Geo-physics Vs Sci-fi Question

My student says no serious scientist would read or has read much science fiction. Can anyone prove him wrong?

Fred Hoyle wrote wonderful science fiction. Although he is sometimes remembered for some quirky ideas, he also did serious work in Stellar nucleosynthesis.Robert L. Forward wrote Dragon's Egg, a really good sci-fi book. He had patents on devices to measure gravity.

Why is the fantasy genre more popular than science fiction?

The answers here seem to be ‘our view of science fiction has become jaded, because science hasn’t brought us the happiness it promised’. As a scientist, this makes me sad. Science will never bring happiness, because that’s the domain of philosophy and action; but in science lies at least as much promise as threat.I think sci-fi and fantasy lend themselves to two different styles of message (and let’s not forget that science fantasy is also a thing, and Star Wars is/was incredibly popular in the mainstream). Sci Fi is very good at posing deep societal questions in the form of a story. It asks us , ‘how will society respond to this technology? Or that trend?’ Or, ‘what would the world be like if…?’Fantasy, on the other hand, lends itself to exploring the deeper metaphysical understanding of life that we express through archetypes and stories. I’m talking about myths, narrative structures, characters that repeat themselves throughout literature and psychology.At face value, a fantasy story provides marvellous escapism, as we launch into worlds that bear little resemblance to our own and follow the journey of characters who are trying to solve real but fantastic problems. But the great, engaging part of fantasy stories is that these problems are similar to abstract problems which we encounter in life, only made literal. The struggle a fantasy hero faces in deposing an evil tyrant is no less real than the struggle you face in having that difficult conversation with your boss, or even your father. You can’t delve into a dragon’s lair, slay it, and come out with a pile of treasure. But you can delve into your own psyche, face your demons, and emerge gratified by the process.I think the loss of spiritual and symbolic meaning in modern days has more to do with the popularity of fantasy, than does any unpopularity of sci-fi. People flock to fantasy because in their daily lives they are starved of symbolic meaning, and most religion has been shown to them as an obsolete trick for fools, something that the intellect can and should cut through.Both are great, and should be enjoyed in their own way.

What are the ten science fiction books that have meant the most to you?

Twenty thousand leagues under the sea and Mysterious island, by Jules Verne: pretty much defined the genre and illustrated the XIXth century industrial dreams of infinite progress; compulsory reading in France in the '60s;War With the Newts by Karel Capek: my second discovery of SciFi, never forgot the impression it gave me, something totally new(t) and riveting... Stand on Zanzibar by John Brunner: great writing, great story, great characters, interesting questions about overpopulation and accurate anticipation it seems (but for the nuclear energy, curiously absent);Do androids dream of electric sheep? by Philip K.Dick (and all his books, more or less): defined an area of psycho-SciFi unchartered before;Hard to Be a God by Arkady and Boris Strugatsky, and their other books, from the other country of SciFi; great reading; Songmaster by Orson Scott Card: of course Ender, but I like this one better; a tale of mastery, despair and rebirth; haunting;Martian chronicles by Ray Bradbury, and pretty much everything he wrote like The illustrated man, even his non-SciFi (Dandelion wine): a great writer, great concepts; Neuromancer by William Gibson: astounding discovery after "classic" SciFi; almost always great;The Lords of Instrumentality by Cordwainer Smith: incredibly coherent saga, building a unique, fascinating universe, creative and poetic, riveting stories... I've been re-reading it for the past 30 years...The werewolf Principle by Theodore Sturgeon: and most of his other books; imaginative, human and unpredictable; a classic.I'm well aware of all those I couldn't mention, the Van Vogts, E. Hamilton, Asimov, Silverberg, Frank Herbert ... and the more recent ones (Anathem by Neal Stephenson comes to mind)...

Would we have the same perception of time on another planet (or in the open space) as we do on Earth?

How we might perceive long days is an interesting question, and one science fiction writers have tackled a few times. It's really guesswork, because we don't have a lot of data to go on. In situations where people have relied on artificial lighting for long periods (in places like Antarctic stations, I'd imagine), it seems that we establish our own  Circadian rhythm.We wouldn't notice difference in our measurement of time. The differences in speeds and gravitational forces would cause only infinitesimally small variations.