Skip to main content

The Future of Geography - Tim Marshall ****

Geography is a strange subject. Parts of it - physical geography - are definitely scientific in nature. The rest - political and social geography is far more removed from anything that could be described as hard science. What Tim Marshall, an expert in foreign affairs, covers here is a strange hybrid - it's all about the political side, but because Marshall is here not considering geopolitics but astropolitics, it has a science and technology aspect. The Future of Geography (Astropolitics in the US) is about the politics that applies in space, and space inevitably comes with plenty of STEM baggage.

The majority of the book is a very effective exploration of how different space-going blocs - notably US, China and Russia, plus significant others like the EU and UK - are likely to take on the potential benefits and risks of space over the next 30 years or so. There is a relatively short consideration of the commercialisation of space (I would have liked a little more on this), but the heart of the book is on the military and governmental attitude to space, both in its ability to contribute to earthbound peace keeping and war - from surveillance to weapons - and also, most dramatically, in conflicts in space.

As Marshall points out, the current treaties on what is allowed in space are vague, contradictory and not universally accepted. He presents a couple of chilling scenarios involving disabling of each other satellites and encroaching on each others' moon bases. This sounds like something straight out of science fiction - and there is probably too much focus on the Moon here, where significant bases may well be another example of space organisations promising more than they can deliver - but especially when considering satellite interactions and attacks, the prospects are chilling. Marshall's writing style is surprisingly light considering the topic. Sometimes this veers into wit, or even whimsy. After mentioning Jeff Bezos's vision of 'giant domed cities' orbiting Earth, Marshall comments 'That's domed, not doomed.' In more whimsical style we get 'If you had a car that could drive through space at 100 km/h it would take 228 years, and many a "Are we there yet?"'

So far, so good - and I do recommend the book strongly because of this main part. The book starts with some history of astronomical and space science, which is perhaps rather too summary give a clear picture (the political machinations around Galileo's trial, for example, are distinctly over-simplified). Similarly at the end there is some speculation about future technologies that doesn't emphasise enough how much ideas such as warp drives, or teleportation of anything more than a handful of particles, are unlikely ever to have any impact on space travel. The reality is, for the purposes of this topic, space is the solar system (certainly as far as the asteroid belt).

Don't let this put you off, though: the central content on the political and military ramifications of space is thought provoking and worrying in equal measures. 

Now in paperback:   
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
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mathematics with Love – Mary Stopes-Roe *****

Admittedly it’s early days (this review is written in January), but this, for me, is the surprise hit of the year so far! I approached this book with trepidation, but found it absolutely delightful. It is described on the cover as the “courtship correspondence of Barnes Wallis, inventor of the bouncing bomb”, and contains a series of letters between Wallis and his cousin and eventual wife Molly Bloxham, along with some useful annotation by their daughter, Mary. The courtship itself is not without difficulties, as Wallis was 18 years older than the 17-year-old Molly at the start of the correspondence, and her father, not surprisingly, wasn’t too pleased about the interest of such an elderly suitor, but that isn’t the only reason the letters are interesting – it’s also because of maths, and Wallis’s position in the UK as the engineering hero of the Second World War. (Incidentally, it seemed very strange to see letters addressed to “Barnes” – I had always assumed Barnes Wallis was a ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more