Category: Book Reviews

The Pioneer space probes, brought to fruition by the staff of NASA’s Ames facility, were a series of eight very similar craft. Their main claims to scientific fame included a litany of firsts in space travel and exploration. Though these probes began in the same era as the ‘all encompassing’ manned lunar flights, they happily and necessarily served a different purpose. Happily as in people realized that manned space flight is not the best tool for exploration; there were cheaper mechanical probes. Necessarily as in Ames had just been absorbed into NASA and needed to create a niche for itself or be in danger of disappearing altogether. Thus began the Pioneer odyssey.

Prior to absorption, Ames had been an effective and very responsive academic styled institute. Its staff solved problems very well but expected the problems to be handed to them on a silver platter. At that time, under NACA, they were considered some of the best theoreticians in their field. On becoming a part of NASA, Ames couldn’t sit back when proactive facilities like JPL were overwhelming the spot light. Charles Hall, an Ames staffer, took on the challenge of altering the mind set at Ames as well as the altering the beliefs of the bureaucrats at NASA. With convincing financial and technical arguments, he demonstrated that Ames could effectively manage the design, assembly, test, and operation of a space probe, even if it was to be the first to assess conditions outside of the Earth’s protective shield. Hall turned out to be the right person at the right place and at the right time for his arguments succeeded and Ames began a new direction as space craft designers and builders.

Much of the success of the Pioneer program was directly tied to Hall. Long before ‘faster, better, cheaper’ became the mantra in vogue, Hall lived and breathed this axiom. Technically he did it in two ways. The first way was to have a clearly defined purpose for each probe and each sub-system within the probe. He then fixated on this purpose, and only monumental persuasion convinced him to accept any modifications or redesigns. In consequence, the typical cost run ups and time over runs were all but absent. The second way Hall accomplished this was to stay true to the KISS (keep it simple stupid) principle. Where at all possible, only proven technology and components were used. Simple solutions, such as stabilizing a satellite with spinning, won out over complex ones that used thrusters in each of three axes. Hall’s other forte aside from program management was his political skill, especially with principle investigators. Whether refereeing the battles for the satellites’ download bandwidth or brokering for ever scarce time on the Deep Space Network (DNS), Hall had a knack of finding an amenable solution that kept his program on time and on target. As much as these were and are the better styles of management, when all was said and done, it was the final product and its success that vindicated Hall’s style and direction.

Pioneer probes 6 through 9 were launched between the years 1966 and 1969. They had a design minimum lifetime of six months. However, as 1970 rolled around, Hall was using all these in operating the first space based weather monitoring network. Pioneer 9 still operated up to 1983! Pioneer 10 and 11 were, of course, the well known path finders; the first to ever reach out beyond Mars. Their mission design was to reach Jupiter and assess its surroundings. Yet, both these probes were allowed and able to travel on and were functioning well past Pluto. Only recently has their signal strength gotten so low that the DNS is unable to detect it against background. This is testament enough for the abilities of Hall and everyone else who worked on the Pioneer missions. However, to complete the picture, don’t forget Pioneers 12 and 13. They were directed inwards, to Venus where they provided some of the best observations and measurements of Venus to date. All these Pioneer probes had Hall’s guiding light and all had remarkably successful missions.

Mark Wolverton’s book The Depths of Space provides a very readable and pleasant historical look at some of the significant issues surrounding the Pioneer space probes. Though perhaps by the end a bit repetitious in its accolades, it contains excellent views into some of the significant trials, tribulations and credos for humankind’s first spacecraft to go boldly where none had gone before. Yes, there may have been sketches of naked humans placed upon them but these probes were much more than mere messages in a bottle.

Read more reviews and buy the book online from Amazon.com.

Review by Mark Mortimer

On January 17, 2004, President Bush announced his new vision for human spaceflight. The space shuttle would fly again, to complete the International Space Station. And then the next stage in human space exploration would begin, with humans landing on the Moon by 2015-2020; missions to Mars will follow. He announced a new commission would be formed, led by Edward “Pete” Aldridge to figure out the best way to implement this vision.

The commissioners conducted five public forums and fact finding missions. They interviewed 94 witnesses, including NASA employees, astronauts, academics, media, students, labour unions, space advocates, and many of the agency’s biggest critics. Three months after they began, the commissioners delivered their 64-page report to the President and the public.

This report lays out what I think is a realistic strategy of how to change NASA so that it’s better equipped to accomplish this vision. But I think the commissioners went a step further and got to the heart of what’s wrong with NASA, and offered solutions to get the agency back on track.

The commissioners suggest that “the space vision must be managed as a national priority”, and offer ideas: national advisors, representatives at federal agencies, commissions and councils. This could be layers of extra bureaucracy, or effective oversight. I’m not sure which it would be.

It goes on to make a series of recommendations on how to make the private industry assume a pivotal role in space exploration, by providing services to NASA, especially supplying low-Earth orbit. The commission suggests that NASA should become a customer, purchasing launch services and other products from a healthy private space industry. NASA’s role should be largely limited to science, and the risky research and development where there is “irrefutable demonstration that only government can perform the proposed activity.” I’d like to see how you measure an “irrefutable demonstration”, but that’s good, strong language.

