Skip to main content

When Galaxies were Born - Richard Ellis ***

There's a strong indicator of the emphasis of this book in the chapter titles, which are based not on scientific discoveries, but on technologies - we get, for example, Palomar, La Palma, Hubble Space Telescope and Keck, each referring to a next generation telescope or telescopes. Richard Ellis has an approachable, conversational manner when introducing the chapters and the book as a whole, such as the one that begins 'In 1977 I cut out a full page advertisement that appeared in the Financial Times...', but the vast bulk of the content is reasonably heavy going unless you are a fully paid up astronomical enthusiast.

We get an awful lot of detail on the telescopes, on the people involved using the telescopes, and on the technical detail of the discoveries (I don't think I've ever seen so many redshift z's on a single page). But though the underlying thrust of the book feels like it should be helping the reader to understand galaxy formation and the 'cosmic dawn', when the universe became transparent to light as what's now the cosmic microwave background started to cross space, there's actually very little on the underlying science. This is largely, in Rutherfordian terms, about stamp collecting. Don't get me wrong, these are very important stamps - essential for developing an understanding - but they are stamps nonetheless.

If you consider yourself part of a general audience with an interest in science (as I do), this is, then, quite hard work to read. If the nitty gritty of astronomy is your thing and you have posters of the Keck telescopes on your wall on the other hand, this is genuinely an essential read and highly recommended.

Hardback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...

On Time - Jim Al-Khalili *****

By a small margin Jim Al-Khalili's The World According to Physics is my favourite of his books, both because the 'three pillars' concept at its heart works so well - but also because it's short. On Time is somewhat heavier, but thankfully not a wrist-buster. It might seem at first sight odd that a book on a subset of physics is considerably longer than one covering the whole thing, but time is one of those subjects that inevitably involves considerable complexities and needs depth. As Al-Khalili establishes, it's hard to think of any other scientific concept where our perception of it - what he refers to as manifest time or psychological time - is so different from the view from physics. Some physicists go so far as to suggest that time doesn't exist at all. In the book, Al-Khalili sets out (to my mind quite successfully) both to explain why they think this is the case, but also why it's not the best interpretation of time. I'd certainly note that I...

When Everyone Knows That Everyone Knows: Steven Pinker *****

In the past I've found Steven Pinker's books hypnotic - I drift along enjoying the words and feeling I'm getting something deep from it without anything much sinking in. This one was different - it was sometimes a little harder to get your head around the underlying concept, descending as it tends to into infinite regression, but overall I did feel I'd gained a lot.  Pinker's focus here is 'common knowledge' which is when not only do we both/all know something, but we know that the other(s) know as well and the implications this has for human interactions. One entertaining thing to emerge from this is the ability to get into infinite loops of the 'I know that you know that I know that...' variety. Although we aren't mentally equipped to deal with more than a handful of iterations, we are told that a simple but limited interaction like a text exchange strictly needs the full infinite set to be definitive. For example, if you and a friend are tryin...