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

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