What do you think?
Rate this book
Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries
Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries
A vibrant collection of essays on the cosmos from the nation's best-known astrophysicist. "One of today's best popularizers of science." —Kirkus Reviews.
Loyal readers of the monthly "Universe" essays in Natural History magazine have long recognized Neil deGrasse Tyson's talent for guiding them through the mysteries of the cosmos with stunning clarity and almost childlike enthusiasm. Here, Tyson compiles his favorite essays across a myriad of cosmic topics.
The title essay introduces readers to the physics of black holes by explaining the gory details of what would happen to your body if you fell into one. "Holy Wars" examines the needless friction between science and religion in the context of historical conflicts. "The Search for Life in the Universe" explores astral life from the frontiers of astrobiology. And "Hollywood Nights" assails the movie industry's feeble efforts to get its night skies right.
Known for his ability to blend content, accessibility, and humor, Tyson is a natural teacher who simplifies some of the most complex concepts in astrophysics while simultaneously sharing his infectious excitement about our universe.
Loyal readers of the monthly "Universe" essays in Natural History magazine have long recognized Neil deGrasse Tyson's talent for guiding them through the mysteries of the cosmos with stunning clarity and almost childlike enthusiasm. Here, Tyson compiles his favorite essays across a myriad of cosmic topics.
The title essay introduces readers to the physics of black holes by explaining the gory details of what would happen to your body if you fell into one. "Holy Wars" examines the needless friction between science and religion in the context of historical conflicts. "The Search for Life in the Universe" explores astral life from the frontiers of astrobiology. And "Hollywood Nights" assails the movie industry's feeble efforts to get its night skies right.
Known for his ability to blend content, accessibility, and humor, Tyson is a natural teacher who simplifies some of the most complex concepts in astrophysics while simultaneously sharing his infectious excitement about our universe.
384 pages, Paperback
First published November 1, 2006
About the author
Neil deGrasse Tyson
84 books284k followersNeil deGrasse Tyson was born and raised in New York City where he was educated in the public schools clear through his graduation from the Bronx High School of Science. Tyson went on to earn his BA in Physics from Harvard and his PhD in Astrophysics from Columbia.
In 2001, Tyson was appointed by President Bush to serve on a twelve-member commission that studied the Future of the U.S. Aerospace Industry. The final report was published in 2002 and contained recommendations (for Congress and for the major agencies of the government) that would promote a thriving future of transportation, space exploration, and national security.
In 2004, Tyson was once again appointed by President Bush to serve on a nine-member commission on the Implementation of the United States Space Exploration Policy, dubbed the “Moon, Mars, and Beyond” commission. This group navigated a path by which the new space vision can become a successful part of the American agenda. And in 2006, the head of NASA appointed Tyson to serve on its prestigious Advisory Council, which guides NASA through its perennial need to fit ambitious visions into restricted budgets.
In addition to dozens of professional publications, Dr. Tyson has written, and continues to write for the public. From 1995 to 2005, Tyson was a monthly essayist for Natural History magazine under the title Universe. And among Tyson’s fifteen books is his memoir The Sky is Not the Limit: Adventures of an Urban Astrophysicist; and Origins: Fourteen Billion Years of Cosmic Evolution, co-written with Donald Goldsmith. Origins is the companion book to the PBS NOVA four-part mini-series Origins, in which Tyson served as on-camera host. The program premiered in September 2004.
Two of Tyson’s other books are the playful and informative Death By Black Hole and Other Cosmic Quandaries, which was a New York Times bestseller, and The Pluto Files: The Rise and Fall of America’s Favorite Planet, chronicling his experience at the center of the controversy over Pluto’s planetary status. The PBS NOVA documentary The Pluto Files, based on the book, premiered in March 2010.
In February 2012, Tyson released his tenth book, containing every thought he has ever had on the past, present, and future of space exploration: Space Chronicles: Facing the Ultimate Frontier.
For five seasons, beginning in the fall of 2006, Tyson appeared as the on-camera host of PBS NOVA’s spinoff program NOVA ScienceNOW, which is an accessible look at the frontier of all the science that shapes the understanding of our place in the universe.
During the summer of 2009 Tyson identified a cadre of professional standup comedians to assist his effort in bringing science to commercial radio with the NSF-funded pilot program StarTalk. Now also a popular Podcast, for three years it enjoyed a limited-run Television Series on the National Geographic Channel. StarTalk combines celebrity guests with informative yet playful banter. The target audience is all those people who never thought they would, or could, like science. In its first year on television and in three successive seasons, it was nominated for a Best Informational Programming Emmy.
Tyson is the recipient of twenty-one honorary doctorates and the NASA Distinguished Public Service Medal, the highest award given by NASA to a non-government citizen. His contributions to the public appreciation of the cosmos have been recognized by the International Astronomical Union in their official naming of asteroid “13123 Tyson.” And by zoologists, with the naming of Indirani Tysoni, a native species of leaping frog in India. On the lighter side, Tyson was voted “Sexiest Astrophysicist Alive” by People Magazine in 2000.
More recently, Tyson published Astrophysics for People In A Hurry in 2017, which was a domestic and international bestseller. This adorably readable book is an introduction to all that you’ve read and heard about that’s making news in the universe—consummated, in one plac
In 2001, Tyson was appointed by President Bush to serve on a twelve-member commission that studied the Future of the U.S. Aerospace Industry. The final report was published in 2002 and contained recommendations (for Congress and for the major agencies of the government) that would promote a thriving future of transportation, space exploration, and national security.
In 2004, Tyson was once again appointed by President Bush to serve on a nine-member commission on the Implementation of the United States Space Exploration Policy, dubbed the “Moon, Mars, and Beyond” commission. This group navigated a path by which the new space vision can become a successful part of the American agenda. And in 2006, the head of NASA appointed Tyson to serve on its prestigious Advisory Council, which guides NASA through its perennial need to fit ambitious visions into restricted budgets.
In addition to dozens of professional publications, Dr. Tyson has written, and continues to write for the public. From 1995 to 2005, Tyson was a monthly essayist for Natural History magazine under the title Universe. And among Tyson’s fifteen books is his memoir The Sky is Not the Limit: Adventures of an Urban Astrophysicist; and Origins: Fourteen Billion Years of Cosmic Evolution, co-written with Donald Goldsmith. Origins is the companion book to the PBS NOVA four-part mini-series Origins, in which Tyson served as on-camera host. The program premiered in September 2004.
Two of Tyson’s other books are the playful and informative Death By Black Hole and Other Cosmic Quandaries, which was a New York Times bestseller, and The Pluto Files: The Rise and Fall of America’s Favorite Planet, chronicling his experience at the center of the controversy over Pluto’s planetary status. The PBS NOVA documentary The Pluto Files, based on the book, premiered in March 2010.
In February 2012, Tyson released his tenth book, containing every thought he has ever had on the past, present, and future of space exploration: Space Chronicles: Facing the Ultimate Frontier.
For five seasons, beginning in the fall of 2006, Tyson appeared as the on-camera host of PBS NOVA’s spinoff program NOVA ScienceNOW, which is an accessible look at the frontier of all the science that shapes the understanding of our place in the universe.
During the summer of 2009 Tyson identified a cadre of professional standup comedians to assist his effort in bringing science to commercial radio with the NSF-funded pilot program StarTalk. Now also a popular Podcast, for three years it enjoyed a limited-run Television Series on the National Geographic Channel. StarTalk combines celebrity guests with informative yet playful banter. The target audience is all those people who never thought they would, or could, like science. In its first year on television and in three successive seasons, it was nominated for a Best Informational Programming Emmy.
Tyson is the recipient of twenty-one honorary doctorates and the NASA Distinguished Public Service Medal, the highest award given by NASA to a non-government citizen. His contributions to the public appreciation of the cosmos have been recognized by the International Astronomical Union in their official naming of asteroid “13123 Tyson.” And by zoologists, with the naming of Indirani Tysoni, a native species of leaping frog in India. On the lighter side, Tyson was voted “Sexiest Astrophysicist Alive” by People Magazine in 2000.
More recently, Tyson published Astrophysics for People In A Hurry in 2017, which was a domestic and international bestseller. This adorably readable book is an introduction to all that you’ve read and heard about that’s making news in the universe—consummated, in one plac
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,535 reviews
June 8, 2014
Neil deGrasse Tyson is a force to reckon with.
But he is not Carl Sagan.
While Sagan must have smiled down kindly on your meek acknowledgement of ignorance regarding, say, black holes, Tyson will have most probably given you the stink eye or aimed a sarcastic jibe at your apathy, before proceeding to explain why black holes still remain a topic of much speculation in the community of astrophysicists worldwide.
Tyson does not pull any punches in this collection of essays while slamming the news media, who more often than not, come off as ill-informed hacks doing a shoddy job of reporting facts in the field of space science, forever (stupidly) claiming how scientists are baffled by so-and-so new developments.
Or snidely commenting on the Hollywood exercise of producing multi-million dollar sci-fi films which badly butcher the scientific aspects of such ventures by inserting factually incorrect observations in scenes and dialogues. (there's a brilliant anecdote concerning James Cameron's 'Titanic' in this regard and the Contact film gets an honorable mention for its adherence to proper science if one overlooks a minor gaffe)
Or criticizing the mad dash for extending the frontiers of space science during the Cold war years, when the spirit of scientific inquiry was sidelined in favor of a dangerous game of political one-upmanship, a kind of puerile assertion of 'our scientists are better than yours'. Or openly chastising revered names from ancient Greece like Aristotle whose inaccurate assumptions about the unchanging nature of stars and the geocentric universe helped the Catholic Church in propagating falsities for centuries with impunity. (He doesn't even spare Newton forGod's Higgs Boson's sake who, unable to satisfactorily explain the ordered behavior of the solar system despite the many often conflicting gravitational forces at work, had cited God's need to step in to correct things in his famed 'Principia')
While Sagan may have adopted a more benign, less aggressive tone in course of addressing issues of religious dogma being at loggerheads with scientific reasoning and aversion to science and mathematics among the general populace, NDT takes the approach of pure, unadulterated logic and demolishes one popular misconception after another (for e.g.:-the North Star is not the most brilliant star in the night sky or how everything that goes up doesn't come down) with a brute force which I am certain will not sit well with some sensitive readers who are easily offended.