The report goes on to suggest how risky technologies should be identified, directed into mature technologies, and then transitioned into the private sector. This is key. If business is unwilling to take a risk on nuclear propulsion, then NASA – an innovative and adventurous NASA – can swoop in, figure out if it’s possible, build a prototype, and then hand it off to private industry. This could be done directly by NASA, or through competitions like the X Prize ($1 billion for the first company to put a human on the Moon, for example). It’s one of the most exhilarating visions for NASA I can imagine, and I’m sure the people working there would be inspired too.

“The space industry will become a national treasure”, suggests the report. It encourages NASA to dig deep throughout the nation to find the best ideas, people and technologies and get them working to fulfill the exploration vision. I like the sound of that; it’s a 180-degree departure from the agency’s current reputation for close-mindedness. If you’re on the outside right now, you have to fight tooth-and-nail to get your great ideas considered by NASA. This created the bad blood between NASA and private industry today. The commissioners set a great example preparing the report, and let anyone provide ideas through the public forums, and via their website – 6,000 written comments were recieved. Many of these freely offered ideas ended up being quoted word-for-word in the report.

The commissioners suggest that NASA should embrace the international space community to develop future endeavors in space. That’s fine, but a similar vision created the International Space Station. Perhaps a better direction would be to allow NASA to work with suppliers outside of the US. Competing against Russian rocket builders might just light a fire under Lockheed Martin and Boeing.

The report reminds us that a large part of NASA is its role in scientific discovery, and encourages the agency to connect with the scientific community to hear their priorities. The current state is a severe disconnect. Although NASA has enabled some terrific science, it’s funneled billions of dollars into research that has more to do with politics than science. If NASA can figure out how to rebalance this, scientists would be much happier.

Finally, the commission recommends that NASA do a better job of connecting to the public; to encourage future generations of scientists, aerospace engineers and software programmers to direct their careers towards space exploration. I’m in the media, and I can tell you that NASA could go a long way to improving its relations with us… and you, the public. It feels secretive and controlling, dispensing information carefully and selectively. Why aren’t astronauts making the talk show circuit? Where are the reality shows? I want new episodes of Cosmos, maybe hosted by Dr. Brian Greene and Dr. Michio Kaku. Just look at the success of the television show CSI, it’s entertaining and scientific.

Before I started reading the report, I was worried it would either be too aggressive or just plain boring. Instead, the Aldridge report was realistic; perhaps the best compliment I could heap on it. It was very entertaining to read, and I was constantly nodding my head in agreement.

It’s realistic because it recognizes that NASA already has many assets, in equipment, programs, and personnel. These can evolve, improving what works and discarding what doesn’t. Radical space advocates want to see the agency scoured. Disband the centres and fire everyone. That makes me cringe to think what kind of assets and goodwill would get flushed down the toilet. Not to mention, it would be political suicide.

This report suggests, no… demands, that NASA and private enterprise sit down at the table and work things out. Get to the bottom of why the agency has resisted its influence in the past, and see the wheels of free enterprise spinning again. Get the burden off the shoulders of the taxpayer and into grateful hands of business. When people ask, “what’s the point of space exploration, why should we spend $15 billion a year on this when we should be feeding the poor”, it demonstrates how NASA has failed to create a self sustaining spacefaring industry.

My main concern with the Aldridge commission’s report is that it doesn’t do enough to define the “critical success factors”. That’s management speak for the things you can point to which indicate you’re on the right track. The report encourages NASA to become sustainable, affordable, and credible, but doesn’t provide the details about what that agency would look like. The trick with critical success factors is they aren’t goals, they’re principles. They guide your organization into a virtuous spiral of improvement. A responsible leader provides followers with the vision, and then backs it up with these principles to help everyone guide their efforts – it prevents an organization from going off the rails in the future.

In recent years NASA has seemed to be in the business of maintaining its existence. Fill an organization with people regularly under attack from budget cuts, public mistakes, taxpayer displeasure, and a non-existent job market, and it shouldn’t come as a surprise that people are mainly looking to protect their jobs. That the thrilling vision and enthusiasm for space exploration has been watered down by politics and bureaucracy.

The easiest time to change someone’s mind in this situation – someone would otherwise maintain the status quo – is when something disastrous happens to confront their world view. The Columbia disaster was just this event. It briefly drove a stake deep into the heart of the bureaucracy and I know it caused every single person in NASA to wonder what went wrong.

And be open for change.

NASA employees and managers have an open mind right now. Congress and the Senate understand that bad decisions by government contributed to the situation. This affected President Bush, and he announced a new direction; an exciting vision to return to the Moon and then head off to Mars.

Although I’m hard pressed to think of something more exciting for space exploration than humans setting foot on Mars, I’m more excited by the possibility that NASA will reinvent itself from an organization that defends itself and restricts free enterprise, to one that embraces entrepreneurs and ensures that mankind returns to space… for good.

NASA needed a plan which would inject free enterprise deep into its bloodstream, while maintaining its value to science, and developing the risky technologies that business won’t touch. In my opinion, this is what they got from Aldridge and the rest of the commissioners. Good job.

Now, let’s see President Bush embrace the plan. Let’s see NASA implement it in a way that respects its employees and takes advantage of their creativity, experience, and infrastructure. Let’s judge their progress by how well they stick to their principles.

