Skip to main content

How to Kill an Asteroid – Robin George Andrews ***

The cover image and title font leave little doubt that this book is targeted at fans of blockbuster sci-fi movies – which these days means a sizable fraction of the general population. That’s a great marketing ploy, because if potential readers paid too much attention to the words ‘real science’ tucked away in the subtitle, then the audience might shrink to a small fraction of the size. It’s a sad fact that space is only seen as cool when it’s fictional; as soon as it becomes factual then it’s strictly for science nerds only.

The most obvious reason is that, outside science fiction, there’s barely any ‘human interest’ angle to space. On top of that, once you get above the Earth’s atmosphere, it’s almost impossible to give a proper explanation of how objects behave and interact without recourse to at least GCSE-level physics. So I have to give Andrews top marks for avoiding both these pitfalls. He picks the one astronomical topic that really does have a human angle – a potential collision with a ‘city-killer’ asteroid, as he terms it. That’s something that’s bound to happen in the – well, in the next ten thousand years, say (but let’s not emphasise ‘astronomical’ numbers like this too much, or people might not buy the book).

As for the second problem – ‘don’t mention physics or you’ll lose most of your readers’ – Andrews does a pretty good job there too, by taking a purely narrative rather than explanatory approach. He focuses on describing events – including how a hypothetical future collision might play out, as well as historical occurrences such as the Tunguska and Chelyabinsk impacts, and comet Shoemaker-Levy’s 1994 encounter with Jupiter – and a handful of recent asteroid-related space missions. Most relevant to the subject of ‘How to Kill an Asteroid’ is NASA’s Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART), which Andrews provides a detailed first-hand account of, but he also touches on the Hayabusa and OSIRIS-Rex sample-collection missions, with their revelations about asteroid composition. The result, I suspect, is pretty much what that core audience of sci-fi movie addicts will be looking for – and while it’s not quite the ‘propulsive narrative that reads like a sci-fi thriller’ promised by the publisher’s blurb, it certainly flows smoothly enough and is a quick and effortless read.

There’s a downside, though, in that by studiously ignoring the physics of the subject, Andrews may leave his more scientifically inclined readers with a lot of unanswered questions. So if you want a detailed insight into how asteroids – and potential defences against them – really work, you might want to look for a more sciencey, less journalistic book. On the other hand, if all you want is a broad overview of the subject, this is as good as any.

[The reviewer is too modest to make the suggestion, but if you’d like a ‘more sciencey, less journalistic’ book, you could try Andrew May’s Cosmic Impact - Ed.]

Hardback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee:
Review by Andrew May - See all our 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