When I read fiction that includes scientific information, it presents two potential issues for me. First, it needs to be plausible. I struggle to suspend disbelief if the science feels inconsistent. Second, if there's too much explanation or technical detail, it quickly becomes tedious. A long stretch of exposition risks pulling me out of the story, boring.
Yes, this is similar to what I face almost every time I write a chapter in my novels. (I write historical fiction).
Firstly, of course I want it to be plausible. A historical setting or character would be ridiculous if they weren't plausible. No-one would believe, for instance, an Aztec character named Fred who wears blue jeans and eats hamburgers. =P
Secondly (and naturally), I'm wary of explaining too much. As you say, it takes the reader out of the story. If I explain too much, it may as well become a history book. This is also known as an info-dump.
How to resolve this?
1. To ensure plausibility,
do your research. I can't emphasize this enough. Learn about your subject. Don't assume that you know.
2. To avoid info-dumps, don't just tell the reader everything you know. Scatter bits of information here and there for people to pick up.
Here's an example. You may have heard of the phrase, "show, don't tell". Here's how it works: suppose you want to describe a character. If you say, "The man's name was Josef and he had a bushy brown beard and glasses and he..." that's boring, because we're
telling the reader.
Rather, if we phrase it as (for instance) "Josef stroked his brown beard, a trick of his when he wanted to concentrate, and pushed up his glasses. Oh dear; he would need a shave soon", it's much more interesting, because we're
showing the reader what's going on.
That's what "show, don't tell" means. How to apply it to a setting? Instead of "The grass was growing outside", we say: "Elena had to push the grass aside to let her outside her front door. It was definitely time to mow it." (OK, I'm exaggerating, but you can see what I mean).
Good luck!