Return to space, and never turn back. Failure is not an option.

Read the report for yourself.

And to add life you need to know what it is all about. Consider that most people believe humans are not at the centre of everything. So if we’re not at the centre, then where exactly are we? Well, centre is pretty much a matter of perspective, and when considering the cosmos, there is a lot of perspective. Newton had things nicely arranged by putting equations and relationships onto macroscopic objects. He had forces and masses and orbits, but he was a little wishy washy on what held it all together. Were the visible constituents all that there was, or was there more? The answer, we know, is, of course, there is more. There are atoms, photons and quarks. Even more tantalizing are fields. Magnetic or electric fields extend from a source to a destination without needing intermediary material. This then is the ticket. This defines the constituents of our surroundings, our existence, our life.

But is this as deep as things get, or can we get deeper? As we delve into smaller and smaller realms, some of our traditional observations and laws get broken. Communication is not supposed to go faster than the speed of light. Yet there is nonlocality, the instantaneous transfer of information, that has been observed when identifying the spin of electrons. And speaking of electrons, those sneaky little particles, we can’t even be sure of where they are or where they are going. Measuring one of their parameters clouds the observation of the other. Not fair! And further, unless we do measure them, the electron may just be anywhere. A probability function is our best guess on where it may be. We see delving into the ‘small’ shows a tricky non-classical view, but things get even hairier.

Let’s look at the bigger picture, our universe. Measurements indicate it’s growing in size and its growth is accelerating. Perhaps surprisingly, there is an ambient temperature of about 2.7 degrees Kelvin. But temperature is an indication of energy. What emits or carries this energy and where did it come from? We’re pretty sure it came from the Big Bang, but we’re not sure what this event was. Nor are we positively sure how we got from that time to this time. Various inflationary steps may have occurred perhaps all of which were driven by some desire to increase entropy. And then, what about time. Is time an inviolate unidirectional dimension? Worm holes may provide a chance to travel in time, but we have yet to see anyone from the future popping by. When looking at the expansion of our view, it is just as freaky as the shrunken version. No wonder theoretical physicists seem to always have a perplexed look.

And how does this all come together? Well, aside from the fact that it is the existence in which we find ourselves, there is nothing definite. But imagine a superstructure of strings, small and large, open and closed. These perplexing little entities can vibrate with special harmonics and purportedly give rise to what we call an electron or a graviton or some field effect. These strings may fill the space that Newton saw as black nothingness but still we can’t prove this as we can’t yet see any. They may even be the reason why some people consider the universe and ourselves to be a holographic image being played out from a lower dimensional frame. Now that’s neat stuff for a cocktail party.

Well, this book on the cosmos will guide the reader through the popular and likeliest hypothesis in theoretical physics today. Illustrative examples and experiments provide wonderful substance to esoteric princeps. Picture Bart Simpson cruising on a skate board to the Andromeda galaxy to pick up some fish and chips. Or there are Mulder and Scully of X-Files notoriety who get mysterious packages mailed to them from aliens. Classical mechanics is intertwined with string theory and teleportation. The gist is there but the breadth of this book, like the cosmos, can be daunting.

Now there could still be a problem if you read this book and then attend a party. The problem is that others in attendance may be equally or better versed. And sadly, many of the enclosed arguments surrounding string theory rest on the laurels of mathematical gurus that say the ‘new’ equations solve some trite detail. Though there are many references, this hearsay doesn’t really support the conjectures. And face it, any party gets pretty stale very quick when the conversation becomes a ‘he said’, ‘she said’, affair.

So anyway, you’ve read Brian Greene’s book on The Fabric of the Cosmos and you’re now ready for a cocktail party or two. You can wow them with your grasp of black holes and entropic progression. You might even get some mileage from telling everyone that we actually live in a universe of ten or so dimensions and that we just can’t quite yet detect the other 6 or 7 or whichever. And who can say you’re wrong? Even Brian admits that there is a lot of conjecture and precious little evidence in the beauty of our cosmos. So go ahead, read about the cosmos and start on the road to being a bona fide theoretical physicist.

Read more reviews on Amazon.com.

Review by Mark Mortimer.

Peter Ward cut his teeth, so to speak, on a more recent mass extinction. This event was the Cretaceous-Tertiary or K/T mass extinction about 65 million years ago that saw the end of the dinosaurs and many of their co-habitants. Fortunately for people, it also paved the way for the dominance of mammals. The quest that drove Peter and other paleontologists was to find the reason for the mass extinction. After extensive investigation of the K/T boundary, the cause was ruled not to be a long, gradual climate change but a brief flash due to an asteroid hitting at Chicxulub in the Yucatan peninsula of Mexico. Peter’s own findings supported the final conclusion but seeing as it was a conclusion, Peter was left without a future target for his personal challenge.

The end of the Permian period was similar to the end of the Cretaceous period as each ended with a mass extinction. However, the Permian period was a more complete extinction and, as it occurred hundreds of millions of years beforehand, there was a lot less material to substantiate either a cause or a process. Peter fortuitously began studying this event. Over the ensuing twenty years, he experienced both political extremes in the pre and post apartheid and environmental extremes as he traversed the back country called the Karoo. He discovered much about the mass extinction and much about himself.