Being born in a country whose space research organization head performs pujas and makes ritualistic offerings prior to launching a 'Mission to Mars', I can't say I fault NDT's acerbic tone or his distaste for those who are hell-bent on unifying science and religion without even realizing that finding common ground between both is akin to attempting to exceed the velocity of light.
But if NDT lacks Sagan's sage-like demeanour and his rich, authorial voice (Sagan's prose is much more refined no doubt), his excellent sense of humor almost compensates for their absence -
And occasionally there's a sop thrown in for the literary-minded (particularly the postmodernist fiction lover) -
The more frivolous aspects of the essays aside, among the astrophysics-related topics NDT centers his discussions around, the ones which were relatively new to me are the concepts of hypernovae, gamma ray bursts, dark matter and dark energy, the uncertainty surrounding the string theory and the probability of the annihilation of Earth through ill-fated, cosmic encounters with errant asteroids, the unavoidable, impending collision of our galaxy with the Andromeda galaxy which is the nearest one heading towards us at a speed of more than 100 kilometers per second.
The Andromeda Galaxy
Since this is a collection of 42 essays which were published in the 'Natural History' magazine, some repetition of concepts and names creeps in occasionally but that merely helps you refresh memories of what you just read a few pages back, not exactly a shortcoming I am keen to quibble over.
4 stars, because Tyson seems a little too bitter about artists who exercise 'artistic license' to distort certain astronomical facts in their paintings. Besides I am certain there is a lot of 5-star-worthy goodness in the rest of NDT's works left for me to discover in the future.
But he is not Carl Sagan.
While Sagan must have smiled down kindly on your meek acknowledgement of ignorance regarding, say, black holes, Tyson will have most probably given you the stink eye or aimed a sarcastic jibe at your apathy, before proceeding to explain why black holes still remain a topic of much speculation in the community of astrophysicists worldwide.
Tyson does not pull any punches in this collection of essays while slamming the news media, who more often than not, come off as ill-informed hacks doing a shoddy job of reporting facts in the field of space science, forever (stupidly) claiming how scientists are baffled by so-and-so new developments.
"Scientists cannot claim to be on the research frontier unless one thing or another baffles them. Bafflement drives discovery."
Or snidely commenting on the Hollywood exercise of producing multi-million dollar sci-fi films which badly butcher the scientific aspects of such ventures by inserting factually incorrect observations in scenes and dialogues. (there's a brilliant anecdote concerning James Cameron's 'Titanic' in this regard and the Contact film gets an honorable mention for its adherence to proper science if one overlooks a minor gaffe)
"I am glad that, in the end, the humans win. We conquer the 'Independence Day' aliens by having a Macintosh laptop computer upload a software virus to the mothership. [] The entire defense system for the alien mothership must have been powered by the same release of Apple Computer's system software as the laptop computer that delivered the virus."
Or criticizing the mad dash for extending the frontiers of space science during the Cold war years, when the spirit of scientific inquiry was sidelined in favor of a dangerous game of political one-upmanship, a kind of puerile assertion of 'our scientists are better than yours'. Or openly chastising revered names from ancient Greece like Aristotle whose inaccurate assumptions about the unchanging nature of stars and the geocentric universe helped the Catholic Church in propagating falsities for centuries with impunity. (He doesn't even spare Newton for
While Sagan may have adopted a more benign, less aggressive tone in course of addressing issues of religious dogma being at loggerheads with scientific reasoning and aversion to science and mathematics among the general populace, NDT takes the approach of pure, unadulterated logic and demolishes one popular misconception after another (for e.g.:-the North Star is not the most brilliant star in the night sky or how everything that goes up doesn't come down) with a brute force which I am certain will not sit well with some sensitive readers who are easily offended.
Being born in a country whose space research organization head performs pujas and makes ritualistic offerings prior to launching a 'Mission to Mars', I can't say I fault NDT's acerbic tone or his distaste for those who are hell-bent on unifying science and religion without even realizing that finding common ground between both is akin to attempting to exceed the velocity of light.
But if NDT lacks Sagan's sage-like demeanour and his rich, authorial voice (Sagan's prose is much more refined no doubt), his excellent sense of humor almost compensates for their absence -
"The good thing about the laws of physics is that they require no law enforcement agencies to maintain them, although I once owned a nerdy T-shirt that loudly proclaimed, "OBEY GRAVITY."
"The only people who still call hurricanes 'acts of God' are the people who write insurance forms."(and Michele Bachmann, just saying)
And occasionally there's a sop thrown in for the literary-minded (particularly the postmodernist fiction lover) -
"The physicist Murray Gell-Mann, who in 1964 proposed the existence of quarks, and who at the time thought the quark family had only three members, drew the name from a characteristically elusive line in James Joyce's Finnegans Wake: 'Three quarks for Muster Mark!'"
The more frivolous aspects of the essays aside, among the astrophysics-related topics NDT centers his discussions around, the ones which were relatively new to me are the concepts of hypernovae, gamma ray bursts, dark matter and dark energy, the uncertainty surrounding the string theory and the probability of the annihilation of Earth through ill-fated, cosmic encounters with errant asteroids, the unavoidable, impending collision of our galaxy with the Andromeda galaxy which is the nearest one heading towards us at a speed of more than 100 kilometers per second.
The Andromeda Galaxy
Since this is a collection of 42 essays which were published in the 'Natural History' magazine, some repetition of concepts and names creeps in occasionally but that merely helps you refresh memories of what you just read a few pages back, not exactly a shortcoming I am keen to quibble over.
4 stars, because Tyson seems a little too bitter about artists who exercise 'artistic license' to distort certain astronomical facts in their paintings. Besides I am certain there is a lot of 5-star-worthy goodness in the rest of NDT's works left for me to discover in the future.
April 1, 2017
This is a very fun read for all you science nerds... not only being clear and humorous but wide-ranging and careful to build up a number of those necessary building blocks of knowledge but doing it precisely in order to slam you with the good stuff later.
Like how you'd DIE IN A BLACK HOLE... :)
To belabor the obvious by the title. :)
Seriously, this book gives us a ton of great ways to die and not just by black hole. I really appreciated that. :)
I'd characterize this book as an easy to intermediate stage science book that's very far from being dull and it has a minimum of equations. I'm sure everyone has heard of thermodynamics and E=MC squared and Drake's equation, after all, but what really thrilled me about this was the truly wide array of subjects and Tyson's conversational tone.
You can tell he is still a very, very good science teacher. :)
I can almost hear him say, "Let's throw out the crap, folks, let's dive right into the good stuff." And he does, ranging from the Big Bang to the Heat Death, kinds of possible life on planets, the building blocks we need to understand science, including a great "stick" analogy for understanding the universe without computers, and he even gets into a bit of politics and religion because let's face it: it's a hot discussion item. But thankfully, it's only there as an afterthought.
I wanted science and I got science, exploring the planets, the sun, even quasars, and especially Black Holes. That's the yummy stuff, after all.
10/10 Black Holes agree! Nom nom nom nom nom.
I totally recommend this for both laymen and the intelligently curious and for anyone else who just likes a bit of the good (science) life. It really, really helps that Tyson's a great writer and clear as glass. The light passes right through it without slowing down at all! Can you believe it?
Like how you'd DIE IN A BLACK HOLE... :)
To belabor the obvious by the title. :)
Seriously, this book gives us a ton of great ways to die and not just by black hole. I really appreciated that. :)
I'd characterize this book as an easy to intermediate stage science book that's very far from being dull and it has a minimum of equations. I'm sure everyone has heard of thermodynamics and E=MC squared and Drake's equation, after all, but what really thrilled me about this was the truly wide array of subjects and Tyson's conversational tone.
You can tell he is still a very, very good science teacher. :)
I can almost hear him say, "Let's throw out the crap, folks, let's dive right into the good stuff." And he does, ranging from the Big Bang to the Heat Death, kinds of possible life on planets, the building blocks we need to understand science, including a great "stick" analogy for understanding the universe without computers, and he even gets into a bit of politics and religion because let's face it: it's a hot discussion item. But thankfully, it's only there as an afterthought.
I wanted science and I got science, exploring the planets, the sun, even quasars, and especially Black Holes. That's the yummy stuff, after all.
10/10 Black Holes agree! Nom nom nom nom nom.
I totally recommend this for both laymen and the intelligently curious and for anyone else who just likes a bit of the good (science) life. It really, really helps that Tyson's a great writer and clear as glass. The light passes right through it without slowing down at all! Can you believe it?
December 24, 2009
Within my skull, where all of those vital pieces of data surrounding science are supposed to be stored, there is instead a vast beaker-shaped void of ignorance. In high school, while we were supposed to be studying the musculature of the formaldehyde-soaked amphibians pinned ignominiously to their coffinesque metal trays, I was far more interested in studying the effects of adding fire to small green buds. During my brief time wandering the hallways of the University world, I was able to do away with my prerequisite requirement by taking an “Arts of Science” course tailor-made for those more interested in empathy than entropy and, while I did manage to get a crocodile on my report card, all I took away from that class was an abiding hatred for hippies. The long and the short of all this is that I didn’t know a quasar from a neutron or a brown dwarf from a red giant (though Red Dwarf was a magnificent television series).
As a devout lover of science fiction and hi-tech gadgetry of all sorts, this was a matter of not a little shame for me. To resolve this I decided that it was time for me to fill in some of the (immense) gaps in my education the best way I know how- via book. Yet how to avoid having my eyes glaze over the moment someone started explaining cell structures or complex wave fields? Fortunately, as it often does, my television provided a solution when Stephen Colbert took a visit to the American Museum of Natural Historys Hayden Planetarium and spoke with its Director, Neil deGrasse Tyson. Tyson, while just as geeky as you would expect from an astrophysicist, is phenomenally skilled at taking incredibly complex scientific theories and translating them into a Common English that even Stephen Colbert is able to understand. My fate was sealed. This man was the ideal author to ease myself into the brave new world of stellar science.
