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 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

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

Nanotechnology - Rahul Rao ****

There was a time when nanotechnology was both going to transform the world and wipe us out - a similar position to our view of AI today. On the positive transformation side there was K. Eric Drexler's visions in the 1986 Engines of Creation. Arguably as much science fiction as engineering possibilities, it predicted the ability to use vast armies of assemblers to put objects together from individual atoms.  On the negative side was the vision of grey goo, out of control nanotechnology consuming all in its path as it made more and more copies of itself. In 2003, for instance, the then Prince Charles made the headlines  when newspapers reported ‘The prince has raised the spectre of the “grey goo” catastrophe in which sub-microscopic machines designed to share intelligence and replicate themselves take over and devour the planet.’ These days the expectations have been eased down a notch or two. Where nanotechnology has succeeded, it has been with the likes of atom-thick mat...
Post a Comment
Read more