Skip to main content

Worlds without End - Chris Impey ****

I was a bit wary when I saw this book because there seem to be almost as many books about exoplanets and astrobiology as there have been planets discovered around new stars. However, it proved a pleasant surprise, as a result of the approach that Chris Impey has taken, and I found it an enjoyable read.

In four sections, Impey takes us through the search for exoplanets, the potential habitability of different worlds, from gas giants to Earth clones, what can be done to search for the existence of life in other planetary systems, and space exploration. The last section, to be honest, really is unnecessary - it's a distinctly different topic covered better in other titles, and I would have been happy to have had more on the earlier subjects. But in the first three sections, the great thing about Impey's approach is the way he drives the discoveries and ideas (there aren't, of course, any astrobiology discoveries per se as it is all theoretical so far) from the individuals involved.

To pick out two examples, the 'Doppler wobble' chapter begins with the sounds of corks popping in 1995 as Swiss astronomers in the south of France celebrated the uncovering of data that provided the first confirmation of an exoplanet, despite, as Impey comments 'using a telescope not big enough to be in the top seventy worldwide.' (It wasn't the first detection, but the first time it became pretty much definitive.) In a later chapter we see the Drake equation being first written in 1961. This very guesswork so-called equation is perhaps given rather more coverage than it deserves as it tells us nothing: but the story is interesting, and, unlike some, Impey at least acknowledges the degree of uncertainty that makes it pretty much useless, except as a way of reminding us of how difficult it is have any idea of how common intelligent life might be in our galaxy.

I do have one big complaint - like many scientists writing popular science, Impey is fine when he sticks to the science content, but can go astray when he gets into history. He commits the worst example of Brunoitis I've seen in a long while. Giordano Bruno (who funnily enough I've just reviewed in his fictional role as a detective) was a sixteenth century Italian mystic who famously commented on the stars being suns with peopled planets and who was burned as a heretic. Impey makes the two classic mistakes. Firstly, he makes it sound as if Bruno's cosmological ideas were original - but they were taken from the much earlier Nicholas of Cusa. The second is to suggest that Bruno was martyred for his science. In reality, Bruno's primary heresies were all conventional religious ones (notably, Nicholas was not persecuted just for having these ideas - in fact, he was made a cardinal). Of course Bruno's persecution was still horrible - but Bruno didn't die because of his very waffly cosmological musing.

As long as you hold your breath and get past Bruno (who is much more entertaining as a fictional character) though, this book gives a great picture of the personalities involved in exoplanet detection and astrobiology, and simple yet effective descriptions of the science that lies behind the discoveries and ideas.

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
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

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

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