Skip to main content

Marcus Chown - Five Way Interview

Marcus Chown graduated from the University of London in 1980 with a first class degree in physics. He also earned a Master of Science in astrophysics from the California Institute of Technology. With much experience writing for magazines such as New Scientist, Chown has written a string of successful popular science books. His latest title is The One Thing You Need to Know.

Why science?

Science is stranger than science fiction. We live in a universe far stranger than anything we could possibly have invented. I get a buzz out of learning new things about it. And they are coming thick and fast. Previous generations would have killed for what we know. We are at a stage when we can ask truly fundamental questions – What is the universe? Why is there a universe? What is space? What is time? Are we alone? – and have a good chances of answering them in the next decade or so.

Why this book?

Recently, I asked to give a talk to a law firm about quantum computers. Warned that I could not assume any scientific knowledge in my audience, I thought: 'What is the one thing you need to know to understand quantum computers – the one thing from which everything else follows?' As I put together my presentation, it occurred to me that I could do the exactly same for a myriad other scientific concepts and that, in a world most people are time poor, telling them the one thing the need to know to understand a topic and showing how everything else follows as a logical consequence, might be a novel and fun way to communicate a lot of deep stuff in a compact and digestible form.

Inevitably, making complex science approachable requires considerable simplification. Can this be dangerous?

As Einstein is often reported as saying: 'Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.' And I think that is true. The perfect description of the universe, the perfect metaphor, is of course a mathematical one. We don’t know why that is. Descriptions in words are also metaphors but not as sharp. Like looking through a frosted window that blurs the view of the world rather than through clear glass. The challenge for a popular science writer is to describe the blurry world in a way that transmits the truth that survives at that blurry level. Does that make sense?

What’s next?

I’m interested in black holes. It’s an incredibly exciting time with the Event Horizon Telescope obtaining the first-ever images of black holes – the supermassive black holes at the heart of our Milky Way and the nearby galaxy, M87, which has a 6.5 billion solar mass black hole. And gravitational wave astronomy is going from strength to strength, with LIGO/Virgo having detected almost 100 black holes mergers. Then surprise is that many of the black holes are a lot more massive than expected, indicating that each had already formed from an earlier merger or there is another route to making black holes other than the gravitational collapse of a massive stars at the end of their lives. Gravitation waves are the voice of space. It’s like we’ve suddenly gained a new sense and, in addition to seeing the universe, we can now also hear it.

What’s exciting you at the moment?

NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope is pretty exciting. I interviewed its project scientist, John Mather, the other day, and he said: 'I never expected to see individual stars in the dawn of time. The telescope has far exceeded our expectations and we are beyond ecstatic.' So I am excited about the prospects of seeing the first stars to switch on after the big bang – more likely clusters of stars. I am also excited about the prospect of detecting water on the surface of planets around nearby stars, which will at least show they are potentially habitable. Even more excitingly, Avi Loeb at Harvard says the JWST could detect the signature of industrial chemicals such as chlorofluorocarbons in exoplanet atmospheres. So, there is a remote chance of us finding an ET technological civilisation!



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Battle of the Big Bang - Niayesh Afshordi and Phil Harper *****

It's popular science Jim, but not as we know it. There have been plenty of popular science books about the big bang and the origins of the universe (including my own Before the Big Bang ) but this is unique. In part this is because it's bang up to date (so to speak), but more so because rather than present the theories in an approachable fashion, the book dives into the (sometimes extremely heated) disputed debates between theoreticians. It's still popular science as there's no maths, but it gives a real insight into the alternative viewpoints and depth of feeling. We begin with a rapid dash through the history of cosmological ideas, passing rapidly through the steady state/big bang debate (though not covering Hoyle's modified steady state that dealt with the 'early universe' issues), then slow down as we get into the various possibilities that would emerge once inflation arrived on the scene (including, of course, the theories that do away with inflation). ...

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 â€˜Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...

We Are Eating the Earth - Michael Grunwald *****

If I'm honest, I assumed this would be another 'oh dear, we're horrible people who are terrible to the environment', worthily dull title - so I was surprised to be gripped from early on. The subject of the first chunk of the book is one man, Tim Searchinger's fight to take on the bizarrely unscientific assumption that held sway that making ethanol from corn, or burning wood chips instead of coal, was good for the environment. The problem with this fallacy, which seemed to have taken in the US governments, the EU, the UK and more was the assumption that (apart from carbon emitted in production) using these 'grown' fuels was carbon neutral, because the carbon came out of the air. The trouble is, this totally ignores that using land to grow fuel means either displacing land used to grow food, or displacing land that had trees, grass or other growing stuff on it. The outcome is that when we use 'E10' petrol (with 10% ethanol), or electricity produced by ...