Death by Black Hole is a collection of essays the Tyson penned for Natural History magazine over the course of several years. Each essay addresses a different topic, running the gamut from the birth of the universe, the history of astronomical discoveries, humankind’s fixation on the red hills of Mars and the life-bringing water that may lay frozen away, all the way to the Pluto Wars (it’s amazing just how contentious Pluto’s status as planet is). Of course there’s some overlap between the chapters and some facts get repeated but, rather than bugging me, I found it to be a good refresher of what had come before that helped solidify my basic understanding of the concepts at hand. Most interesting to me, policy junkie that I am, is the closing essay in which Tyson writes about the plague of scientific ignorance sweeping the country. After almost brutally doing away with that Bible-in-textbook-clothing anachronism that is “intelligent design,” he makes great points about America’s waning prestige in scientific research and the future costs, both economic and academic, that we will have to pay due to ceding our intellectual priority to advance knowledge. I’m not much interested in sustaining American supremacy in any field, but I can always get behind an argument for strengthening education.
What I most enjoyed was the excitement that Tyson has for his field. He doesn’t get bogged down in the minutiae of atomic weights and the like, but thrills at the possibilities of quantum mechanics and takes an almost excessive amount of joy in ruminating over the possible ways that people can be killed in space from the atom-splitting nullification of crossing a black hole’s event horizon to the persistent fear of a species-leveling asteroid striking Earth. Tyson is a man possessed of a childlike sense of wonder at the mysteries of the universe that sees the current limits of our scientific understanding not as having reached the final frontiers of science but as hurdles to be vaulted over in our quest to know. His enthusiasm is quite contagious and I challenge any reader to emerge from this book without being excited about science.
As a devout lover of science fiction and hi-tech gadgetry of all sorts, this was a matter of not a little shame for me. To resolve this I decided that it was time for me to fill in some of the (immense) gaps in my education the best way I know how- via book. Yet how to avoid having my eyes glaze over the moment someone started explaining cell structures or complex wave fields? Fortunately, as it often does, my television provided a solution when Stephen Colbert took a visit to the American Museum of Natural Historys Hayden Planetarium and spoke with its Director, Neil deGrasse Tyson. Tyson, while just as geeky as you would expect from an astrophysicist, is phenomenally skilled at taking incredibly complex scientific theories and translating them into a Common English that even Stephen Colbert is able to understand. My fate was sealed. This man was the ideal author to ease myself into the brave new world of stellar science.
Death by Black Hole is a collection of essays the Tyson penned for Natural History magazine over the course of several years. Each essay addresses a different topic, running the gamut from the birth of the universe, the history of astronomical discoveries, humankind’s fixation on the red hills of Mars and the life-bringing water that may lay frozen away, all the way to the Pluto Wars (it’s amazing just how contentious Pluto’s status as planet is). Of course there’s some overlap between the chapters and some facts get repeated but, rather than bugging me, I found it to be a good refresher of what had come before that helped solidify my basic understanding of the concepts at hand. Most interesting to me, policy junkie that I am, is the closing essay in which Tyson writes about the plague of scientific ignorance sweeping the country. After almost brutally doing away with that Bible-in-textbook-clothing anachronism that is “intelligent design,” he makes great points about America’s waning prestige in scientific research and the future costs, both economic and academic, that we will have to pay due to ceding our intellectual priority to advance knowledge. I’m not much interested in sustaining American supremacy in any field, but I can always get behind an argument for strengthening education.
What I most enjoyed was the excitement that Tyson has for his field. He doesn’t get bogged down in the minutiae of atomic weights and the like, but thrills at the possibilities of quantum mechanics and takes an almost excessive amount of joy in ruminating over the possible ways that people can be killed in space from the atom-splitting nullification of crossing a black hole’s event horizon to the persistent fear of a species-leveling asteroid striking Earth. Tyson is a man possessed of a childlike sense of wonder at the mysteries of the universe that sees the current limits of our scientific understanding not as having reached the final frontiers of science but as hurdles to be vaulted over in our quest to know. His enthusiasm is quite contagious and I challenge any reader to emerge from this book without being excited about science.
April 23, 2009
I have often lamented the passing of my favorite popular scientist, Carl Sagan, by talking about how necessary he is right now. We are at a point in our history where scientific illiteracy is growing, where people are not only ignorant of how science works, but are proud of their ignorance. What we need is someone who can reach the majority of Americans who are not especially scientifically literate - the people whose automatic reaction to science is to think, "That's just too hard for me to deal with."
Enter Neil deGrasse Tyson, an astrophysicist and the director of the Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. He's appeared on countless television programs, including The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, to talk about the current state of astronomy and astrophysics. He's an engaging and entertaining man, who claims that Pluto was "asking for" its demotion, who seems to take perverse pleasure in describing all the terrible ways the universe could take us out. He knows that we're in a precarious position, here on Earth, and he revels in it rather than worrying about it.
Whereas Sagan seemed to come from the point of view that the universe was a place of infinite wonder, where one could look anywhere and be awed and humbled, Tyson's attitude is more of the universe as an infinite theme park - a place where you could see your electrons stripped from your body, watch gas clouds larger than our own solar system collide and ignite, or see planets crumple under cosmic bombardment. Tyson's universe is an adventure, as big as it gets.
This book is a collection of essays that Tyson wrote for Natural History magazine over a ten year period, on a variety of subjects related to science and scientific inquiry. In many ways, it's similar to every other pop science book out there - and there are so very many of them - but it is his perspective and his voice that makes this one stand out from the crowd.
He's grouped his essays into seven sections, on topics ranging from the difficulties inherent in actually knowing anything about the universe to the understanding of how life went from little mindless bacteria to we clever Homo sapiens to the intersection of science and religion. Most of it is accessible to the average non-scientist, though he does get a little technical at points. But he understands that, and he tries to compensate for for the fact that, by and large, the public is intimidated by "real science." In the essay entitled, "Over the Rainbow," he discusses this particular challenge by using spectroscopy as an example.
In spectroscopy, astrophysicists look at the spectrum of a star, hunting for telltale dark lines that indicate the physical properties of stars. It's like looking at a rainbow with bits blackened out of it, as though the CIA had somehow gotten to it first. Those black lines contain all the vital information about the star's composition and, more importantly, speed. Very little can be gleaned by just looking at the star, as it turns out. He notes five levels of abstraction, starting from the star itself:
Level 0: A star
Level 1: Picture of a star
Level 2: Light from the picture of a star
Level 3: Spectrum from the light from the picture of a star.
Level 4: Patterns of lines lacing the spectrum from the light from the picture of a star.
Level 5: Shifts in the patterns of lines in the spectrum from the light from the picture of a star.
These descending levels of abstraction can apply to any branch of science, not just astrophysics. The challenge, as he notes, is getting people past level 1, which is easy to understand but is not the level at which true science is done. It is up to educators, he says, to help make people comfortable with looking at real science, and not just pretty pictures.
Indeed, there are several sections of the book dedicated to the intersection between science and the public. He talks about how easily we are baffled by numbers (why are below-ground floors not labeled -1, -2, -3 etc?) and how casually we disregard actual scientific facts. He brings up some of his favorite moments in bad movie science, and how he single-handedly saved Titanic from ignominious astronomical shame. At least, on its DVD re-release. He addresses the historically shifting centers of science in human history, how things like NASA are truly a global endeavor. Without the discoveries made through history by people all over the planet - from England to Greece to Baghdad - there would be no NASA, nor any science that we recognize. And to assume that the United States will always be the center of scientific discovery is to willfully ignore history.
And, of course, there's a section dedicated to the conflict between religion and science, a never-ending battle that has existed since science began. Tyson believes that there can be no common ground between the two - science relies on facts, religion relies on faith. This is not to say that one is better than the other, any more than, say, a hammer is better than a screwdriver. It's just that you can't use them interchangeably. And he points out that becoming a scientist doesn't require you to give up your faith. There have been, and still are, countless scientists who are believers in the Divine. It's just that most of them know enough not to confuse science and spirituality.
The place where they meet, historically, is on the boundary of ignorance. Isaac Newton, having figured out gravity, couldn't quite work out how you could have a multiple-body system like our solar system without the whole thing falling into chaos. His conclusion - God must, from time to time, step in to keep things on the right path. Having done that, Newton went on to do other things, and it wasn't until the next century that Pierre-Simon laPlace decided that he wasn't satisfied with Newton's "Insert God Here" argument, and did the math for himself.
In other words, God is a marker on the boundaries of ignorance, and the best of us are tempted to let Him answer the questions that we can't. To do so, however, impedes the path of science and stops progress in its tracks. What if Newton had said, "No, I'm going to figure this damn thing out." Would we be a century ahead in our technology by now? Maybe, maybe not. What if the Catholic Church had listened when Galileo said, "The Bible tells you how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go." Might more progress have been made? So many great thinkers have come up to the boundaries of their knowledge and, humbled by what they do not know, chose to allow The God of the Gaps reassure them.
But that's the whole point of science, and it's what this book, and others like it, are trying to instill in people. The unknown is not horrible, it is not terrifying, and it's not a place to just stop. It's a place of awe and wonder and bafflement and opportunity. To say, "I don't understand it - it must be God" is short-changing ourselves and our heirs out of even greater knowledge of the universe.
Enter Neil deGrasse Tyson, an astrophysicist and the director of the Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. He's appeared on countless television programs, including The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, to talk about the current state of astronomy and astrophysics. He's an engaging and entertaining man, who claims that Pluto was "asking for" its demotion, who seems to take perverse pleasure in describing all the terrible ways the universe could take us out. He knows that we're in a precarious position, here on Earth, and he revels in it rather than worrying about it.
Whereas Sagan seemed to come from the point of view that the universe was a place of infinite wonder, where one could look anywhere and be awed and humbled, Tyson's attitude is more of the universe as an infinite theme park - a place where you could see your electrons stripped from your body, watch gas clouds larger than our own solar system collide and ignite, or see planets crumple under cosmic bombardment. Tyson's universe is an adventure, as big as it gets.
This book is a collection of essays that Tyson wrote for Natural History magazine over a ten year period, on a variety of subjects related to science and scientific inquiry. In many ways, it's similar to every other pop science book out there - and there are so very many of them - but it is his perspective and his voice that makes this one stand out from the crowd.
