Skip to main content

Celestial Calculations - J. L. Lawrence ***

These days, amateur astronomers don’t need to do any calculations. If their telescope is of the ‘go-to’ kind, they just type in the name of the object they want to observe and the telescope does the rest. If they have an old-fashioned manual telescope, or if they want to see something that isn’t in the telescope’s database – such as the ISS or a satellite – they consult a mobile app or a website. With all these handy software aids, it’s easy to forget that what they’re doing – in a fraction of a second – is a long series of calculations of the sort astronomers used to have to do by hand.

 Those calculations are what this book is all about – but before you go running for the hills, there’s no advanced mathematics in it. You’ll scour it in vain for differential equations, complex numbers, logarithms or x-y graphs – for the simple reason that none of those things existed when astronomers started doing the calculations we’re talking about. It does use a few trigonometric functions like sines and cosines – originally developed by the ancient Greek astronomer Hipparchus, not as a sideline but because he needed them for his day job – and anyone can find those buttons on a calculator app even if they’re not sure what they mean.

 Some of the things the book shows you how to calculate, particularly in the first few chapters, won’t even look like astronomy to many people. There are calendar and time zone conversions, sunrise and sunset times, and the dates of equinoxes and solstices – but all of these are ultimately based on celestial motions. When the book moves on to the subject of orbits – whether of planets around the Sun or satellites around the Earth – there’s another surprise. The usual approach in popular science books is via Newton’s theory of gravity – but that’s not how J. L. Lawrence tackles it here. That’s because gravity is physics, and that’s not what this book is about. If all you need is a geometric description of orbits, you can find it in the work Kepler, dating from the very beginning of the 17th century – which is as ‘modern’ as the calculations in this book get.

 Having written several books myself, I was struck by just how much effort the author must have put into this one. It’s close to 400 pages long, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg. By the very nature of the subject matter, Lawrence didn’t simply have to write words, he had to do calculations – sometimes several on a page. On top of that, the book comes with a suite of downloadable computer programs, which do things like plotting star charts and working out rise and set times for the Moon and planets. Of course, it’s easy enough to find other free software which can do the same things – often in a slicker and more flexible way – but here you get a step-by-step explanation of the logic behind the number crunching.

 For the sort of person who is excited by the title Celestial Calculations, this book will be perfect; they can look forward to hours of enjoyment working through the examples. The catch is, I can’t imagine there are many people in that category. For a more general reader interested in popular science or amateur astronomy – and that includes me – the book still provides some fascinating insights, but it’s so long and detailed that reading it often verges on hard work rather than fun. Personally, I would have enjoyed it more if it had been a third of the length.
Paperback:  
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 Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...
Post a Comment
Read more

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...
Post a Comment
Read more

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more