Skip to main content

Everything You Know About Space Is Wrong - Matt Brown ****

What we have here is a feast of assertions some people make about space that are satisfyingly incorrect, with pithy, entertaining explanations of what the true picture is. Matt Brown admits in his introduction that a lot of these incorrect facts are nitpicking - more on that in a moment - but it doesn't stop them being delightful. I particularly enjoyed the ones about animals in space and about the Moon.

Along the way, we take in space exploration, the Earth's place in space, the Moon, the solar system, the universe and a collection of random oddities, such as the fact that Mozart didn't write Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star. Sometimes the wrongness comes from a frequent misunderstanding. So, for example, Brown corrects the idea that Copernicus was the first to say that the Earth moves around the Sun. Sometimes there's some very careful wording. This is used when Brown challenges the idea that the Russian dog Laika was the first animal in space. What we discover is that, instead, Laika was the first animal in orbit, but plenty of other animals had made brief ventures into space and back beforehand. (Some even survived.)

Just occasionally, the wording goes from ambiguous to downright misleading. So, another 'fact' that's challenged is that light from the Sun takes eight minutes to reach the Earth. There was one potential challenge, in that it's actually a little over eight minutes. But Brown uses the fact that photons can take many thousands of years to get to the surface of the Sun before taking eight minutes (and a bit) to get here. And if the statement had been 'Light takes eight minutes to get from the depths of the Sun to the Earth', he would have a point. But it didn't.

Since nitpicking is the order of the day, I'd also point out that we don't know that the universe is finite, and Baa Baa Black Sheep is a variation on the theme of Twinkle Twinkle Little Star, not, as the book says, the same tune, as it has two notes that aren't in the original and several timing differences. But one of the joys of reading a book like this is looking out for things to disagree with. And it certainly is great fun to read - and a fairly quick read too. (A good thing in my book. Far took many popular science books are over-long.) Easily managed on a mid-length train journey.

The content is lightly written and produces fascinating factoids throughout, though, for some reason, the second half of the content wasn't quite as interesting as the first. And, of course, as with Brown's earlier book Everything You Know About Science Is Wrong, I bridle somewhat at the title. I know a reasonable amount about space, and most of it isn't wrong. But I suppose titling a book 'Things That Some People Think About Space (Not All the Same People) That Is Wrong' would be rather clumsy.

Lots of fun for both younger and adult readers with an interest in space or science in general.

Hardback:  

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you


Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

Space Oddities - Harry Cliff *****

In this delightfully readable book, Harry Cliff takes us into the anomalies that are starting to make areas of physics seems to be nearing a paradigm shift, just as occurred in the past with relativity and quantum theory. We start with, we are introduced to some past anomalies linked to changes in viewpoint, such as the precession of Mercury (explained by general relativity, though originally blamed on an undiscovered planet near the Sun), and then move on to a few examples of apparent discoveries being wrong: the BICEP2 evidence for inflation (where the result was caused by dust, not the polarisation being studied),  the disappearance of an interesting blip in LHC results, and an apparent mistake in the manipulation of numbers that resulted in alleged discovery of dark matter particles. These are used to explain how statistics plays a part, and the significance of sigmas . We go on to explore a range of anomalies in particle physics and cosmology that may indicate either a breakdown i

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