Skip to main content

Mercury - William Sheehan ****

Driving to work one morning several years ago, I spotted a tiny white dot close to the rising sun. ‘That’s Venus,’ I said to myself. Almost immediately I saw another, much brighter dot a few degrees away. ‘No, that’s Venus – the first one must be, um ... Mercury.’ Even with a lifelong interest in astronomy, I always manage to forget Mercury.

With eight planets in the Solar System, one of them has to be the least interesting – and Mercury got the short straw. That’s a relative statement, though, and a diligent author could still dig up enough fascinating facts about that tiny dot by the Sun to fill a short book. William Sheehan has done a brilliant job of doing just that.

One of the reasons Mercury is so easy to forget is that it’s almost impossible to get a good view of it from Earth. Even after the invention of the telescope, which turned planets like Mars and Jupiter into explorable worlds, Mercury remained a mystery – and the subject of some pretty wild speculations. In 1686, for example, Bernard de Fontanelle offered the following gem on the subject Mercurian natives: ‘that they never think deeply on anything, that they act at random and by sudden movements, and that actually Mercury is the lunatic asylum of the universe.’

There’s one situation when Mercury can be seen quite easily through a telescope, and that’s during a transit – when it passes in front of the Sun (advance notice to astronomical enthusiasts: there’s a Mercury transit coming up in a year’s time, on 11 Nov 2019). The trick is knowing exactly when to look – and that’s easy, because planets move as predictably as clockwork, don’t they? Well, not in the case of Mercury – at least not in the 18th and 19th centuries, when several transits were observed at the ‘wrong’ time, or missed altogether. The problem (as we now know) is that Mercury obeys Einstein’s rules of gravity, not the Newtonian approximation that was in use in those days.

The inability of Earthbound telescopes to discern surface features on Mercury – despite various 19th and 20th century claims to have done so – is highlighted by the fact that no one knew what the planet’s rotation speed was until it was measured by radar in 1965. The answer is 58.65 days, exactly two thirds of the Mercurian year of 88 days. That means the days on Mercury are very long – even longer than you might think. The 58-day period is relative to an inertial frame, but during that time Mercury is also going round the Sun. So a ‘day’ (the time from one sunrise to the next) is actually closer to two Mercurian years.

The final demystification of Mercury came with the first space probes – the Mariner 10 flyby in 1974 followed by the Messenger orbiter, which circled the planet for four years starting in 2011. Although they produced a wealth of data, their main achievement was to confirm Mercury’s status as ‘least interesting planet’ – a small, airless, heavily cratered world that resembles the Moon more than it does any of the other planets. There’s one small consolation in the fact that all those craters needed names, and aficionados of high culture can have great fun browsing through the list at the end of the book (there’s Magritte, Melville, Mendelssohn, Michelangelo, Milton, Monet and Mozart, just to mention some of the Ms).

It’s not all bad news, though – Mercury has a few genuinely unusual and unexpected features. It’s made up of 60 per cent iron – an amazingly high proportion, twice that of our own planet. And it has a faint comet-like tail – something I was unaware of till I read this book. As I said at the start, Sheehan has done a great job of pulling together all the genuinely interesting facts about Mercury – in a serious, well-sourced style that’s easy to read without talking down to the reader – while resisting the temptation to pad the text out with unnecessary details. Add to that top-quality production standards and some lovely photographs from the Mariner and Messenger missions, and the result is a book that easily convinced me the Solar System’s ‘least interesting’ planet is still a pretty fascinating place.


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


Review by Andrew May

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mathematics with Love – Mary Stopes-Roe *****

Admittedly it’s early days (this review is written in January), but this, for me, is the surprise hit of the year so far! I approached this book with trepidation, but found it absolutely delightful. It is described on the cover as the “courtship correspondence of Barnes Wallis, inventor of the bouncing bomb”, and contains a series of letters between Wallis and his cousin and eventual wife Molly Bloxham, along with some useful annotation by their daughter, Mary. The courtship itself is not without difficulties, as Wallis was 18 years older than the 17-year-old Molly at the start of the correspondence, and her father, not surprisingly, wasn’t too pleased about the interest of such an elderly suitor, but that isn’t the only reason the letters are interesting – it’s also because of maths, and Wallis’s position in the UK as the engineering hero of the Second World War. (Incidentally, it seemed very strange to see letters addressed to “Barnes” – I had always assumed Barnes Wallis was a ...

Data Empire - Roopika Risam ****

The central thesis presented by Roopika Risam is that information gives us (and particularly countries) the power to organise, control and dominate others. Although I have a couple of issues with the presentation, this is a genuinely interesting trip through the history of our use of stored information from the earliest tallies to the latest information technology. I loved a quote from Lisa Gitelman that data is is always 'cooked' so 'raw data is an oxymoron'. This neatly underlines Risam's thesis that data and information are not neutral facts, but rather tools that (like everything from fire to electronics) can be used for good or evil. As we are taken through the historical context, it can sometimes be a little difficult to judge whether Risam regards a particular example as bad or good, even when the outcome is disastrous. One thing I didn't like too much is the adherence to a popular science writing approach that has got distinctly hackneyed: opening chapte...

Andrew Jaffe - Five way interview

Andrew Jaffe is professor of astrophysics and cosmology at Imperial College, London and director of the Imperial Centre for Inference and Cosmology. His new book is The Random Universe. Why science? I’ve always been interested in science, in particular in  astronomy, astrophysics, and space. One of my earliest memories - back in nursery school in New Jersey, I think - was watching one of the moon launches. I wanted that excitement to be part of my life! I never got to be an astronaut, but I did get to be part of the Planck Satellite team, and was privileged to be able to travel to the ESA Spaceport in French Guiana to watch the launch.  In between, I was lucky enough to have a supportive family, get a good education, and find inspiring teachers, mentors, and collaborators. They helped me model the universe, and helped me learn how to refine those models in the face of experimental and observational evidence. That is, they taught me to be a scientist. Why this book? The Random...