Skip to main content

Mars - Stephen James O’Meara ****

This is the latest in the excellent ‘Kosmos’ series from Reaktion Books (who clearly have a thing about the letter k). They’re beautifully packaged, with glossy paper and hundreds of colourful images, but the text is so substantial and insightful they can’t simply be dismissed as ‘coffee-table books’. My earlier reviews of the Mercury and Saturn titles, written by William Sheehan, gave both books 4 stars. This new one by Stephen James O’Meara is up to the same standard.

As with the previous books, this one goes into more detail than you might expect on the ‘prehistory’ of the subject, prior to the advent of space travel. The first three chapters – about a quarter of the book – deal in turn with mythological narratives, ground-based telescopic discoveries and romantic speculations about the Red Planet. Some of this is familiar stuff, but there are some obscure gems too. The Victorian astronomer Richard Proctor, for example, decided to name dozens of newly observed features on Mars after other astronomers – but only British ones, forcing him to reuse some of the names up to six times each. Equally eccentric was the Swiss medium Hélène Smith – best known for producing, in a trance state, what she claimed was authentic Martian writing, but the book also includes some of her charmingly naïve drawings of Martian houses and landscapes.

The rest of the book deals with the 60 years of serious Martian exploration, starting in October 1960 with the launch of a pair of Soviet ‘Marsnik’ probes – which in the event never got anywhere near the Red Planet – and culminating with NASA’s highly successful series of Mars rovers. For the first couple of decades there was a real hope that some form of primitive life would be found lurking in the Martian sand, but since then the emphasis has shifted – or more accurately bifurcated. On the one hand, there’s the scientific community searching for evidence of life on Mars in the distant past; on the other the technologists and visionaries hoping to send humans to the Red Planet in the not-so-distant future. 

O’Meara is best known for his writings on amateur astronomy, as opposed to professional science, and to some extent this difference comes across in the present book too. There’s more emphasis on conveying facts than on explaining underlying principles, whether of planetary science, space travel or the biochemistry of life. Nevertheless, the book includes some interesting scientific insights, such as the realisation – as long ago as the 1970s – that if there really is life on Mars then you don’t need to land on the planet to look for it. You just have to probe the atmosphere for any departures from chemical equilibrium – as Venus reminded us just last month.

I don’t normally quibble about typos in a book, but in this one I spotted several that really should have been picked up at the proof-reading stage. For example, Stephen Hawking’s name is spelled correctly on page 131, but it has an erroneous final s on the previous page. The Martian moon Phobos is given the correct translation of ‘fear’ (which is obvious, if you think of phobia) on page 172, but back on page 156 it was mistranslated as ‘flight’. NASA’s InSight lander is mentioned on page 127 of the main text, but omitted from the (otherwise comprehensive, I think) list of Mars missions in Appendix III.

Those trivial points aside, this is an excellent book. I suspect that many of the people who buy it – either for themselves or as a gift for someone else – will be attracted more by its stunning array of photographs than anything else. But it would be a shame if readers don’t get into O’Meara’s text too, because it’s packed with fascinating stuff.

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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin Five Way Interview

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin (born in 1999) is a distinguished composer, concert pianist, music theorist and researcher. Three of his piano CDs have been released in Germany. He started his undergraduate degree at the age of 13 in Kazakhstan, and having completed three musical doctorates in prominent Italian music institutions at the age of 20, he has mastered advanced composition techniques. In 2024 he completed a PhD in music at the University of St Andrews / Royal Conservatoire of Scotland (researching timbre-texture co-ordinate in avant- garde music), and was awarded The Silver Medal of The Worshipful Company of Musicians, London. He has held visiting affiliations at the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and UCL, and has been lecturing and giving talks internationally since the age of 13. His latest book is Quantum Mechanics and Avant Garde Music . What links quantum physics and avant-garde music? The entire book is devoted to this question. To put it briefly, there are many different link...

Should we question science?

I was surprised recently by something Simon Singh put on X about Sabine Hossenfelder. I have huge admiration for Simon, but I also have a lot of respect for Sabine. She has written two excellent books and has been helpful to me with a number of physics queries - she also had a really interesting blog, and has now become particularly successful with her science videos. This is where I'm afraid she lost me as audience, as I find video a very unsatisfactory medium to take in information - but I know it has mass appeal. This meant I was concerned by Simon's tweet (or whatever we are supposed to call posts on X) saying 'The Problem With Sabine Hossenfelder: if you are a fan of SH... then this is worth watching.' He was referencing a video from 'Professor Dave Explains' - I'm not familiar with Professor Dave (aka Dave Farina, who apparently isn't a professor, which is perhaps a bit unfortunate for someone calling out fakes), but his videos are popular and he...

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...