Skip to main content

Astrophysics for People in a Hurry – Neil deGrasse Tyson *****

When I reviewed James Binney’s Astrophysics: A Very Short Introduction earlier this year, I observed that the very word ‘astrophysics’ in a book’s title is liable to deter many readers from buying it. As a former astrophysicist myself, I’ve never really understood why it’s considered such a scary word, but that’s the way it is. So I was pleasantly surprised to learn, from Wikipedia, that this new book by Neil deGrasse Tyson ‘topped The New York Times non-fiction bestseller list for four weeks in the middle of 2017’.

Like James Binney, Tyson is a professional astrophysicist with a string of research papers to his name – but he’s also one of America’s top science popularisers, and that’s the hat he’s wearing in this book. While Binney addresses an already-physics-literate audience, Tyson sets his sights on a much wider readership. It’s actually very brave – and honest – of him to give physics such prominent billing; the book could easily have been given a more reader-friendly title such as ‘Secrets of the Universe’. But it would still have been astrophysics by stealth, because it’s only thanks to physics that we understand anything beyond our own planet. As Tyson puts it: ‘the universality of physical laws makes the cosmos a marvellously simple place’.

Although the book is new, its chapters (now suitably updated) originated over a period of many years as self-contained magazine articles. They cover a wide range of topics, from the big bang and dark matter, via the electromagnetic spectrum and the periodic table, to asteroids and exoplanets. The coverage isn’t comprehensive; some of the most obvious subjects, like stellar evolution and black holes, are barely touched on. That isn’t a problem, though. The book doesn’t set out to explain everything we know about the universe, but to show that what we do know about it, we know because of physics. That’s just as interesting, and much rarer at a popular science level.

Personally, I loved the book – and I would have loved it even more when I was 15 years old, and my knowledge of physics was largely aspirational rather than actual. In those days, the book would probably have been written by someone like Isaac Asimov – and that’s a fair comparison, because Tyson’s style is a lot like Asimov’s. It manages to be clever, engaging, witty and lucid all at the same time. I kept finding myself stopping to read bits again because they were so good. Here are three examples of the kind of thing I mean:
  • On quarks: ‘The most familiar quarks are ... well, there are no familiar quarks. Each of their six subspecies has been assigned an abstract name that serves no philological, philosophical or pedagogical purpose, except to distinguish it from the others.’
  • On dark energy: ‘When you estimate the amount of repulsive vacuum pressure that arises from the abbreviated lives of virtual particles, the result is more than 10120 times larger than the experimentally determined value of the cosmological constant. This is a stupidly large factor, leading to the biggest mismatch between theory and observation in the history of science.’
  • On the cosmic microwave background: ‘The molecule cyanogen gets excited by exposure to microwaves. If the microwaves are warmer ... they excite the molecule a little more. In the big bang model, the cyanogen in distant, younger galaxies gets bathed in a warmer cosmic background than the cyanogen in our own Milky Way galaxy. And that’s exactly what we observe (you can’t make this stuff up).’
Although the book’s aimed at beginners, I have to admit that rather spooky last point came as news to me. And it wasn’t the only thing I learned. I  never realised there was enough energy in a single cosmic ray particle to knock a golf ball across a putting green. I didn’t know thunderstorms could produce gamma rays. Or that, if we could see Jupiter’s magnetosphere, it would be several times bigger than a full Moon in the sky. 

All in all, this is a book I can heartily recommend to anyone, regardless of how much or how little they know about physics.



Review by Andrew May


Popular posts from this blog

The Great Silence – Milan Cirkovic ****

The great 20th century physicist Enrico Fermi didn’t say a lot about extraterrestrial life, but his one utterance on the subject has gone down in legend. He said ‘Where is everybody?’ Given the enormous size and age of the universe, and the basic Copernican principle that there’s nothing special about planet Earth, space should be teeming with aliens. Yet we see no evidence of them. That, in a nutshell, is Fermi’s paradox.

Not everyone agrees that Fermi’s paradox is a paradox. To some people, it’s far from obvious that ‘space should be teeming with aliens’, while UFO believers would scoff at the suggestion that ‘we see no evidence of them’. Even people who accept that both statements are true – including  a lot of professional scientists – don’t always lose sleep over Fermi’s paradox. That’s something that makes Milan Cirkovic see red, because he takes it very seriously indeed. In his own words, ‘it is the most complex multidisciplinary problem in contemporary science’.

He points out th…

The Happy Brain - Dean Burnett ****

This book was sitting on my desk for some time, and every time I saw it, I read the title as 'The Happy Brian'. The pleasure this gave me was one aspect of the science of happiness that Dean Burnett does not cover in this engaging book.

Burnett's writing style is breezy and sometimes (particularly in footnotes) verging on the whimsical. His approach works best in the parts of the narrative where he is interviewing everyone from Charlotte Church to a stand-up comedian and various professors on aspects of happiness. We get to see the relevance of home and familiarity, other people, love (and sex), humour and more, always tying the observations back to the brain.

In a way, Burnett sets himself up to fail, pointing out fairly early on that everything is far too complex in the brain to really pin down the causes of something as diffuse as happiness. He starts off with the idea of cheekily trying to get time on an MRI scanner to study what his own brain does when he's happy, b…

The Order of Time - Carlo Rovelli ***

There's good news and bad news. The good news is that The Order of Time does what A Brief History of Timeseemed to promise but didn't cover: it attempts to explore what time itself is. The bad news is that Carlo Rovelli does this in such a flowery and hand-waving fashion that, though the reader may get a brief feeling that they understand what he's writing about, any understanding rapidly disappears like the scent of a passing flower (the style is catching).

It doesn't help either that the book is in translation so some scientific terms are mangled, or that Rovelli has a habit of self-contradiction. Time and again (pun intended) he tells us time doesn't exist, then makes use of it. For example, at one point within a page of telling us of time's absence Rovelli writes of events that have duration and a 'when' - both meaningless terms without time. At one point he speaks of a world without time, elsewhere he says 'Time and space are real phenomena.'…