Skip to main content

Astroquizzical - Jillian Scudder ****

Described as a 'curious journey through our cosmic family tree', Jillian Scudder's Astroquizzical, takes the very positive inspiration of questions asked about the universe on Scudder's blog and gives us that 'curious journey' in light, readable prose. The family tree in question has Earth as our parent, the Sun as our grandparent, then the Milky Way and finally the universe. So we work outwards in a genuinely entertaining exploration of our cosmic habitat.

The book is pitched a beginner's level - but even though there was relatively little that was new to me as a reader, it was well-written enough to keep my interest. This was particularly helped when Scudder threw in an incentive in the form of a fascinating, quirky fact. For me, without doubt, the best was the discovery that mats of sulfur-loving bacteria (which could possibly survive in the atmosphere of Venus) that hang in caves are known as snottites or snoticles.

The book is at its best in the earlier sections. Scudder gives us an excellent balance of enthusiasm and facts when dealing with, for example, the Moon and the planets. It get's a little thin on the Milky Way and the universe - so, for example, dark matter only gets a footnote and the reference to the cosmic microwave background is so short it's not easy to follow why it's there. It's a shame there isn't a bit more in these later sections - the book is quite short and wouldn't have become overlong by extending them a little.

Interest is also kept by a good balance of illustrations - surprisingly good black and white in the inline photographs and two sections of colour plates to bring the whole picture to life. Although astronomy isn't all about pretty pictures, it's good to be reminded of what captures the imagination of many young astronomers, and Scudder is particularly good at explaining how the stunning colour images are multi-layered black and white images from different coloured filters, often highlighting the key wavelengths of particular elements.

As with the relative thinness of the later sections, my only real complaint is that we could do with a bit more. Interesting asides like the snoticles really make a book like this, and there could have been considerably more of them. Detail is what stimulates the reader's imagination. So, rather than just tell us that neutron stars are 'catastrophically dense', telling us how much mass there is in a teaspoonful (100 million tonnes) or something similar really brings it home. There's also the minor irritation that the book sometimes only gives US domestic units (for example, degrees Fahrenheit) which doesn't sit well with a scientific topic.

This is the kind of book that would be excellent to get either a teenage reader or an adult with limited exposure to astronomy interested in the field. It reads well and gives basic details without being patronising. It's a cosmic journey that I enjoyed.

Hardback:  

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you


Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

David Spiegelhalter Five Way interview

Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter FRS OBE is Emeritus Professor of Statistics in the Centre for Mathematical Sciences at the University of Cambridge. He was previously Chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication and has presented the BBC4 documentaries Tails you Win: the Science of Chance, the award-winning Climate Change by Numbers. His bestselling book, The Art of Statistics , was published in March 2019. He was knighted in 2014 for services to medical statistics, was President of the Royal Statistical Society (2017-2018), and became a Non-Executive Director of the UK Statistics Authority in 2020. His latest book is The Art of Uncertainty . Why probability? because I have been fascinated by the idea of probability, and what it might be, for over 50 years. Why is the ‘P’ word missing from the title? That's a good question.  Partly so as not to make it sound like a technical book, but also because I did not want to give the impression that it was yet another book

The Genetic Book of the Dead: Richard Dawkins ****

When someone came up with the title for this book they were probably thinking deep cultural echoes - I suspect I'm not the only Robert Rankin fan in whom it raised a smile instead, thinking of The Suburban Book of the Dead . That aside, this is a glossy and engaging book showing how physical makeup (phenotype), behaviour and more tell us about the past, with the messenger being (inevitably, this being Richard Dawkins) the genes. Worthy of comment straight away are the illustrations - this is one of the best illustrated science books I've ever come across. Generally illustrations are either an afterthought, or the book is heavily illustrated and the text is really just an accompaniment to the pictures. Here the full colour images tie in directly to the text. They are not asides, but are 'read' with the text by placing them strategically so the picture is directly with the text that refers to it. Many are photographs, though some are effective paintings by Jana Lenzová. T

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on