The lands of the Karoo do not give up their secrets easily. Though effectively a desert region, its temperature ranges from below freezing to well above 40 Celsius. Sunstroke and frostbite were equally possible. Ticks were incessant and could in one bite lead to a painful and fateful end. Puff adders and Cape cobras abounded. Clean water didn’t. Restaurants and hotels were few and far between and of limited quality. In spite of the hardships, or perhaps because of them, many every day visions took on a greater grandeur. Night skis were a crystal clear panoply of stars, galaxies and light shows. Rivers had recuperative powers better than any pharmaceutical pill. And, of course, the sighting of a fossil made the rigour of many a hard day melt away. The Karoo had the evidence needed to help explain the Permian boundary extinction but it did so grudgingly.

Being a paleontologists, as is Peter, gives perhaps a somewhat unique perspective of today’s events on Earth. Some claim that the Earth at this moment is experiencing another mass extinction. However, this time it is not due to celestial strikes but through the actions of a singular species, humans. Humanity is causing the loss of species at a rate ten times faster than at any time since the last mass extinction. In addition, with its alteration to the Earth’s environment, especially the atmosphere, many of the indicators for the start of a mass extinction are again present. Further, if a large extinction occurs, then with the human caused reduction in biodiversity, the Earth may again need tens of millions of years to achieve a full set of complex life forms. Peter raises such perspectives and in so doing easily justifies the time and effort spent examining an event hundreds of millions of years old.

This backward look in time is equally exciting for space enthusiasts. NASA itself is funding significant investigations into the Earth’s mass extinctions and the beginnings of life. The definition of life and its constituent matters may seem complete but seeing new life forms at undersea volcanoes or kilometres deep in granite lends credence to the belief that life can exist elsewhere than Earth. Further, the study of mass extinctions can lead to the definition of the processes of evolution as well as ecosystem dependencies. From this, conjecture can be raised about the effects of the loss of species and phyla, as well as the effects of another asteroid striking Earth. Such scenarios easily give NASA greater support to develop lunar bases and space travel.

After reading this book, you will discard any romantic notions you may have had about being a fossil hunter. Peter clearly describes days of sweat, years of poor pay and few occasions of reward. His personal vindications allow a reader to feel the warmth of comradery, the joys of mystery meat on pizza and the satisfaction of contributing to scientific knowledge. As much as this book reinforces a career choice other than a paleontologist, I’m glad there are people like Peter who do this work and are able to write a book for a non-practitioner to enjoy.

Yet, though I’m not a paleontologist, I would have liked a clearer description of the events and surroundings being investigated. There is a flourish that waxes about the vast expanse of life before the Permian mass extinction and the lack thereafter, but there is little detail. Also, reference is made to activities and researchers elsewhere, but these seem more of an add on than part of the narrative. Peter includes more of his feelings than details of his work, which may please or discourage the reader.

The Gorgonopsian was a predator from the Permian period. It became extinct along with about 95 percent of its fellow inhabitants on Earth at the end of this period. Peter Ward, in his book Gorgon, describes his personal challenges and successes in prying the secrets of fossils from the back country of South Africa. In reading this book, you can easily end up wondering about the huge expanse of lives and events that have gone before us, wondering about current and past politics or just wondering about what drives people to do the things they do.

You can also read a review of Ward’s previous book, The Life and Death of Planet Earth here on Universe Today.

Read more reviews, or buy a copy online from Amazon.com.

Review by Mark Mortimer

The seven-member crew of space shuttle Columbia was a picture perfect cross section of humanity. It included a range of ages, both sexes, a number of ethnicities and several nationalities. Each person was a very talented individual who was excelling in their chosen vocation. Almost all were living out a childhood fantasy of travelling in space. However, their goal was not that of personal glorification but rather of being a participant of the much larger space exploration effort undertaken by NASA, the United States and other world governments. These astronauts realized that they were a beacon for young and old alike; a symbol of what cooperation and skill can achieve. Their hopes, as well as the hopes of their families who were waiting at the landing site, were dealt a serious blow when Columbia didn’t return.

Of course, the shuttle relies on more than just the seven astronauts. Its related workforce totalled about 17,500 people of whom over 90% were contractors. These people were responsible for processing the shuttle before each flight and ensuring that the flight went smoothly. Here is where the main cause of Columbia’s failure arose. The people who were making these decisions were becoming over confident with every successful flight. In particular they were neglecting the fact that the shuttles were still designated as experimental. The mindset appeared to change from proving that the shuttle was ready to fly to one of proving that there was an anomaly that would make the shuttle unflyable. For example standing requirements for meeting readiness to flight were being challenged due to semantics rather than considering the safety implications. Expediency was replacing safety as the mantra of the day and this was a dark foreboding for the experimental shuttle.

Though the CAIB and this book share many of the same concerns about the accident, the authors raise a more fundamental one regarding NASA’s very existence. This concern centres on the political climate that now engages NASA. In the beginning, NASA was a political instrument with the very singular task of landing people on the moon and safely returning them to earth before the year 1970. Yes, in their time they had trials and disasters, but they were focussed and, more importantly, they had the support of the politicians words and especially the budget allocations. NASA succeeded in their task and deserved all the accolades given them.

