Skip to main content

Twenty Worlds - Niall Deacon *****

This is a truly entertaining and informative book, but the reason I’m giving it the full five stars has as much to do with the refreshing novelty of the author’s style as anything else. There’s novelty in the subject-matter too – the wide variety of recently discovered exoplanets orbiting other stars – but even so this is the third book on the topic that I’ve read. The first two were a lot less fun to read, and (without naming and shaming the authors) it’s worth a brief diversion to explain why.

The first author was a university professor with a vast knowledge of the subject, who seemed determined to convey the entirety of that knowledge without stopping to think whether it was interesting or necessary for a general audience. The second author – another academic – took a different but equally tedious approach, with a plodding chronological account that focused as much on the dull routine of the scientists involved as on their work.

Niall Deacon doesn’t make either of those mistakes. He’s a professional astronomer too, though you wouldn’t guess that from his writing style, which is as straightforward and lucid as science writing gets. Each of his 20 chapters is focused, not just on a single planet, but on one or two interesting new things about it. This gives him more space to get the key points across, without cluttering up the picture with peripheral detail. It’s this lack of extraneous detail that gives the book a different feel from the usual run of popular science books. We’re rarely told, for example, the date that a particular planet was discovered or the names of the researchers involved (although these can be surmised from the list of references at the end).

Deacon’s narrative style is unconventional, too. New scientific ideas are approached by an oddly lateral route, starting with a seemingly random, everyday metaphor and then gently easing the reader towards the point he’s trying to make. So you get chapters starting with anything from Ramadan or the Beatles or David Attenborough to frisbees, vaccinations and mountain lakes. I  found this rather bemusing at first, but once I got used to his style it was fun trying to guess where he was going with an idea.

The fact that there’s at least one new idea per chapter means the book’s emphasis is on breadth and variety – not just of the exoplanets themselves, but of how they were discovered. A few of the more obscure ones were new to me, despite my previous reading on the subject. I didn’t know exoplanets had been found using gravitational microlensing, for example – or that, with hindsight, evidence for a planet orbiting van Maanen’s star may have been found more than a century ago. I was also delighted to learn about WASP – Britain’s low-budget answer to the Kepler space telescope, consisting of an array of Canon telephoto lenses purchased on eBay and installed on a mountain in the Canary Islands.

When I saw the word ‘worlds’ rather than ‘planets’ in the book’s title, I assumed the focus would be on potentially habitable, Earth-like planets. But if anything, the opposite is true. To use Deacon’s analogy, beginning a planet hunt by saying ‘let’s look for another Earth’ is a bit like British tourists in an exotic far-flung destination saying ‘let’s find a fish and chip shop’. I’m aware of three or four well-known exoplanets that are often mooted as possible ‘other Earths’ that he doesn’t even mention. But to do so would risk turning the book into a boringly repetitive catalogue – and happily it’s the exact opposite of that.

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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

God: the Science, the Evidence - Michel-Yves Bolloré and Olivier Bonnassies ***

This is, to say the least, an oddity, but a fascinating one. A translation of a French bestseller, it aims to put forward an examination of the scientific evidence for the existence of a deity… and various other things, as this is a very oddly structured book (more on that in a moment). In The God Delusion , Richard Dawkins suggested that we should treat the existence of God as a scientific claim, which is exactly what the authors do reasonably well in the main part of the book. They argue that three pieces of scientific evidence in particular are supportive of the existence of a (generic) creator of the universe. These are that the universe had a beginning, the fine tuning of natural constants and the unlikeliness of life.  To support their evidence, Bolloré and Bonnassies give a reasonable introduction to thermodynamics and cosmology. They suggest that the expected heat death of the universe implies a beginning (for good thermodynamic reasons), and rightly give the impression tha...

The Infinite Alphabet - Cesar Hidalgo ****

Although taking a very new approach, this book by a physicist working in economics made me nostalgic for the business books of the 1980s. More on why in a moment, but Cesar Hidalgo sets out to explain how it is knowledge - how it is developed, how it is managed and forgotten - that makes the difference between success and failure. When I worked for a corporate in the 1980s I was very taken with Tom Peters' business books such of In Search of Excellence (with Robert Waterman), which described what made it possible for some companies to thrive and become huge while others failed. (It's interesting to look back to see a balance amongst the companies Peters thought were excellent, with successes such as Walmart and Intel, and failures such as Wang and Kodak.) In a similar way, Hidalgo uses case studies of successes and failures for both businesses and countries in making effective use of knowledge to drive economic success. When I read a Tom Peters book I was inspired and fired up...

The War on Science - Lawrence Krauss (Ed.) ****

At first glance this might appear to be yet another book on how to deal with climate change deniers and the like, such as How to Talk to a Science Denier.   It is, however, a much more significant book because it addresses the way that universities, government and pressure groups have attempted to undermine the scientific process. Conceptually I would give it five stars, but it's quite heavy going because it's a collection of around 18 essays by different academics, with many going over the same ground, so there is a lot of repetition. Even so, it's an important book. There are a few well-known names here - editor Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker - but also a range of scientists (with a few philosophers) explaining how science is being damaged in academia by unscientific ideas. Many of the issues apply to other disciplines as well, but this is specifically about the impact on science, and particularly important there because of the damage it has been doing...