He's grouped his essays into seven sections, on topics ranging from the difficulties inherent in actually knowing anything about the universe to the understanding of how life went from little mindless bacteria to we clever Homo sapiens to the intersection of science and religion. Most of it is accessible to the average non-scientist, though he does get a little technical at points. But he understands that, and he tries to compensate for for the fact that, by and large, the public is intimidated by "real science." In the essay entitled, "Over the Rainbow," he discusses this particular challenge by using spectroscopy as an example.
In spectroscopy, astrophysicists look at the spectrum of a star, hunting for telltale dark lines that indicate the physical properties of stars. It's like looking at a rainbow with bits blackened out of it, as though the CIA had somehow gotten to it first. Those black lines contain all the vital information about the star's composition and, more importantly, speed. Very little can be gleaned by just looking at the star, as it turns out. He notes five levels of abstraction, starting from the star itself:
Level 0: A star
Level 1: Picture of a star
Level 2: Light from the picture of a star
Level 3: Spectrum from the light from the picture of a star.
Level 4: Patterns of lines lacing the spectrum from the light from the picture of a star.
Level 5: Shifts in the patterns of lines in the spectrum from the light from the picture of a star.
These descending levels of abstraction can apply to any branch of science, not just astrophysics. The challenge, as he notes, is getting people past level 1, which is easy to understand but is not the level at which true science is done. It is up to educators, he says, to help make people comfortable with looking at real science, and not just pretty pictures.
Indeed, there are several sections of the book dedicated to the intersection between science and the public. He talks about how easily we are baffled by numbers (why are below-ground floors not labeled -1, -2, -3 etc?) and how casually we disregard actual scientific facts. He brings up some of his favorite moments in bad movie science, and how he single-handedly saved Titanic from ignominious astronomical shame. At least, on its DVD re-release. He addresses the historically shifting centers of science in human history, how things like NASA are truly a global endeavor. Without the discoveries made through history by people all over the planet - from England to Greece to Baghdad - there would be no NASA, nor any science that we recognize. And to assume that the United States will always be the center of scientific discovery is to willfully ignore history.
And, of course, there's a section dedicated to the conflict between religion and science, a never-ending battle that has existed since science began. Tyson believes that there can be no common ground between the two - science relies on facts, religion relies on faith. This is not to say that one is better than the other, any more than, say, a hammer is better than a screwdriver. It's just that you can't use them interchangeably. And he points out that becoming a scientist doesn't require you to give up your faith. There have been, and still are, countless scientists who are believers in the Divine. It's just that most of them know enough not to confuse science and spirituality.
The place where they meet, historically, is on the boundary of ignorance. Isaac Newton, having figured out gravity, couldn't quite work out how you could have a multiple-body system like our solar system without the whole thing falling into chaos. His conclusion - God must, from time to time, step in to keep things on the right path. Having done that, Newton went on to do other things, and it wasn't until the next century that Pierre-Simon laPlace decided that he wasn't satisfied with Newton's "Insert God Here" argument, and did the math for himself.
In other words, God is a marker on the boundaries of ignorance, and the best of us are tempted to let Him answer the questions that we can't. To do so, however, impedes the path of science and stops progress in its tracks. What if Newton had said, "No, I'm going to figure this damn thing out." Would we be a century ahead in our technology by now? Maybe, maybe not. What if the Catholic Church had listened when Galileo said, "The Bible tells you how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go." Might more progress have been made? So many great thinkers have come up to the boundaries of their knowledge and, humbled by what they do not know, chose to allow The God of the Gaps reassure them.
But that's the whole point of science, and it's what this book, and others like it, are trying to instill in people. The unknown is not horrible, it is not terrifying, and it's not a place to just stop. It's a place of awe and wonder and bafflement and opportunity. To say, "I don't understand it - it must be God" is short-changing ourselves and our heirs out of even greater knowledge of the universe.
October 15, 2007
I have one last section to go (Religion and Science), but my main points won't be affected by it.
Death By Black Hole provides, especially in the first couple of sections, a really good outline of various problems that astrophysicists are confronted with, and it definitely made me think of the scientific process in a new way. So that was pretty cool. But on the whole, my reaction was rather meh - kind of disappointing when the book really isn't bad.
My main complaint about the book isn't actually the book's fault. It's just way below my level, and I found myself frequently bored. I think the best audience for the book is someone who's never had an astronomy class, and is maybe familiar with basic physics and chemistry. I would have enjoyed it a lot more if I read it in high school. I did learn a handful of new things, and sometimes Tyson's explanations helped some points I was fuzzy on click into place, but on the whole, I would have preferred the book to be much more detailed.
My second problem is that, as Tyson says in the preface, the book is composed of various essays that he wrote for a magazine over the years, and that they were only slightly edited for continuity when he was preparing the book. Big mistake. While this divided the book into bite-sized, easy to process pieces, it also made it a helluva lot repetitive. Several phenomena were explained two, or even three times throughout the book. It should really have been edited a lot more aggressively.
But on the whole, I think this is a really good pick for a layperson who doesn't know much about astronomy and isn't interested in involved explanations of the physical and chemical side of things. Neil deGrasse Tyson is one eloquent guy, and writes with an infectious passion for his subject.
Death By Black Hole provides, especially in the first couple of sections, a really good outline of various problems that astrophysicists are confronted with, and it definitely made me think of the scientific process in a new way. So that was pretty cool. But on the whole, my reaction was rather meh - kind of disappointing when the book really isn't bad.
My main complaint about the book isn't actually the book's fault. It's just way below my level, and I found myself frequently bored. I think the best audience for the book is someone who's never had an astronomy class, and is maybe familiar with basic physics and chemistry. I would have enjoyed it a lot more if I read it in high school. I did learn a handful of new things, and sometimes Tyson's explanations helped some points I was fuzzy on click into place, but on the whole, I would have preferred the book to be much more detailed.
My second problem is that, as Tyson says in the preface, the book is composed of various essays that he wrote for a magazine over the years, and that they were only slightly edited for continuity when he was preparing the book. Big mistake. While this divided the book into bite-sized, easy to process pieces, it also made it a helluva lot repetitive. Several phenomena were explained two, or even three times throughout the book. It should really have been edited a lot more aggressively.
But on the whole, I think this is a really good pick for a layperson who doesn't know much about astronomy and isn't interested in involved explanations of the physical and chemical side of things. Neil deGrasse Tyson is one eloquent guy, and writes with an infectious passion for his subject.
February 13, 2013
I don't think I can properly explain how much I love this book, but I'll try.
Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries is a collection of essays Tyson wrote for Natural History, a magazine dedicated to -- you guessed it -- natural history (basically, science) between 1995-2005.
What I like about it:
- Tyson writes in a way that's easily accessible for anyone even without a science background. His analogies are easy to understand and they're fun. Like, "Oh, Neil deGrasse Tyson, you." Also, he tries to explain complex terms or theories so that you can finish the book and be a pseudo-astrophysicist. Now you can go to dinner parties and impress people with your knowledge about quarks and black holes and radio waves.
- Tyson's writing is jovial and light-hearted. He frequently cracks jokes to lighten the mood -- you don't want to be bored. (Of course, I am a huge physics nerd and he could drone on and on about string theory and it could never bore me.) At one point, he jokes about red shirts. Red shirts, people! This guy's a winner.
- Tyson takes the time to highlight two ways science (broadly) and astro-/physics (specifically) relate to both theology and culture. The Science and Culture section of the book was interesting, because what he describes is true: there is a misunderstanding between what scientists are doing and what the public thinks the scientists are doing. His little asides (rants) are fun, too.
- This was a very informative book for just being a collection of 5-10 page essays. If you're new to astrophysics, the universe and particles, this stuff is like gold -- I don't think I've seen/heard any of the phenomena explained in a clearer way. If you're not new to any of this, then you probably shouldn't be reading this because you've probably already read it. Unless you really like it.
Issues for some people, but weren't issues for me:
- I understand that some people may go, "Ugh, why does everything that has to do with science bring up religion and God!" Tyson does dedicate a whole section of the book to (omg) 3 essays dealing with religion's place in science. He does so tactfully and tastefully. I'm not a religious person, but I don't think he would have offended anyone. And besides, religion and science have been at each others' throats since the dawn of both. If a popular astrophysicist didn't bring it up, someone would have asked why he didn't bring it up.
- There's some repetition going on because, if you've read the preface and my review you'll know, this is a collection of essays from a magazine. There's bound to be some repetition because non-sciencey readers need to be reminded that Planck is considered the father of quantum mechanics and that Einstein's theory of relativity is a furthering of Newton's theory of gravity. Honestly, the repetition isn't enough where you would roll your eyes and mutter, "Redundant."
- Some people may not be okay with Tyson's little rants. In one part he complains about the scientific ignorance going on in Hollywood skylines. Some readers may just want him to stop complaining and shut up already, but he has a right to his discontent. When you're a professional in your field, things that are obviously wrong annoy you more than those that don't belong to your field. You should see how irritated my family gets when I point out the inconsistencies movies have in regards to language and sociolinguistic situations. His annoyance is justified.
Basically, what this all boils down to is this:
How can you not like a man who dresses in a waistcoat with suns and stars on it?
How can you not like a man whose reaction to Newton became a meme?
Seriously, though, this book is awesome.
Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries is a collection of essays Tyson wrote for Natural History, a magazine dedicated to -- you guessed it -- natural history (basically, science) between 1995-2005.
What I like about it:
- Tyson writes in a way that's easily accessible for anyone even without a science background. His analogies are easy to understand and they're fun. Like, "Oh, Neil deGrasse Tyson, you." Also, he tries to explain complex terms or theories so that you can finish the book and be a pseudo-astrophysicist. Now you can go to dinner parties and impress people with your knowledge about quarks and black holes and radio waves.
- Tyson's writing is jovial and light-hearted. He frequently cracks jokes to lighten the mood -- you don't want to be bored. (Of course, I am a huge physics nerd and he could drone on and on about string theory and it could never bore me.) At one point, he jokes about red shirts. Red shirts, people! This guy's a winner.
