Skip to main content

Supernova - Or Graur ***

A solid entry in MIT Press's pocket-sized 'essential knowledge' series, introducing supernovas. (The author would not like my use of this plural: he sniffily comments that 'although "supernovas" is sometimes used in popular media, it is seldom used by astronomers'. This is because 'nova' comes from the Latin - which it does - but perhaps it's worth pointing out we are writing in English, not Latin.) A supernova can be one of several different types of collapsing/exploding stars: Or Graur gives us a good deal of detail on current best ideas on the different ways a supernova can form and behave.

Along the way, we are introduced to the history of our noticing supernovas, the role of star remnants in distributing the heavier elements across the universe and how astronomers use supernovas as standard candles to measure great distances (amongst other things). Graur is unusually flexible for an astronomer here, allowing that dark energy is based on distinctly uncertain data (derived from supernova observations), though elsewhere he refers to dark matter with no suggestion that this too has uncertainty about its existence. Unusually for these books there is a glossy colour plate section in the middle, allowing for much clearer images than is normally possible on conventional paper, which was real benefit.

Graur also makes it clear (with relish) that there are plenty of questions left for astronomers and astrophysicists still to answer about these phenomena. Superficially there is nothing very surprising in this book, but there is considerably more up-to-date detail than would usually be presented in a title pitched at the general reader. This has its good side - we find out, for example, about exotic supernova types that will not usually get a mention - but it also has a less useful aspect as there is, if anything, too much detail on each type, meaning that the writing can get more like a bullet-pointed fact sheet than a readable narrative.

There is a real problem, which Graur highlights without realising the consequences in his introduction. He tells us 'For too long, popular culture has focused on a handful of famous, eccentric, or controversial scientists... In reality, there are tens of thousands of scientists spread across the world... To combat this pernicious stereotype, I have sought to highlight the global and collaborative nature of astronomy and refrained from gossiping about the astrophysicists mentioned in this book.' Of course the collaborative aspect is true - but what Graur unfortunately seems to miss is that stories need insights into individual humans - by largely sticking to impersonal facts you also produce uninspiring writing. It's a paradox - we do need to emphasise the wide-ranging collaboration, but also to provide specific stories of real people's individual work if a book is to be accessible.

I read most of this book while in a public space, which highlighted to me the worst thing about the series format. Every few pages, a whole page is black with a short pull quote in large white letters. These don't add anything at all - and the quotes themselves are rarely thrilling (for example 'Today hundreds of astronomers routinely discover thousands of supernovae each year'). I found it quite embarrassing for these things to be visible to those around me, as if I were reading a children's book and rushed past them.

An effective, up-to-date summary for those who want more detail on supernovas than is usually found in a popular science book.

Paperback: 
Bookshop.org

  

Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Comments

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...

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 ...

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 ...