Skip to main content

Cosmic Odyssey - Linda Schweizer *****

Based on its generic-sounding title, you might expect this to be a broad-ranging history of astrophysical concepts – and if you buy it on that basis you won’t be disappointed. From stellar evolution and the structure of galaxies to supermassive black holes, quasars and the expansion of the universe, Linda Schweizer shows – in admirably non-technical detail – how our understanding of the fundamental pillars of modern astronomy developed over several decades from a standing start.

In spite of that, this isn’t a generic history at all. It has a very specific remit, encapsulated in the subtitle: ‘How Intrepid Astronomers at Palomar Observatory Changed our View of the Universe’. California’s Palomar Observatory is home to the ‘200-inch’ (5.1 metres – the diameter of the main mirror) Hale telescope, which was the premier instrument for optical astronomy from its inauguration in 1949 until the Hubble telescope became fully operational 45 years later. This was perhaps the most eventful and fast-moving period in the history of astrophysics, thanks in part to the power of the Hale telescope itself, coupled with the advent of complementary new techniques such as radio astronomy, and a general increase in support for space-related research around the world.

As the subtitle implies, the book describes the science from the point of view of the astronomers involved – not so much in traditional biographical style, but showing how they made one astonishing breakthrough after another by bouncing ideas off each other and following hunches. I’m not convinced that ‘intrepid’ is quite the right word, though. In a job where there’s no actual physical danger, I guess intrepid means not being afraid to follow up unpopular, potentially career-destroying theories. But only one of the protagonists, Halton Arp, really matches that description – and most of his wackier ideas turned out to be wrong.

On the other hand, the people who made the great discoveries, like quasars, weren’t really taking risks at all. The outlandishness was all in the data, not their interpretation of it. Even so, they still made their share of mistakes, such as when Allan Sandage over-enthusiastically proclaimed that every star-like object with a high UV-to-blue ratio was a quasar (actually most of them are just stars). In her preface, Schweizer describes the Palomar scientists as ‘eccentric yet inspiring’ – which wouldn’t have looked as good as ‘intrepid’ on the cover, but is probably closer to the truth.

The period covered – essentially the second half of the 20th century – is sufficiently recent that many of the key players are still alive, or were when Schweizer started collecting material for the book, so she was able to capture valuable recollections from people like Sandage and Arp before they were lost to history. For the same reason, the book will be something of a nostalgia trip for older readers, who may remember some of the discoveries from the time they were made.

In my own case, the book brought back vivid memories of my time as an astronomy postdoc in the 1980s, when I crossed paths with several of the characters mentioned – and I fully concur with Schweizer’s ‘eccentric yet inspiring’ sentiment. Alar Toomre, one of the main protagonists of her chapter on interacting galaxies, was name-checked in my first published paper for his ‘enthusiastic help in understanding the results’. That was a euphemistic way of saying he did all the hard work for me, in the longest private letter I’ve ever received – eight typewritten pages plus 16 pages of diagrams.

In all there are 12 thematically organised chapters, two of them on subjects I’ve got some professional knowledge of – galactic structure and dynamics – and others that I’m really no more knowledgeable about than a general reader, such as solar system physics or stellar nucleosynthesis. Viewed from either perspective, I found Schweizer’s style clear, intelligent and informative. I’d heartily recommend the book to anyone with an interest in astronomy that goes deeper than gazing at pretty pictures (of which this book has its share, though ironically most of them are credited to the Hubble rather than Palomar telescope).


Hardback:

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Andrew May
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more