- Tyson takes the time to highlight two ways science (broadly) and astro-/physics (specifically) relate to both theology and culture. The Science and Culture section of the book was interesting, because what he describes is true: there is a misunderstanding between what scientists are doing and what the public thinks the scientists are doing. His little asides (rants) are fun, too.
- This was a very informative book for just being a collection of 5-10 page essays. If you're new to astrophysics, the universe and particles, this stuff is like gold -- I don't think I've seen/heard any of the phenomena explained in a clearer way. If you're not new to any of this, then you probably shouldn't be reading this because you've probably already read it. Unless you really like it.
Issues for some people, but weren't issues for me:
- I understand that some people may go, "Ugh, why does everything that has to do with science bring up religion and God!" Tyson does dedicate a whole section of the book to (omg) 3 essays dealing with religion's place in science. He does so tactfully and tastefully. I'm not a religious person, but I don't think he would have offended anyone. And besides, religion and science have been at each others' throats since the dawn of both. If a popular astrophysicist didn't bring it up, someone would have asked why he didn't bring it up.
- There's some repetition going on because, if you've read the preface and my review you'll know, this is a collection of essays from a magazine. There's bound to be some repetition because non-sciencey readers need to be reminded that Planck is considered the father of quantum mechanics and that Einstein's theory of relativity is a furthering of Newton's theory of gravity. Honestly, the repetition isn't enough where you would roll your eyes and mutter, "Redundant."
- Some people may not be okay with Tyson's little rants. In one part he complains about the scientific ignorance going on in Hollywood skylines. Some readers may just want him to stop complaining and shut up already, but he has a right to his discontent. When you're a professional in your field, things that are obviously wrong annoy you more than those that don't belong to your field. You should see how irritated my family gets when I point out the inconsistencies movies have in regards to language and sociolinguistic situations. His annoyance is justified.
Basically, what this all boils down to is this:
How can you not like a man who dresses in a waistcoat with suns and stars on it?
How can you not like a man whose reaction to Newton became a meme?
Seriously, though, this book is awesome.
January 26, 2010
As a scientist, at first I was rather bored by this book. I was not learning anything new, and not gaining new insights into astronomy.
But, as I read further, it just hit me--this book is tremendously entertaining! If you are a layman, and looking for a unique viewpoint, you could do a lot worse than this book. And, believe it or not, you will be entertained!
In addition, Tyson puts several aspects of astronomy and astrophysics into a unique perspective. He describes all the ways that the universe is trying to kill us--storms, viruses, meteors, comets, climate change, volcanoes, and so on. But many of these lethal phenomena could be responsible for life existing on Earth, in the first place!
I really did appreciate the arguments put forward against the idea of "Intelligent Design." Just because some areas in cosmology are not understood, does not mean that one is required to invoke God as a cause. Science always works on the frontier of knowledge, and if we were always to state that God is responsible for things we do not yet understand, then we would be working on the frontier of ignorance. Tyson does a much better job than I can, in explaining this concept. Highly recommended!
But, as I read further, it just hit me--this book is tremendously entertaining! If you are a layman, and looking for a unique viewpoint, you could do a lot worse than this book. And, believe it or not, you will be entertained!
In addition, Tyson puts several aspects of astronomy and astrophysics into a unique perspective. He describes all the ways that the universe is trying to kill us--storms, viruses, meteors, comets, climate change, volcanoes, and so on. But many of these lethal phenomena could be responsible for life existing on Earth, in the first place!
I really did appreciate the arguments put forward against the idea of "Intelligent Design." Just because some areas in cosmology are not understood, does not mean that one is required to invoke God as a cause. Science always works on the frontier of knowledge, and if we were always to state that God is responsible for things we do not yet understand, then we would be working on the frontier of ignorance. Tyson does a much better job than I can, in explaining this concept. Highly recommended!
June 26, 2020
The best collection of cosmology and astronomy essays I've read so far.
I've read the Serbo-Croatian translation of this book / Smrt u crnoj rupi: i druge kosmičke nevolje autor Nil de Gras Tajson / Milan Perić McMillan / 384 pages / 103,295 words.
Excellent translation.
I've read the Serbo-Croatian translation of this book / Smrt u crnoj rupi: i druge kosmičke nevolje autor Nil de Gras Tajson / Milan Perić McMillan / 384 pages / 103,295 words.
Excellent translation.
August 4, 2013
Neil is without doubt one of the greatest scientific communicators alive. He is erudite and hilarious with no apparent effort and can always bring the 'wow'.
I enjoy his podcast and have probably watched near all videos on youtube that feature him. This is the first time that I have tried his written work and I am very pleased with the results.
This work is a collection of editorial pieces that Neil writes for a periodical. They are intended to be short, punchy scientific stories and not form an ongoing dialogue.
In this respect Neil did a brilliant job. I dipped in and out of this book over the last couple of weeks and it was simple to pick up again after each break. I read it while doing experiments in the lab, and I read it while on the toilet.
What let the collection down (just the tiniest smidgen) was that some material was covered twice. Fine for an ongoing column and understandable for a collection, but still, a little work could have been taken to cull and back reference sections.
Don't get me wrong, I adored this book. And anyone who has not discovered love for Neil needs to read it immediately. You'll definitely connect with him if you are sceptical, scientific or just a spotter of bullshit.
This book left me wanting more. I want some long form stories, woven into a larger narrative. I have 'The Pluto Files' on my shelf. Maybe it won't be long before I open it.
I enjoy his podcast and have probably watched near all videos on youtube that feature him. This is the first time that I have tried his written work and I am very pleased with the results.
This work is a collection of editorial pieces that Neil writes for a periodical. They are intended to be short, punchy scientific stories and not form an ongoing dialogue.
In this respect Neil did a brilliant job. I dipped in and out of this book over the last couple of weeks and it was simple to pick up again after each break. I read it while doing experiments in the lab, and I read it while on the toilet.
What let the collection down (just the tiniest smidgen) was that some material was covered twice. Fine for an ongoing column and understandable for a collection, but still, a little work could have been taken to cull and back reference sections.
Don't get me wrong, I adored this book. And anyone who has not discovered love for Neil needs to read it immediately. You'll definitely connect with him if you are sceptical, scientific or just a spotter of bullshit.
This book left me wanting more. I want some long form stories, woven into a larger narrative. I have 'The Pluto Files' on my shelf. Maybe it won't be long before I open it.
November 19, 2019
هذا الكتاب الرائع هو عبارة عن مجموعة من المقالات المطولة التي كتبها نيل تايسون خلال الفترة بين ١٩٩٥ و٢٠٠٥. وعلى عكس أحد الكتب المشابهة التي جمع فيها ستيفن هوكنج مقالاته فإن التكرار في المواضيع هنا شبه معدوم، فكل منها تتحدث عن موضوع مختلف.
لا أعلم حقًا ما أقول في روعة وجمال هذا الكتاب، هل اخترت يا نيل تايسون أجمل وألذ المواضيع العلمية لتعرضها لنا؟ أم أن كل كل تلمسه يصبح جميلًا هكذا؟ إن طريقة تقديم تايسون للمواضيع العلمية تجعله أحد أفضل العلماء لل��واصل مع العامة.
في كتابه الشهير، تاريخ موجز للزمان، طرح هوكنج سؤالًا حول من ينفخ النار في المعادلات الرياضية ويجعلها حية على أرض الواقع، ربما في إشارة منه لله، ولكني هنا سأطرح سؤالًا مختلفًا وهو ما الذي ينفخ النار في العلم؟ وإجابتي هي، إنهم العلماء أمثال تايسون الذين يجعلون العلم مثرًا جدًا ومشوقًا فتكاد تحس أنك تقرأ إحدى الروايات الكلاسيكية الخالدة، بل أفضل من ذلك. اعترف بأني أدين لتايسون بإيقاظ وتجديد حبي وعشقي للفيزياء وذلك عن طريق تقديمه لسلسلة كوسموس (الكون) الرائعة جدًا وذلك قبل سنتين. هل شاهدت هذه السلسلة العلمية؟ لا تفوت الفرصة فهي من أفضل الوثائقيات تقييمًا والمرئيات فيها بجودة عالية جدًا تنافس وتفوق أفلام هوليوود.
هذا الكتاب رائع جدًا، وهو يدفعني لقراءة كل كتب تايسون المتوفرة بصيغة مسموعة، إنه مليء بالعبارات المثيرة الجاهزة للاقتباس وكذلك النكات الظريفة التي تجعلك تنفجر من الضحك بين حين وآخر. إن صوت الشخص الذي يقرأ الكتاب مشابه جدًا لتايسون لدرجة أني حسبته هو الذي يقرؤه في البداية، خاصة وأنه يستخدم نفس أسلوبه في قراءة الكلمات وبث الروح فيها.
مواضيع الكتاب مشوقة جدًا، فمنذ البداية يطرح تايسون تاريخ العلم وظاهرة إعلان العلماء وصولنا لمنتهاه وأن كل ما يمكن معرفته قد تم معرفته وأن كل ما هناك ليس سوى تعديلات بسيطة هنا وهناك، قبل أن تحدث ثورة علمية تغير شكل العلم بالكامل. وبعد ذلك يذكر المواضيع والألغاز العلمية التي لم يتم حلها للآن ويشير إلى أننا في صدد ثورة علمية جديدة.
بعد ذلك يتطرق لموضوع طبيعة العلم، والتحديات التي تواجهنا في الحصول على المعرفة. يتطرق تايسون هنا لموضوع الحواس وحدودها وكيفية تخطي وكسر هذه الحدود، والمواضيع ما بعد الحسية التي تحاول إضفاء صبغة علمية على ذاتها مثل الباراسايكولوجي ومعرفة المستقبل، وكيفية التحقق من هذه الإدعاءات بالطرق العلمية. وثم يتحدث عن الثوابت والقوانين الكونية وهل هي حقًا ثابتة وموجودة بنفس الطريقة في الكون كله؟
حقيقةً المواضيع التي يتطرق لها الكتاب كثيرةً جدًا ورائعة، بعضها مررت بها سابقًا ولكن طريقة تقديم تايسون لها تجعلك تنظر لنفس الموضوع من زاوية أخرى وهذا ما يجعل فهمك له أكثر عمقًا ويرسخ المعلومة بشكل قوي من خلال استخدام أمثة سهلة التذكر. سيجعلك هذا الكتاب متواضعًا ويحطم غرورك البشري، إن وجد، فهو يبين أننا لسنا مخلوقات مميزة بالصورة التي يعتقدها الغالبية، مثلًا إن أجسامنا لا تتكون من عناصر نادرة أو غريبة، بل تتكون من أكثر العناصر انتشارًا في الكون.
