Skip to main content

Colliding Worlds - Simone Marchi ****

The title of this book recalls Immanuel Velikovsky’s Worlds in Collision, one of the most notorious works of pseudoscience from the 1950s, which argued that human history since Biblical times has been shaped by collisions between planets and other bodies in the Solar System. As outrageous as Velikovsky’s theories were, they contained a tiny grain of truth. On a much longer timescale – billions of years rather than millennia – the Solar System really has been shaped by collisions. And that’s what this wide-ranging new book by Simone Marchi is all about.

The planets were built by collisions – first through the aggregation of dust and pebble-sized fragments, then by the merger of larger protoplanets. Chance played a part here – computer simulations show very different outcomes depending on whether it’s a grazing collision or head-on. This could explain why Venus and Earth ended up so different, despite being similar in size and distance from the Sun. And it was another collision – with a hypothetical planet named Theia – that gave us the most obvious thing Venus lacks, namely the Moon.

Collisions were much more frequent – because there was more interplanetary debris around – four billion years ago when life first appeared on Earth. These collisions may have caused problems for newly arisen life forms – or alternatively they may have been crucial to their development. Either way, it’s well-established that subsequent asteroid impacts helped shape evolution by triggering mass extinctions, which freed up niches for new species to emerge. The best-known example is the Chicxulub event 66 million years ago, which killed off the dinosaurs and cleared the way for the eventual emergence of our own species.

In our own time, much smaller asteroid ‘collisions’ can be of great value to scientists when they result in meteorites, which are the easiest way to acquire samples of extraterrestrial material and assess their composition. They also help to establish the age of the Solar System and, in the case of material that originated on Mars, tell us something about that planet too.

Although collisions form the main thread running through the book, it’s actually wider in scope than that, covering both the history of the Solar System, and the history of our understanding of it. That includes our understanding of our own planet, and one of the eye-opening facts is how long it took the academic world to recognise the role played by collisions in geological history. Basically, the topic got lost for decades in the gap between the geology and astronomy departments.

As far as I can tell, this is Marchi’s first book, and it’s his specialist subject – he’s a space scientist at the Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado. But don’t let that put you off – the book is entirely non-technical, and written very much with the general reader in mind. Marchi’s first-hand accounts of work he was personally involved in – such as NASA’s Dawn mission to the asteroid belt – make especially fascinating reading. For anyone wanting an up-to-date account of the Solar System and the processes that shape it, this is the perfect place to start.

Hardback: 
Bookshop.org

 


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

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

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

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