Eyes in the Sky - Andrew May ****

If you ask someone to describe a telescope, they will probably come up with a big tube in a dome, perhaps located somewhere remote on top of a mountain. But, in reality, many of our most important telescopes are now located in space - not only does this relieve them of the distorting effects of weather and atmosphere, they can be used 24/7. Despite their importance, and plenty of books showing of the images they produce, space telescopes don't get the coverage they deserve as objects of interest in their own right, so this book is welcome.

In giving it four stars, I am primarily thinking of an audience with more than a passing interest in astronomy, though Andrew May's text is generally approachable. We start with an introduction to space and telescopes, move on to the big name most have heard of - the Hubble space telescope and then look at some specific topics where such telescopes have had a big impact, such as looking back in time to near the Big Bang, searching for exoplanets and mapping the galaxy. From here we get to see what has already been achieved with NASA's latest big offering, the James Webb space telescope, before diving into high energy astronomy (in the X-ray and gamma ray bands) and finishing with a brief look at future possibilities. (As with all space ventures, many of these are likely to be cancelled or postponed.)

There is always a danger with a book like this that it will turn into a catalogue of the telescopes and their technical details, ideal for those who enjoy the telescopic equivalent of train spotting, but not really getting to grips with their purpose and achievements. This is a more contextual overview, slim enough to never get into too much detail, and with enough stories of events along the way (from the well-known problem with Hubble's mirror to non-astronomer Bill Borucki's contribution to planet hunting) to keep the reader's interest.

I am embarrassingly listed on Amazon and Bookshop as editor: in reality I'm just series editor, and this is all Andrew's book, but I need to make this clear in case it's seen as a conflict of interest.

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

Comments

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on

Roger Highfield - Stephen Hawking: genius at work interview

Roger Highfield OBE is the Science Director of the Science Museum Group. Roger has visiting professorships at the Department of Chemistry, UCL, and at the Dunn School, University of Oxford, is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a member of the Medical Research Council and Longitude Committee. He has written or co-authored ten popular science books, including two bestsellers. His latest title is Stephen Hawking: genius at work . Why science? There are three answers to this question, depending on context: Apollo; Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, along with the world’s worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl; and, finally, Nullius in verba . Growing up I enjoyed the sciencey side of TV programmes like Thunderbirds and The Avengers but became completely besotted when, in short trousers, I gazed up at the moon knowing that two astronauts had paid it a visit. As the Apollo programme unfolded, I became utterly obsessed. Today, more than half a century later, the moon landings are

Splinters of Infinity - Mark Wolverton ****

Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists. Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by re

Search This Blog