من الأسئلة التي يطرحها الكتاب: إذا كان كل ما لديك هو عقلك وعصا خشبية، فما الذي يمكنك اكتشافه عن الكون باستخدام هذه الأدوات فقط؟ لماذا تتجه عقارب الساعة بهذا الاتجاه بدلًا من الاتجاه العكسي؟ لماذا يستغرق الضوء الخارج من سطح الشمس لنا ثمان دقائق فقط، بينما يستغرق الضوء الخارج من مركز الشمس أكثر من مليون سنة في المتوسط للوصول لسطح الشمس بالرغم من أن المسافة أقصر بكثير؟ كيف تم اكتشاف الكواكب التي تقع بعد زحل؟ ولماذا لا يعتبر العلماء أن بلوتو كوكب؟ هل يمكن أن توجد حياة من دون وجود نجم قريب من الكوكب التي تعيش فيه؟ وما هي مصادر الطاقة في الكون غير النجوم؟ كيف يمكن للعلماء دراسة الكون، خاصة وأنه كبير جدًا ولا يمكن وضعه في المختبر؟ ما هي النوافذ التي نمتلكها والتي تسمح لنا باكتشاف الكون؟ ما هو لون الكون؟ وما هي أكثر حالات المادة انتشارًا فيه؟ كيف نشأ الكون وتطور وما هي دورة حياة النجوم؟ كيف يعمل جهاز الميكرويف وما هي الاستخدامات الأخرى لهذه الموجات؟ ما هي شروط وجود الحياة وما هي أهم الفرضيات حول ظهور الحياة على الأرض؟ وهل هناك إمكانية لوجود أشكال مختلفة للحياة وأين هي أبرز الأماكن التي قد تتواجد فيها؟ ما هي أبرز الأفلام التي توجد بها أخطاء علمية وما هي قصتك مع فلم التايتانك؟
هذه الأسئلة الكثير لا تغطي حتى ربع الكتاب، فكما هو واضح فإنني لم أذكر حتى الموضوع الذي هو عنوان الكتاب، الثقوب السوداء، وكما ذكرت فإن الروعة هنا ليست فقط في جمال الموضوع، بل في طريقة التقديم الساحرة. هذا الكتاب يستحق القراءة وقد أثبت تايسون لي أنه مقدم ممتاز للعلم، سواء عن طريق الكلام أو الكتابة. ستكون لي بالتأكيد جولات جديدة مع تايسون في بقية كتبه وأنصح بشدة بقراءة هذ الكتاب الذي استحق الخمس نجوم كاملة.
لا أعلم حقًا ما أقول في روعة وجمال هذا الكتاب، هل اخترت يا نيل تايسون أجمل وألذ المواضيع العلمية لتعرضها لنا؟ أم أن كل كل تلمسه يصبح جميلًا هكذا؟ إن طريقة تقديم تايسون للمواضيع العلمية تجعله أحد أفضل العلماء لل��واصل مع العامة.
في كتابه الشهير، تاريخ موجز للزمان، طرح هوكنج سؤالًا حول من ينفخ النار في المعادلات الرياضية ويجعلها حية على أرض الواقع، ربما في إشارة منه لله، ولكني هنا سأطرح سؤالًا مختلفًا وهو ما الذي ينفخ النار في العلم؟ وإجابتي هي، إنهم العلماء أمثال تايسون الذين يجعلون العلم مثرًا جدًا ومشوقًا فتكاد تحس أنك تقرأ إحدى الروايات الكلاسيكية الخالدة، بل أفضل من ذلك. اعترف بأني أدين لتايسون بإيقاظ وتجديد حبي وعشقي للفيزياء وذلك عن طريق تقديمه لسلسلة كوسموس (الكون) الرائعة جدًا وذلك قبل سنتين. هل شاهدت هذه السلسلة العلمية؟ لا تفوت الفرصة فهي من أفضل الوثائقيات تقييمًا والمرئيات فيها بجودة عالية جدًا تنافس وتفوق أفلام هوليوود.
هذا الكتاب رائع جدًا، وهو يدفعني لقراءة كل كتب تايسون المتوفرة بصيغة مسموعة، إنه مليء بالعبارات المثيرة الجاهزة للاقتباس وكذلك النكات الظريفة التي تجعلك تنفجر من الضحك بين حين وآخر. إن صوت الشخص الذي يقرأ الكتاب مشابه جدًا لتايسون لدرجة أني حسبته هو الذي يقرؤه في البداية، خاصة وأنه يستخدم نفس أسلوبه في قراءة الكلمات وبث الروح فيها.
مواضيع الكتاب مشوقة جدًا، فمنذ البداية يطرح تايسون تاريخ العلم وظاهرة إعلان العلماء وصولنا لمنتهاه وأن كل ما يمكن معرفته قد تم معرفته وأن كل ما هناك ليس سوى تعديلات بسيطة هنا وهناك، قبل أن تحدث ثورة علمية تغير شكل العلم بالكامل. وبعد ذلك يذكر المواضيع والألغاز العلمية التي لم يتم حلها للآن ويشير إلى أننا في صدد ثورة علمية جديدة.
بعد ذلك يتطرق لموضوع طبيعة العلم، والتحديات التي تواجهنا في الحصول على المعرفة. يتطرق تايسون هنا لموضوع الحواس وحدودها وكيفية تخطي وكسر هذه الحدود، والمواضيع ما بعد الحسية التي تحاول إضفاء صبغة علمية على ذاتها مثل الباراسايكولوجي ومعرفة المستقبل، وكيفية التحقق من هذه الإدعاءات بالطرق العلمية. وثم يتحدث عن الثوابت والقوانين الكونية وهل هي حقًا ثابتة وموجودة بنفس الطريقة في الكون كله؟
حقيقةً المواضيع التي يتطرق لها الكتاب كثيرةً جدًا ورائعة، بعضها مررت بها سابقًا ولكن طريقة تقديم تايسون لها تجعلك تنظر لنفس الموضوع من زاوية أخرى وهذا ما يجعل فهمك له أكثر عمقًا ويرسخ المعلومة بشكل قوي من خلال استخدام أمثة سهلة التذكر. سيجعلك هذا الكتاب متواضعًا ويحطم غرورك البشري، إن وجد، فهو يبين أننا لسنا مخلوقات مميزة بالصورة التي يعتقدها الغالبية، مثلًا إن أجسامنا لا تتكون من عناصر نادرة أو غريبة، بل تتكون من أكثر العناصر انتشارًا في الكون.
من الأسئلة التي يطرحها الكتاب: إذا كان كل ما لديك هو عقلك وعصا خشبية، فما الذي يمكنك اكتشافه عن الكون باستخدام هذه الأدوات فقط؟ لماذا تتجه عقارب الساعة بهذا الاتجاه بدلًا من الاتجاه العكسي؟ لماذا يستغرق الضوء الخارج من سطح الشمس لنا ثمان دقائق فقط، بينما يستغرق الضوء الخارج من مركز الشمس أكثر من مليون سنة في المتوسط للوصول لسطح الشمس بالرغم من أن المسافة أقصر بكثير؟ كيف تم اكتشاف الكواكب التي تقع بعد زحل؟ ولماذا لا يعتبر العلماء أن بلوتو كوكب؟ هل يمكن أن توجد حياة من دون وجود نجم قريب من الكوكب التي تعيش فيه؟ وما هي مصادر الطاقة في الكون غير النجوم؟ كيف يمكن للعلماء دراسة الكون، خاصة وأنه كبير جدًا ولا يمكن وضعه في المختبر؟ ما هي النوافذ التي نمتلكها والتي تسمح لنا باكتشاف الكون؟ ما هو لون الكون؟ وما هي أكثر حالات المادة انتشارًا فيه؟ كيف نشأ الكون وتطور وما هي دورة حياة النجوم؟ كيف يعمل جهاز الميكرويف وما هي الاستخدامات الأخرى لهذه الموجات؟ ما هي شروط وجود الحياة وما هي أهم الفرضيات حول ظهور الحياة على الأرض؟ وهل هناك إمكانية لوجود أشكال مختلفة للحياة وأين هي أبرز الأماكن التي قد تتواجد فيها؟ ما هي أبرز الأفلام التي توجد بها أخطاء علمية وما هي قصتك مع فلم التايتانك؟
هذه الأسئلة الكثير لا تغطي حتى ربع الكتاب، فكما هو واضح فإنني لم أذكر حتى الموضوع الذي هو عنوان الكتاب، الثقوب السوداء، وكما ذكرت فإن الروعة هنا ليست فقط في جمال الموضوع، بل في طريقة التقديم الساحرة. هذا الكتاب يستحق القراءة وقد أثبت تايسون لي أنه مقدم ممتاز للعلم، سواء عن طريق الكلام أو الكتابة. ستكون لي بالتأكيد جولات جديدة مع تايسون في بقية كتبه وأنصح بشدة بقراءة هذ الكتاب الذي استحق الخمس نجوم كاملة.
October 4, 2021
There is so much more to this collection of marvelous essays than just black hole theorem. For instance, there is helioseismology, deep-space planetology, celestial mechanics (Lagrange points), matter-antimatter asymmetry, plasma cosmology, circumstellar habitability, astronomical spectrography, gravitational lensing, and (my personal favorite) the cinematic propagation of scientific illiteracy.
The thing is, none of this is over your head. A little quality time with deGrasse Tyson and you too will be conversational in Kepler. Trust me.
The thing is, none of this is over your head. A little quality time with deGrasse Tyson and you too will be conversational in Kepler. Trust me.