Today NASA is drastically different. It has no singular goal and it seems to drift from one purpose to the next, as depending on the whim of the party in power. Further, most politicians happily vouch their support for space exploration yet almost yearly force a decrease in NASA’s budget. On top of this, NASA has gotten itself into a program bind. The shuttle’s reason for existence is to build the International Space Station (ISS). Yet the goal of the station itself appears to be mostly to provide rationale for the shuttle’s existence. Neither have strong justification for existence on their own nor do either have an apparent succession plan other than complete replacement. Through an executive order the shuttle is forbidden from launching commercial satellites and when flown for experiments, as Columbia was, there is precious little justification for the $500 million launch cost. NASA is unfocused and unsupported and needs to pull together to define a goal which would clearly places a value on programs, schedules and safety.

Cabbage and Harwood have written an engaging text that strongly focuses on the people directly involved with Columbia’s final flight. Part of it is like a testimonial to the crew and clearly we see the sacrifice made by the crew. I like the chronological narration particular in the rendition of what happened while Columbia was flying in orbit and the ground crew thought there was a problem but couldn’t prove it.

However though there was a lot of personal information sometimes it was excessive. The text contains the complete academic background and most of the career progression of the main individuals. Further, this information appears to be copied straight from a dossier rather than determined from personal interviews. I would have preferred more insight into the person’s feelings than their work accomplishments.

In Comm Check… The Final Flight of Shuttle Columbia, Michael Cabbage and William Harwood co-author an easy to read book that portrays the main people involved with the Columbia accident and the events surrounding it. Though there is no vilification of any person, and none appears to be due, there is a sense that something is not quite right at NASA. Reading this book will remind you of the sorrows of the second loss of a shuttle and will also give you a feeling of how close the United States is to cancelling any future human space flight. This would be a significant decision and reading this book may help you decide where you want to vote on this issue.

Read more reviews, and find similar books from Amazon.com

Review by Mark Mortimer

The frontiers of space and time are where the physicists and cosmologist are positioned in their search for an understanding of our surroundings. These theoreticians and experimenters are looking for smaller and smaller particles in our space and at the same time are considering the possibility of more than one universe. For them, time may or may not have begun with the start of the universe. It is a relative dimension, and it may even consist of more than one dimension. As equipment gets more advanced, whether stronger atom smashers or more powerful telescopes, these experts obtain more and more clues about existence and often more and more questions.

In our surroundings stranger and stranger ideas are contemplated. There may be planets without central stars. Our universe may start growing with hyperinflation, slow down growth and then speed up again. Patterns of galaxies look like they grow on bubbles. While great attractors have matter streaming into them. Dark matter and negative energy may be more important than visible matter and known energy in keeping our universe together. The universe could be expanding and continue to do so forever, in steady state, or it could be contracting where a big crunch brings the universe back to that which existed before the big bang. There may be other universes alongside or intertwined with our own, or there may be multiple copies of our universe. Theoreticians are looking at their equations and current observations and trying to make reason of it all. Experimenters, of course, would cherish the idea of travelling about the galaxies so as to equally provide for an understanding. However, for now, being stuck on a planet forces them to make the most of whatever is at hand.

Theoreticians rely, for the most part, on mathematics. Math is a standardized means of expressing relationships between entities. Because of its formality, a mathematical equation will often provide more than just the one answer needed and theoreticians will pronounce new elements or conditions based on these alternate answers. Though these can appear, at first, to be nonsensical, experimenters might then establish proof of the validity of these answers. This method of mathematical ‘prediscovery’ has lead to such exotic concepts as strange matter, dark energy, negative pressure and fractional electric charges. And the theoreticians and experimenters are an essential combination in advancing our understanding.

However, even with the steady advances being made, there still remains their greatest challenge, to combine gravitational force with electromagnetism. Physicists are looking hard for this unifying theory and, though many pronouncements are made, there is still no proof for any particular one. Super symmetry or string theory is a strong candidate. By vibrating at different frequencies or notes, a string could mimic any elementary particle. Recent theories have overcome earlier anomalies in the conservation laws and actually provide tens to hundreds of possibilities. These are now considered to be equivalent candidates as each can fold into the other due to the concept of topology. Experimenters, however, will be challenged as the largest of these strings are believed to be on the order of 10^-31 cm. Needless to say they aren’t able to do this, at least yet.

And this is one of the curiosities that Tom raises. Is the universe set in a specific way, for a specific reason, or is it the mathematics that defines the state of the universe? This is termed by the cosmologists as the anthropic principal. That is, people are needed to define that in which they exist so perhaps, without people, this universe wouldn’t exist or at least it wouldn’t the way we know it. Further, mathematics is a human construct. So how is it continually able to predict knowledge? And how is it we can say something exists even though we can’t detect it with any of our five senses? Still, with all the good that has come from curiosity it is fortuitous that people are curious.

Tom’s book is a wonderful tour de force of current thinking in physics and cosmology. It discusses much of the progress in scientific ideas, from early principles such as conservation of energy through to the wave/particle concept of light and beyond. Often Tom includes the results of personal interviews and this adds solid credence to the work. Also, though mathematics is often raised, the book has no equations. Albeit, a good understanding and interest of physics and physical principles will allow you to get the most out of this tour.

