the habitat experience freefall, not 2.5 g. 2.5g is about
> the surface gravity of Jupiter. Astonishingly (to me), the surface gravity of
> Saturn is about the same as Earth.

If these habitats have monorails circling the planet, perhaps the trains are traveling at greater than orbital speed, and exerting a centrifugal force on the rail, and from that to the habitat. It''s possible adjustments on the train as it is going around could also be an active balancing act to solve that whole "Ringworld is unstable!" thing.

I'm not sure what a synchronous orbit gets you... It would seem any orbit would work for assembling the satellites, building them into a rail around the orbit, and then slowing the rail while speeding up the train. If we did it above Earth -or any planet where we cared about what was on the surface- an orbit other than geosynchronous might be wanted instead, so that we can choose a rotation to stay over one spot if we wish, and to whatever extent we are not freefalling in Earth's gravity we are still getting weight. (Plus, we can lower space elevators. Could they act as guy wires to help keep the hoop stable? I don't know. As the saying goes, you'll never get me up in one of those!)

--
-Jack