May 28, 2021
This is a collection. of 41 articles Neil deGrasse Tyson has penned for the magazine “Universe” around the turn of the millenium. As such, the topics and quality vary, and some topics are mentioned multiple times, albeit in different contexts. Tyson is entertaining, with a sense of humor and enthusiasm, and a gift of explaining things to the layperson, although not without faults. I envision him with a mischievous smirk under that mustache while he imparts pearls of knowledge and wisdom in astrophysics.
The topics range from the Solar system, Pluto, asteroids, the Big Bang, through alien life, Einstein, galaxies, black holes, to astrophysics in popular culture. I particularly enjoyed the section on the myriad ways the universe is trying to kill us (asteroids, gamma rays, extraterrestial microbes) and the many endings we will have. The Sun will burn itself out in 5 billion years, but before it dies, it will expand and incinerate the Earth along with Mercury, Venus and Mars. If we somehow manage to migrate to say, Europa, we will no longer have solar energy. If we hold out for two more billion years, then we get to witness the Milky Way colliding with the Andromeda galaxy, which, Tyson assures us, will be a spectacular event that either tear our second home apart or fling it out into cold space. And if we hang out long enough, eventually all energy to form stars in the universe will be exhausted, it will be cold, and everything will die in a slow whimper.
Well, this last example may or may not hold: this book was published in 2004, and many discoveries and new theories have been made since, and we perhaps be better served with a newer book. Tyson himself wrote a couple and I sure will be looking them up.
My major issue was with the uneven level of explanations: Tyson both gives too much and too little information sometimes, which can get very confusing. Here is an example: I had to rewind his explanation of the Big Bang about a dozen times, thinking I must not be paying enough attention. The problem was, he introduced the particle types boson, quark and hadron, but failed to explain what they were and how they were related. He went on to explain that there were electrons, then quarks, then hadrons, then protons and neutrons... (with tons of other detail), but I did not get this until I finally looked up hadron on Wikipedia: hadrons are made up of quarks, and protons and neutrons are a type of hadron! Now, here is what I mean by too much and too little: if he just skipped hadrons and talked of protons and neutrons, the story would have been fine. And if he just explained what they were, it would have been fine, too. But if you know what a hadron is, you probably don’t need an explanation of the Big Bang...
(My daughter just graduated as a bachelor in physics. I asked her if she knew what a hadron was. She said she didn’t take a particle physics class. I rest my case.)
I did not care for Tyson’s grumbling about how stupid everyday people and the media are... and seriously, your biggest problem with Titanic was that the sky was not showing the proper stars? I also did not like his rant about intelligent design. The basic principles of science are investigation and always questioning; of religion is belief. The two don’t mix, and he should just leave it at that. I can’t stand either side of the argument, because they both talk down something they don’t understand.
So while I greatly enjoyed some sections, I was frustrated by some others. I think some of this may have been less rigorous editing, as these were originally articles. Still, a worthwhile read, but perhaps his newer ones are better.
The topics range from the Solar system, Pluto, asteroids, the Big Bang, through alien life, Einstein, galaxies, black holes, to astrophysics in popular culture. I particularly enjoyed the section on the myriad ways the universe is trying to kill us (asteroids, gamma rays, extraterrestial microbes) and the many endings we will have. The Sun will burn itself out in 5 billion years, but before it dies, it will expand and incinerate the Earth along with Mercury, Venus and Mars. If we somehow manage to migrate to say, Europa, we will no longer have solar energy. If we hold out for two more billion years, then we get to witness the Milky Way colliding with the Andromeda galaxy, which, Tyson assures us, will be a spectacular event that either tear our second home apart or fling it out into cold space. And if we hang out long enough, eventually all energy to form stars in the universe will be exhausted, it will be cold, and everything will die in a slow whimper.
Well, this last example may or may not hold: this book was published in 2004, and many discoveries and new theories have been made since, and we perhaps be better served with a newer book. Tyson himself wrote a couple and I sure will be looking them up.
My major issue was with the uneven level of explanations: Tyson both gives too much and too little information sometimes, which can get very confusing. Here is an example: I had to rewind his explanation of the Big Bang about a dozen times, thinking I must not be paying enough attention. The problem was, he introduced the particle types boson, quark and hadron, but failed to explain what they were and how they were related. He went on to explain that there were electrons, then quarks, then hadrons, then protons and neutrons... (with tons of other detail), but I did not get this until I finally looked up hadron on Wikipedia: hadrons are made up of quarks, and protons and neutrons are a type of hadron! Now, here is what I mean by too much and too little: if he just skipped hadrons and talked of protons and neutrons, the story would have been fine. And if he just explained what they were, it would have been fine, too. But if you know what a hadron is, you probably don’t need an explanation of the Big Bang...
(My daughter just graduated as a bachelor in physics. I asked her if she knew what a hadron was. She said she didn’t take a particle physics class. I rest my case.)
I did not care for Tyson’s grumbling about how stupid everyday people and the media are... and seriously, your biggest problem with Titanic was that the sky was not showing the proper stars? I also did not like his rant about intelligent design. The basic principles of science are investigation and always questioning; of religion is belief. The two don’t mix, and he should just leave it at that. I can’t stand either side of the argument, because they both talk down something they don’t understand.
So while I greatly enjoyed some sections, I was frustrated by some others. I think some of this may have been less rigorous editing, as these were originally articles. Still, a worthwhile read, but perhaps his newer ones are better.
July 24, 2011
Blinded by science
Einstein, Io, comet tails
Information glut
I consider myself an intelligent person. I also find science fascinating. I'm just not sure what happen between me and Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries.....
Maybe I just wasn't in the mood for a science-y book. Maybe I over estimated my intelligence. Both are quite possible. The whole time I was listening to this, it was like listening to Charlie Browns teacher. whaa wha whaa wha whaa Galileo, wha wha E=mc2, whaa whaa whaa Gravity sucks.
I would get some really good, crunchy tidbit and be riveted.....and then the mind would drift to something like "I wonder if I fed the cats, and CRAP I forgot to start the dishwasher"........then I would drift back to the science stuff.
It just didn't hold my attention.
Einstein, Io, comet tails
Information glut
I consider myself an intelligent person. I also find science fascinating. I'm just not sure what happen between me and Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries.....
Maybe I just wasn't in the mood for a science-y book. Maybe I over estimated my intelligence. Both are quite possible. The whole time I was listening to this, it was like listening to Charlie Browns teacher. whaa wha whaa wha whaa Galileo, wha wha E=mc2, whaa whaa whaa Gravity sucks.
I would get some really good, crunchy tidbit and be riveted.....and then the mind would drift to something like "I wonder if I fed the cats, and CRAP I forgot to start the dishwasher"........then I would drift back to the science stuff.
It just didn't hold my attention.
September 6, 2019
„A világegyetem meg akar ölni minket.”
Gyorsan letudom a kötelező köröket, mert, ha elkezdem leírni a feltörekvő gondolataimat, utána biztosan nem lesz lelkem leírni ezeket az átlagosabbnak tartott gondolatokat: Tyson rendkívül szimpatikus, mint Ember, mint Asztrofizikus, mint Életvezetési tanácsadó, vagy akár, mint Barát. Mindig csodáltam azokat, akik képesek lelépni a katedráról, ott hagyni az elefántcsonttornyot, és közvetlenül szólni az átlagemberekhez. Ilyen Tyson is, de ilyen volt Stephen Hawking, vagy Richard P. Feynman, de éppen ilyen Carlo Rovelli is, és még sokan mások, mind fizikusok, mind más tudományterületek képviselői.
Érezzük, hogy Tyson kisujjában nagyjából 50 millió elefántnyi tudás sűrűsödik, melyet a lehető legérthetőbben, minden mennyiségben, olykor nagyon frappáns, életszerű (vagy kevésbé életszerű) példákkal igyekszik alátámasztani. (Csak mert megtudtam, hogy egy neutroncsillag sűrűsége épp akkora, mintha 50 millió elefántot tömnénk bele egy gyűszűbe.)
De minden csak a saját képzeletünkön múlik, hogy életszerű-e vagy sem. Ezen felül tanít is, arra tanít, hogy a megszerzett információt kezeljük fenntartásokkal, valamint új szemléletmódokat is nyújt, olyan, látszólag egyértelműnek tűnő gondolatokat, melyek felett túl könnyen lépünk túl a mindennapi életünk során, amelyek beszűkült látásmódunk miatt fel sem merülnek bennünk. Merthogy csak abból a tudásból, tapasztalatanyagból tudunk táplálkozni, amit itt, a Földön szereztünk meg, azonban semmi nem garantálja, hogy egy másik bolygón ennek feltétlenül így kéne történnie, sőt. Azt mondja, hogy egy földönkívüli faj minden valószínűség szerint egyik földi fajra sem hasonlítana, egyikre sem, abból a nagyjából 10 milliárdból, amely valaha itt élt, vagy itt él. Ez is mutatja saját képzeletünk korlátoltságát.
De lényeges ebből az egészből bármi? Ebből az értékelésből? Ebből a könyvből? Az asztrofizikából? A fizikából? A tudományból? Van bármi értelme, hogy megtudjuk, honnan indult Ez, és hogy hová vezet? Meg, hogy egyáltalán mi az az Ez? Nem lehet, hogy azáltal, hogy megkapjuk ezeket a kérdéseket, többé nem is lesz Ez? Hogy azért nem tudhatjuk meg, mert ez a tudatlanság és értelemkeresés adja meg a lényegünket, az értelmét az életünknek? Mind tudjuk, hogy a világegyetem méreteihez képest, – legyen az térbeli, vagy időbeli –, az ember, az emberiség, de még maga a Föld is, vagy a Naprendszer, vagy a Tejútrendszer teljesen elhanyagolható, csak egy kis piszok a végtelen valamelyik sarkán, csak egy a több százmilliárdból, vagy még annál is jelentéktelenebb.