Though I do appreciate the ability of a journalist to capture the essence of a story, there are times this book reads like a collection of headlines rather than a continuous connected prose. The subject is the same throughout, i.e. physics and cosmology, but it is difficult to grasp what, if any, overall point is being made. The book would greatly benefit with the presentation of a reason for research and analysis in this area.

The physicists and cosmologists are indeed finding matter to be strange. Tom Siegfried in his book Strange Matters, Undiscovered Ideas at the Frontiers of Space and Time will bring the reader up to speed on who is doing what to provide a better understanding of our cosmos. Tom’s journalistic skills allow very complex topics to be easily read and understood by the uninitiated. Read this book and you will realize that, though perhaps strange, the ideas being contemplated at the forefront of space and time show humans to be a gifted species with great potential.

Read more reviews and descriptions from Amazon.com

Review by Mark Mortimer

Perhaps surprisingly Einstein had a less than spectacular youth. He appeared to be more interested in reading books than developing social skills. He also had his own value system that gave greater weight to substance than imagery. From this he completed his undergraduate work with no money, no support for further education and few friends to start him on a career. Luckily one of them did find him a posting as a government patent officer. As he excelled at analyzing propositions, the work suited him. Of greater benefit was the opportunity he had to freely think about many of the questions that had been perplexing him since his early years. Through discussions with new colleagues and fortuitous circumstances in one year, 1905, he wrote his theories on special relativity, the interchangeability of matter and energy and the quantization of light. With these Einstein finally received support from the scientific community together with a doctorate and a teaching position at a university.

In as much as these theories were ground breaking postulations of their time, Einstein didn’t rest on his laurels. Much of his preceding work had been on the contemplation of light and the electromagnetic effect. Einstein’s conjectures about light were for the most part based in the nether regions of space where there was no effect from gravity. His general theory on relativity brought gravity into perspective by describing it as the bending of space and time. As Einstein was now a full member of the scientific community he instantly got support and tribulations from his colleagues. Though this was and still is the accepted method for evaluating new theories it seemed quite vicious and even somewhat personal. Nevertheless his theory prevailed with much support from a field he was not particularly good at, mathematics. In reviewing Einstein’s work mathematicians corroborated his theories and perhaps more importantly expanded them to encompass other known yet unexplained phenomena.

It was at about this time that Einstein’s fame blossomed. He went on world tours, was greeted by royalty and had the adulation usually reserved for film stars. He even saw his face depicted in stained glass at a church to which he mused, “a jew as a protestant saint?”. Aside from these existential considerations, Einstein was facing more suitable cosmological challenges. For example, if gravity is an attractive force shouldn’t the universe be contracting, eventually leading to a singularity? Einstein with the scientific community tackled this and others. Schwarzschild’s solution to Einstein’s equations led to event horizons and black holes. Mandl brought forward the idea of testing gravity by looking for the lensing of light caused by the mass of stars. These and others put Einstein’s theories to the test and continually they were found up to the task. He was due his fame.

Still Einstein continued. The jewel in the crown so to speak was the unifying theory. That is, a field theory that unified his theory of gravity with Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism. Unity would bring together the farthest reaches of the cosmos with the smallest concepts of particles in a sensible temporal frame. Much of the last thirty years of Einstein’s life was spent looking for this theory. Mathematics shone as the tool of choice as only it could successfully represent the relations of objects too small and obscure or too large and too powerful. Yet even with this Einstein met his match. As Kaku put it, Einstein was about 50 years ahead of the necessary technology and mathematics to continue making progress.

This book by Kaku is a clean concise summary of Einstein’s activities portrayed against the technical and political challenges of the day. Kaku also discusses recent experiments that have or will provide more proof or insight. The progression from Newtonian thinking of space and time to relativistic thinking admirably describes scientific progress and the rigour to which theories are subject.

In some ways though this book may make you feel like a child in a candy store. There are many referrals to experiments and mathematical properties but no substantiation. If you know the material, the reading is easy, if you don’t you need faith or must investigate elsewhere. Also, the portrayal of Einstein is one sided in that only his positive attributes seem to be mentioned. Everyone has their off days and in adding some of Einstein’s, the portrayal would have been more balanced.

All in all, Einstein’s Cosmos aptly describes Einstein as the amazing person he was who readily deserves the praise of being one of the most influential people of the millennium. As we each age and travel with our planet through space we should take some of the precious time we are granted on Earth to read books like this and perhaps realize a clearer view of where we stand and what we can accomplish.

Buy this book and others from Amazon.com

Review by Mark Mortimer

The Moon is a substantial satellite almost half the size of the planet Mars. As fortune would have it only one side of the Moon’s surface ever shows toward Earth. However the Moon is believed to be about 4.6 billion years old and thus it has had ample time to aggregate a fascinating landscape, especially as there is minimal weathering or plate tectonics. Using the typical unaided eye the Moon is seen as a large disc with varying brightness across its surface. However with binoculars or telescopes the surface jumps into bright relief and then fine shadows and patterns tell an amazing story that can be just as exciting as Mars.

