Skip to main content

Keith Cooper - Five Way Interview

Keith Cooper is a science journalist and editor. He has written for numerous publications and websites, and is the Editor of Astronomy Now magazine. His latest book is Amazing Worlds of Science Fiction and Science Fact, published by Reaktion Books, which delves into the topic of exoplanets, how they are presented in science fiction and how the fictional planets compare with the real ones that are being discovered. 

Why this book?

I like science fiction. And I like space exploration and exoplanet research. I only want to write books that I would want to read, so it seemed sensible to put them together. A more pertinent question might be, why now? Exoplanet research has developed to the point that we can start to say something about these worlds, even if it’s just from the statistics of the sheer number of worlds that we’re finding.

At the moment, detection of potential life on exoplanets is very indirect - could we have a way of definitively showing this to be true?

There’s no solid evidence for extraterrestrial life, direct or indirect, at the moment. But yes, there are direct means. SETI, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, could detect a radio signal from another world tomorrow. I wrote about this and the potential consequences in my previous book, The Contact Paradox: Challenging Our Assumptions in the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (2019). The search for technosignatures, be they radio beacons, technosignatures, artificial lights, atmospheric pollution or something else, is very direct, but it is also a long shot at present. 

Then there’s biosignatures, which could be direct or indirect, depending upon how ambiguous they are. The presence in an exoplanet’s atmosphere of certain abundances of oxygen, ozone, carbon dioxide, methane, water or other molecules important in life’s processes would be a big clue that there could be life on that planet.

SF uses ‘fake science’ to get its protagonists to exoplanets - do you think it’s ever likely to be possible in the real world?

I think describing it as fake does science fiction a disservice. Yes, there is lots of nonsense science in some science fiction, but other writers well versed in science will go some way to making concepts seem plausible, at least from a theoretical point of view. Take suspended animation for example, which is a staple of SF. Researchers are actively studying suspended animation, mostly for medical procedures, but SF writers can extrapolate on the science. Of course, putting it into practice is the hard part. In theory a warp drive would work, based on a 1990s paper by the physicist Miguel Alcubierre. But in practice, no, because the energy density required is far too great. So I like to describe ideas in SF that are based on the scientific literature as speculative rather than fake. I do think it will be possible to send uncrewed probes to the nearest stars, whether that’s via a fusion drive, a light-sail or by dropping nukes out the back and riding the shockwaves. Interstellar journeys will take decades or centuries at best with these technologies, so I’m not sure it’s feasible for humans without some kind of scientific revolution.

What’s next?

The European Space Agency will soon be launching two new space missions to investigate exoplanets. PLATO (Planetary Transits and Oscillations of stars) will discover thousands of transiting exoplanets, while ARIEL (Atmospheric Remote-sensing Infrared Exoplanet Large-survey) will characterise the atmosphere of many of these worlds. Further into the future, the Extremely Large Telescope under construction at the European Southern Observatory in Chile and a next-generation space telescope scheduled for the 2040s should both be able to directly image rocky planets, possibly in the habitable zone. As for what’s next for me, hopefully more books if any publishers are game.

What’s exciting you at the moment?

The Breakthrough Listen project has transformed SETI, vastly expanding the search to cover not just radio signals, but also optical laser signals, and searches for less well-defined technosignatures – they often just look for anything out of the ordinary. The funding from Breakthrough Listen has also provided a pathway for more young researchers to get into SETI, as well as increase the diversity of people doing SETI, which in turn results in lots of new ideas. In addition, I’m enthused by the growing list of potential biosignatures – those ambiguous detections I mentioned earlier – of phosphine on Venus, methane on Mars, and dimethyl sulphide on an exoplanet called K2-18b. The latter seems like it could be a kind of ocean planet called a hycean world, with a thick, warm hydrogen atmosphere. On Earth dimethyl sulphide is only produced by plankton in the sea, but that’s not to say some abiotic, geochemical process on another world couldn’t produce it, and the detection of the dimethyl sulphide itself is also considered debatable at present. But it’s exciting that we can even start to have these discussions. There were several false alarms before the first discovery of an exoplanet, and it might be the same case with alien life too.

These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee or taking out a membership:
Interview by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Infinite Alphabet - Cesar Hidalgo ****

Although taking a very new approach, this book by a physicist working in economics made me nostalgic for the business books of the 1980s. More on why in a moment, but Cesar Hidalgo sets out to explain how it is knowledge - how it is developed, how it is managed and forgotten - that makes the difference between success and failure. When I worked for a corporate in the 1980s I was very taken with Tom Peters' business books such of In Search of Excellence (with Robert Waterman), which described what made it possible for some companies to thrive and become huge while others failed. (It's interesting to look back to see a balance amongst the companies Peters thought were excellent, with successes such as Walmart and Intel, and failures such as Wang and Kodak.) In a similar way, Hidalgo uses case studies of successes and failures for both businesses and countries in making effective use of knowledge to drive economic success. When I read a Tom Peters book I was inspired and fired up...

God: the Science, the Evidence - Michel-Yves Bolloré and Olivier Bonnassies ***

This is, to say the least, an oddity, but a fascinating one. A translation of a French bestseller, it aims to put forward an examination of the scientific evidence for the existence of a deity… and various other things, as this is a very oddly structured book (more on that in a moment). In The God Delusion , Richard Dawkins suggested that we should treat the existence of God as a scientific claim, which is exactly what the authors do reasonably well in the main part of the book. They argue that three pieces of scientific evidence in particular are supportive of the existence of a (generic) creator of the universe. These are that the universe had a beginning, the fine tuning of natural constants and the unlikeliness of life.  To support their evidence, Bolloré and Bonnassies give a reasonable introduction to thermodynamics and cosmology. They suggest that the expected heat death of the universe implies a beginning (for good thermodynamic reasons), and rightly give the impression tha...

The War on Science - Lawrence Krauss (Ed.) ****

At first glance this might appear to be yet another book on how to deal with climate change deniers and the like, such as How to Talk to a Science Denier.   It is, however, a much more significant book because it addresses the way that universities, government and pressure groups have attempted to undermine the scientific process. Conceptually I would give it five stars, but it's quite heavy going because it's a collection of around 18 essays by different academics, with many going over the same ground, so there is a lot of repetition. Even so, it's an important book. There are a few well-known names here - editor Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker - but also a range of scientists (with a few philosophers) explaining how science is being damaged in academia by unscientific ideas. Many of the issues apply to other disciplines as well, but this is specifically about the impact on science, and particularly important there because of the damage it has been doing...