I define science fiction as any literature that depicts some kind of technology that is more advanced than what is available at the time the story was written. In light of that definition, consider the technologies depicted in AS. Based on the knowledge of nature our science has provided us are these things realistic or fanciful?
Reardon Metal?
Galt's atmosperic static engine?
The device that disintegrates everything in Galt's workshop?
The "mirage device" that hides the valley?
Xerxes -- An interesting sidebar on this. A guy named Kerry O'Quinn was the founder of Starlog magazine. I remember when it came out in the mid-1970s seeing references in an editorial to Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged, a very encouraging sign from my young, sci-fi-loving Objectivist perspective.
In 2005 O'Quinn spoke at our Summer Seminar. Turns out he knew Rand. In fact, he described watching the just-discovered copy of the Italian movie version of We the Living on some sort of movie editor looking over Rand's shoulder. He tried to get Rand interested in sci-fi. I think his contention was that her book had sci-fi elements. But she never really took to it.
O'Quinn is now working to make a movie of Anthem.
Yeah, I used to buy Starlog when I was much younger. Is it still published?
Obviously, I think AS qualifies as science fiction. However, it is never marketed in the SF sections of bookstores. It reminds me of Michael Crichton's books. Many of them would qualify as SF but don't appear in that section.
So, what about the original topic of my thread? Are any of these inventions theoretically possible? Where are all the science geeks out there?
I would classify Atlas as an alternate history which of course is a subgenre of science fiction. Robert Heinlein defined science fiction as:
“Realistic speculation about possible future events, based solidly on adequate knowledge of the real world, past and present, and on a thorough understanding of the nature and significance of the scientific method."