The story of the Moon includes many great characters. Tycho and Copernicus are great rayed craters dominating the scene. Mare Imbrium and Mare Tranquillitatis provide a smooth, gentle supporting backdrop for smaller understudies. To see any of these in great detail wait for the Moon’s terminus to highlight their features. The terminus is where the sunlight striking the Moon’s surface fades into the shadows of space. As the light and the surface are at an oblique angle the features have strong shadows, making them stand out and enabling estimates of their height and shape. To accommodate this, the guidebook provides charts of the terminus for each day of the lunar’s 29 days cycle. Each chart is oriented in a North-South reference as seen from a small telescope thus making a perfect reference. Extensive adjoining text gives an appropriate description together with some conjectures about formation. All in all the Moon’s story is varied, gently paced and continually varying.

To compliment these charts there are further notes on the Moon relevant to the space enthusiast. Aides to observing are covered in some detail, these being binoculars and telescopes. The Moon’s presumed formation theory and geology add a nice temporal factor. Stellar events such as libations, occultations, ecliptics and eclipses round out this guide for observing the Moon.

I like the Moon Observer’s Guide. It provides an economical and extensive resource for observing Earth’s satellite. For the astronomy addict it may become quickly trivial but for an introduction it is an invaluable aid.

Buy this book and others from Amazon.com.

Review by Mark Mortimer.

The first half of the book is a reference source for how to observe. With good sense, it gives credit to the unaided eye and it extols the benefits of quickly and easily orienting yourself amongst the limitless dots and streaks in the black canopy of night. Visual aids are described. Telescope types; refractor, reflector and catadioptric, are compared. Ancillary equipment from red lights, to telescope drives to planispheres are also discussed. There are star charts (white dot on blue background) for the complete sky, that is both northern and southern hemispheres. These charts show stars up to magnitude 5 as well as the constellations and their boundaries. This half of the book also includes a section on how to locate the constellations and many of the most significant stars using the altazimuthal system, celestial coordinates, and/or from starting from other, easy to find sights such as Orion.

The second half of the book categorizes the sources of light from near Earth outwards. It starts with meteors, satellites and auroras, then to the Moon, the Sun, and through each of the planets. The final section looks at star clusters, binary stars and nebulae. There is even a brief discussion of galaxies and some exciting amateur prints of them. Rather than solely stating where to find each object, this half discusses characteristics of interest (e.g. the cusps of Venus), noteworthy events (e.g. occultations) and effects in time (e.g. variable stars). Throughout this half the author emphasizes the benefits of recording observations, such as by sketching. This is both for self-satisfaction and as a means of proving observations of an original event.

I like this book as it explains all the necessary fundamentals for sky watching. Without costing more than the price of this text, a person can occupy themselves for a long time in getting acquainted with the sights and events that occur while most everyone else is safely tucked into bed. Sometimes I did find the text a little difficult to follow especially with some of the explanations. Yet there are many prints and drawings that provide a lot of clarity. Also, there are enough inline references throughout the text to aid in following any particular topic.

In all, Practical Astronomy is a great reference for getting a person started onto the road of understanding the night sky and enjoying a pastime that keeps many night owls happily occupied.

Buy this book and others from Amazon.com

Review by Mark Mortimer

Image credit: NASA
You target NASA as being responsible for many of the problems within the space sector today. If you were given one day as NASA administrator what would you do to address the problems?

First, I would immediately initiate an independent review of all NASA centers in the context of their relevance to NASA’s new mission. Regardless of how one feels about the new Bush plan (and I have some reservations), it is the equivalent of an order to NASA from the highest office: the plan lays out what NASA is to do in coming decades, and by omission also decrees what isn’t required. Yet from the standpoint of structure and operation, the agency’s response to date has been to simply assume that one way or another, every center will be found to have some critical contribution to that new mission. That’s hard to believe; even if centers like Ames or Glenn contribute something of value to the Moon/Mars effort, it’s hard to believe a whole center is needed, along with its huge cost burden. If the center structure isn’t overhauled – which will almost certainly involve closing or consolidating one or more – it’s hard to see how the Bush plan stands a chance.

Second (and I’d probably only have time for two big things), I’d send every senior manager out into the real world – beyond the aerospace contractors, the groupies, the space media – and have them strike up conversations with ordinary people about the importance of space exploration. Much of NASA’s problem is that it’s a mutual admiration society with little connection to what those who aren’t ‘space interested’ actually think about space. I’m sure there’d be some surprises. To be fair, this problem also afflicts the alt.space sector, too.

Your book had a brief reference to Earth problems in the sense that they need to be resolved before space gets developed. In particular overpopulation and exhaustion of natural resources seem to resonate. How do you see space development advancing given these ‘Earthly’ challenges?

The first reference was to Carl Sagan’s position on human space exploration; the second, that of overpopulation and resource exhaustion, referred to Gerard O’Neill’s thinking. My own thoughts are somewhere in the middle: I think human space exploration serves a useful social purpose, yet I don’t think it’s the cure-all for humanity’s woes that some believe it to be.

There doesn’t seem to be any references to space advocacy groups outside of the United States. Is this because there are none, because they are not very vocal or because they are not germaine to the book?

Most non-U.S. space advocacy groups tend to be small; the larger ones tend to be international branches of U.S. groups like the Mars Society and Planetary Society. It’s not that they’re not important, but I felt I represented their interests in reference to the U.S. groups.

