Skip to main content

Chris Impey - Five Way Interview

Chris Impey is University Distinguished Professor of Astronomy at the University of Arizona. He has won numerous teaching awards and authored textbooks and nine popular science titles, including Beyond our Future in Space, How it Ends and Einstein's Monsters: The Life and Times of Black Holes. His latest book is Worlds without End.

Why science?

Science is the best way humans have found to make sense of the world. It's not perfect, and the people who do it can be flawed too, but science is powerful in its reach. In my fields of physics and astronomy, it has let us understand the invisible world within atoms and the remote realm of the universe a fraction of a second after the big bang. Science is also a unifying force in society. The worldwide community of scientists speaks a common language, shares common goals, and maintains an optimistic view of human potential. But science is opaque to most people and its process is widely misunderstood, so I believe scientists have an obligation to communicate the results and benefits of their work to the general public.

Why this book?

Exoplanets are booming. Within a few decades, we've gone from zero to over 5000, with hundreds of habitable worlds identified. The current stage is exciting as we move toward the characterisation of these exoplanets, and attempt the difficult experiment to detect life on Earth-like worlds. The detection of life beyond Earth will be the discovery of the century. 
I felt it was time for a snapshot of this rapidly-moving research field, laying out what we may learn in the next five to ten years.

Given all the uncertainty involved in several of the parameters, is the Drake equation any better than those newspaper equations on, say, how to make the best sandwich?

Even Frank Drake was modest about the efficacy of his equation, calling it a 'container for ignorance.' But it is still a useful framing device for thinking about life in the universe, and in particular, intelligent life. Astronomers have now measured the first three terms so there has been real progress, and the fourth term is in view if we can determine the fraction of habitable planets that actually host biology. The final term, L, is a sobering reminder that technological civilizations like ours may not be long-term stable, and that dictates the odds of cosmic companionship. So yes, not a mathematical tool in the usual sense, but still a very good way to communicate astrobiology to a larger audience.

What’s next?

Having mentioned how essential and successful science is earlier, I'm acutely aware that it is under assault as evidence-based reasoning is in short supply and misinformation spreads like wildfire on the internet. The threat is particularly acute in the United States, where it  has a political overtone, but the problem exists in Europe as well. I'm motivated to reboot Carl Sagan's book The Demon-Haunted World, now almost 30 years old, for the modern era. His book was a clarion call for rational thinking and a paean to science. Perhaps it is immodest of me to try and replicate the work of a master of science communication, but it feels like the time is right to advocate for the power of science and push back against the pseudoscience, superstition, and illogical thinking that permeates modern society.

What’s exciting you at the moment?

Gravitational waves. Since the field broke open with LIGO's first detection in 2015, a big new field of science is available. Seeing with 'gravity eyes' is the biggest innovation in astronomy since the invention of the telescope. LIGO and similar detectors are now seeing black hole mergers every week, letting us test general relativity at a new level. These are the most precise physics experiments ever built. The recent use of networks of pulsars to detect the 'hum' of merging supermassive black holes in the early universe is very exciting. 

Image © Chris Impey


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more