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

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

How to Keep a Plane in the Sky - Alex Davies ****

If there's one big gap in the science writing sphere, it's popular engineering (you can quibble over whether engineering is science, but where else would you put popular engineering?). Alex Davies does the field a real service with this insightful introduction to the world of test engineering. The concept is simple. If we build something and sell it, we need to test it to make sure that it won't fail in a way that's dangerous to the consumer. The most obvious example is airliners, which feature at some length, but this applies to everything from cuddly toys to hair straighteners: someone needs to predict what could go wrong and to put the product through its paces to see if it will survive under any reasonable circumstances. When Davies is telling a story of test engineering in action, the book is a delight. He opens with the way that real bears are used to test if bears can get into coolers and trash cans - and the impressive ways these animals can  circumvent human in...
Post a Comment
Read more

On the Equality of All Things - Carlo Rovelli ****

There is a wide gulf between the worldviews of physicists and philosophers. Many physicists present a rather sweetly naive, child-like view of the world, where philosophers bring a distinctly more adult, cynical tone. This being the case, it can be a little worrying when a physicist dips a toe into the philosophical mire. Infamously, in The Grand Design , Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow told us that philosophy was now dead because science could deal with anything it had previously been needed for. Thankfully, Carlo Rovelli is not trying to do away with philosophy, though it has to be said that when he veers into the topic that physicist's naivety can make it feel like the philosophising of an earnest eighteen-year-old. Take the opening paragraph, which tells us 'electrons and minds, stones and laws, judgements and galaxies do not essentially differ in nature from one another. They are notions that illuminate each other'. I almost expected a Pink Floyd soundtr...
Post a Comment
Read more