There are also very few references to other national space institutes? Is this because other countries and citizens are less interested in space?

One of my primary missions in writing this book was to deflate some of the mythology that sustained (and still sustains) the original ‘Space Age’, the theory being that only through an honest assessment of the past can one find a clear way to the future. This naturally meant focusing more on the U.S. and Soviet/Russian space programs than on the programs of other countries. I think there is another book to be written on ‘international space’, or perhaps it’s more of a long magazine article since certainly the U.S. and Russia remain the most space-interested societies on Earth (this is true even with Russia’s diminished capability). Again, there are certainly other national space programs of note and which I touch on briefly – Europe’s, Japan’s, China’s – but they’re not central to what I was trying to accomplish.

If manned space flight capability were to disappear in the next 20 years do you think it will ever reappear? If so, how?

At present, human spaceflight has little military, scientific or economic significance (except for the latter’s significance to certain aerospace contractors): from a societal standpoint, human spaceflight is an endeavor sustained almost purely on emotional terms, as a beacon of national pride, creativity and adventure. If it disappeared, it would be difficult to restart, both because of the technological challenge (look at how NASA is scrambling to figure out how to return to the Moon, something that was almost routine by 1972) and because the geopolitical rationale that produced the space race and the spaceflight technology we have today is unlikely to be replicated in the future. Thus, it’s hard to imagine a future society spending the resources and energy to develop human spaceflight unless there was some new, compelling reason.

However, I don’t think the disappearance of government-sponsored human spaceflight would necessarily mean the end of human spaceflight altogether. Within 20 years, alt.space vehicles should be robust enough to ensure that at least sub-orbital spaceflight would still be around. If government-sponsored flight went away, perhaps some of the terminated technology (and technologists) would beef up the alt.space sector sufficiently to move it from sub-orbital to orbital flight. That might not be a bad scenario, actually!

If you met a bright, energetic youth that has the aptitude for science and engineering (as in the prologue) would you encourage them to enter the space sector? If so, how? If not, where would you direct them?

If they had interest in space, I wouldn’t discourage them. But I’d encourage them first to get a job with NASA and then, quickly, to leave the agency for the burgeoning entrepreneurial sector: you have to understand the beast in order to tame it, or at least to avoid being killed by it.

I’m sure you’ve heard of the latest government call to return to the Moon and then on to Mars. Again. Any thoughts on its chances for success and on what this directive means for NASA in the short and long term?

I applaud the idea of destinations for human spaceflight, but I’m disheartened that this idea is being shoved into the same old box. The initiative seems primarily designed to reinvigorate NASA, not to reinvigorate general interest in human spaceflight. Unless someone of vision and influence can see the distinction and act on it, I’m not optimistic that the initiative will meet a fate any different than those of Bush senior or Reagan (both, you’ll recall, also announced bold Moon/Mars plans to great fanfare).

The initiative has certainly caused a lot of bustle within NASA: ‘codes’ are being formed, projects are being sketched out, etc. Meanwhile, Congress is squabbling over just the first of the budget boosts needed to make the initiative happen? and remember, this is a Bush-friendly Congress! Thus, we see again the problem with a politically driven space agenda. The best thing to come out of the initiative will probably be the retirement of the shuttle and the gradual pullout from the space station. Beyond that, at present I’d give the Moon/Mars plan a 50/50 chance of success.

I have this feeling that people are building systems that are so complex that they can’t manage them adequately whether space shuttles, 777’s or computer operating systems. Thoughts?

I don’t think complexity alone is the Achilles’ heel of any given system or device. 777s are fine machines with a great track record of functioning as advertised. I complain about my Windows OS as much as anyone, but if I step back from my irritation, it actually works quite well most of the time.

The shuttle is a disastrous machine not because of its innate complexity but because of its rube goldberg design: it’s not just complex, it’s overcomplicated? it’s a bit of this, a bit of that, all the while being sold as every cure for every problem (well, less so now, but that’s how it went originally). Worse, NASA and its shuttle contractors have known this from the beginning and yet have continued to sell the shuttle as a robust, operational vehicle. It isn’t, it never has been, and it never will be.

To me, an individual’s pursuit of life, liberty and happiness is contrary to a state project that requires effort from all taxpayers yet only benefits a few. How does space development amplify life, liberty and happiness for everyone? From reading your book I get the feeling that you disapprove of a strong central government with a lot of control. As the government gets stronger, more controlling and more centralized do you see better times or worse times for space development?

I am neither for nor against ‘big government’ as a rule. That said, I believe there are some enterprises that are absolutely the province of government, such as health care, environmental protection and education. All members of a given society deserve a minimum standard of quality where such things are concerned; it should be the responsibility of the state – or, if you like, that collective of citizens that governs and funds itself – to provide such things, and they should never be subject to the necessarily cold machinations of the market.

There are other things that can, and should, be largely removed from government control. Spaceflight is one of them, at least in part. I am obviously a fan of space exploration and space travel, but I do not consider them to be fundamental to ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’. Therefore, I see tremendous potential for the market to grab hold of certain aspects of spaceflight that are now monopolized by the government and paid for by the taxpayers: or, as you put it, which require the effort of many and benefit few.

Buy Lost in Space from Amazon.com

Interview by Mark Mortimer