Mindig ez van, amikor ilyen könyveket olvasok, és ez nagyon furcsa, mert azt gondolnánk, egy asztrofizikáról szóló könyvben még véletlenül sem találunk mást, mint száraz tudományt, objektív nézőponthalmazokat, közben meg épp ellenkezőleg, jóval emberibb, érzelmesebb gondolatok szállnak meg, talán épp ennek a jelentéktelenség, emberi halandósággal való szembesítés hatására, melyek egyébként elnyomunk magunkban két hosszú munkanap között. Olyanok, minthogy a nagyjából 100 évnyi létezésünk igazságtalanul kevés ahhoz képest, amennyi a világ. (De mi is a világ, ha már itt tartunk?) Születésünk előtt végtelen, halálunk után végtelen, és mi erről jóformán semmit sem tudunk. Csupán ebből kiindulva, rendkívül feleslegesnek tűnik ebben a rövidke szemelvényben, abban a 100 évben, ami jut nekünk azt kutatni, hogy végtelennel ezelőtt mi volt, hogy volt, vagy végtelennel ezután hogy lesz, mint lesz. De valahogy szükségünk van erre, a józan észt kizárva, és mégis a józan eszünket használva próbáljuk megérteni a megérthetetlent, elérni az elérhetetlent, felfogni halandóként a végtelent. És ez csodálatra méltó, ezért megéri embernek lenni, ezért büszkeség Embernek lenni.
„Úgy gondolom, Isten két könyvet írt. Az első a Biblia, melyben az ember válaszokat talál az értékrendjével és az erkölccsel kapcsolatos kérdéseire. A második a természet könyve, mely lehetővé teszi számunkra, hogy megfigyelések és kísérletek segítségével magunk adjunk válaszokat a világegyetemre vonatkozó kérdéseinkre." (Galilei, 1615)
Gyorsan letudom a kötelező köröket, mert, ha elkezdem leírni a feltörekvő gondolataimat, utána biztosan nem lesz lelkem leírni ezeket az átlagosabbnak tartott gondolatokat: Tyson rendkívül szimpatikus, mint Ember, mint Asztrofizikus, mint Életvezetési tanácsadó, vagy akár, mint Barát. Mindig csodáltam azokat, akik képesek lelépni a katedráról, ott hagyni az elefántcsonttornyot, és közvetlenül szólni az átlagemberekhez. Ilyen Tyson is, de ilyen volt Stephen Hawking, vagy Richard P. Feynman, de éppen ilyen Carlo Rovelli is, és még sokan mások, mind fizikusok, mind más tudományterületek képviselői.
Érezzük, hogy Tyson kisujjában nagyjából 50 millió elefántnyi tudás sűrűsödik, melyet a lehető legérthetőbben, minden mennyiségben, olykor nagyon frappáns, életszerű (vagy kevésbé életszerű) példákkal igyekszik alátámasztani. (Csak mert megtudtam, hogy egy neutroncsillag sűrűsége épp akkora, mintha 50 millió elefántot tömnénk bele egy gyűszűbe.)
De minden csak a saját képzeletünkön múlik, hogy életszerű-e vagy sem. Ezen felül tanít is, arra tanít, hogy a megszerzett információt kezeljük fenntartásokkal, valamint új szemléletmódokat is nyújt, olyan, látszólag egyértelműnek tűnő gondolatokat, melyek felett túl könnyen lépünk túl a mindennapi életünk során, amelyek beszűkült látásmódunk miatt fel sem merülnek bennünk. Merthogy csak abból a tudásból, tapasztalatanyagból tudunk táplálkozni, amit itt, a Földön szereztünk meg, azonban semmi nem garantálja, hogy egy másik bolygón ennek feltétlenül így kéne történnie, sőt. Azt mondja, hogy egy földönkívüli faj minden valószínűség szerint egyik földi fajra sem hasonlítana, egyikre sem, abból a nagyjából 10 milliárdból, amely valaha itt élt, vagy itt él. Ez is mutatja saját képzeletünk korlátoltságát.
De lényeges ebből az egészből bármi? Ebből az értékelésből? Ebből a könyvből? Az asztrofizikából? A fizikából? A tudományból? Van bármi értelme, hogy megtudjuk, honnan indult Ez, és hogy hová vezet? Meg, hogy egyáltalán mi az az Ez? Nem lehet, hogy azáltal, hogy megkapjuk ezeket a kérdéseket, többé nem is lesz Ez? Hogy azért nem tudhatjuk meg, mert ez a tudatlanság és értelemkeresés adja meg a lényegünket, az értelmét az életünknek? Mind tudjuk, hogy a világegyetem méreteihez képest, – legyen az térbeli, vagy időbeli –, az ember, az emberiség, de még maga a Föld is, vagy a Naprendszer, vagy a Tejútrendszer teljesen elhanyagolható, csak egy kis piszok a végtelen valamelyik sarkán, csak egy a több százmilliárdból, vagy még annál is jelentéktelenebb.
Mindig ez van, amikor ilyen könyveket olvasok, és ez nagyon furcsa, mert azt gondolnánk, egy asztrofizikáról szóló könyvben még véletlenül sem találunk mást, mint száraz tudományt, objektív nézőponthalmazokat, közben meg épp ellenkezőleg, jóval emberibb, érzelmesebb gondolatok szállnak meg, talán épp ennek a jelentéktelenség, emberi halandósággal való szembesítés hatására, melyek egyébként elnyomunk magunkban két hosszú munkanap között. Olyanok, minthogy a nagyjából 100 évnyi létezésünk igazságtalanul kevés ahhoz képest, amennyi a világ. (De mi is a világ, ha már itt tartunk?) Születésünk előtt végtelen, halálunk után végtelen, és mi erről jóformán semmit sem tudunk. Csupán ebből kiindulva, rendkívül feleslegesnek tűnik ebben a rövidke szemelvényben, abban a 100 évben, ami jut nekünk azt kutatni, hogy végtelennel ezelőtt mi volt, hogy volt, vagy végtelennel ezután hogy lesz, mint lesz. De valahogy szükségünk van erre, a józan észt kizárva, és mégis a józan eszünket használva próbáljuk megérteni a megérthetetlent, elérni az elérhetetlent, felfogni halandóként a végtelent. És ez csodálatra méltó, ezért megéri embernek lenni, ezért büszkeség Embernek lenni.
„Úgy gondolom, Isten két könyvet írt. Az első a Biblia, melyben az ember válaszokat talál az értékrendjével és az erkölccsel kapcsolatos kérdéseire. A második a természet könyve, mely lehetővé teszi számunkra, hogy megfigyelések és kísérletek segítségével magunk adjunk válaszokat a világegyetemre vonatkozó kérdéseinkre." (Galilei, 1615)
January 22, 2021
4.5 Stars - I’m rounding up because of my inner science geek 🤓.
You always remember your first... Physics book of course 😀 For me this was... umm - not this one - it was actually Stephen Hawking’s “A Brief History of Time”. Technically I read “The Illustrated Brief History of Time” (I like pictures 📷 - I thought the illustrations were helpful in visualizing the concepts). Being an Electrical Engineer I have some formal collegiate training in this discipline. A lot of engineers have two semesters each of chemistry / physics. At my school anyway we were required to have 1 chemistry and 3 physics. What’s that third semester all about you might ask? It’s the really weird quantum physics as well as an overview of general and special relativity theory. I’d like to say all this was very easy to me - it was not! I wound up getting an A, but many of the ideas really were way over my head.
So by the time I read ‘Death By Black Hole’ at least I had heard these ideas several different times. While I don’t think it makes me more likely to understand this stuff I think I have a bit of a head start compared to someone totally unfamiliar with this subject area. Nevertheless, I bought this about ten years ago and for whatever reason it sat on my bookshelf - collecting dust.
Why did I put it off so long? Several reasons... The first is that there are so many fictional books that call to me and - well... just seem like a lot more fun. Another is that despite the fact that I often watch science documentaries (my family makes fun of me) - this stuff can be kind of dry - and just like in college - I know that certain parts will either challenge me or leave me baffled (see below). Maybe it was because it wasn’t illustrated (dang it - I have to visualize this stuff on my own - haha)
Despite any reservations I may have harbored I rather enjoy Neil deGrasse Tyson. He is a frequent guest with Stephen Colbert and I find him very entertaining. True... I still hold a bit of a grudge for his part in expelling Pluto from our solar system’s planets club, but I understand his reasoning.
So what did I think of the book? Like so many non-fiction books I drag my feet on reading - my reaction was - as it usually is - “That was much better than I expected”. I thought Tyson did a pretty good job of explaining the concepts without feeling like the ideas were being dumbed down. As noted in the introduction each of the chapters were originally published in Natural History magazine from 1995-2005. Because they were spread out many of the ideas were repeated in several places. That was fine by me 😀 Did I mention some of these ideas are pretty complicated? Haha - I needed the repetition in spots.
Tyson didn’t just bury you with heavy concepts. Far from it. He did an excellent job of slowly unveiling many of these ideas alongside the historical figures that pioneered such knowledge over the centuries. I am a history geek too (yes... I usually watch those documentaries alone as well - haha) so I loved this. The quotes from so many brilliant people claiming that physics was essentially ‘all figured out’ by the end of the 19th century and that ‘future discoveries would be in refining data to the 6th decimal point’ were hilarious.
No history of our understanding of our solar system would be complete without the transition from the Aristotelian ‘Earth at the center’ view to the Copernican model that the ‘Sun is at the center and we are just a planet’ Despite what flat-Earthers might believe- the latter viewpoint is correct. Copernicus wasn’t quite right either - believing that the planets orbits are circular- when in fact they are elliptical- and in constant conflict with each other. Tyson continues on with a very humbling view of how as new technologies are discovered we have to either refine or totally tear down long held ideas as to how the universe works. The more we know - less unique we seem. The early chapter of how what you observe with your senses vs what you can measure with technology was extremely well done.
The chapter on Hollywood was quite funny. He begins the chapter by going on and on about how he gets annoyed by his prudish friends that when they go to movies based on books they ruin the movie for him by criticizing the movie because the book was better. I don’t know what he’s talking about... I’ve never heard that on GR 😜. After that he goes on to poke fun at movie inaccuracies that bug him with respect to science and math. This includes some big ones that I rather enjoyed including Titanic, The Right Stuff, and Contact. The thing he brought up about Contact was really funny - I admit I had not done the math myself.
BTW - the chapter on math - and the fear of math - was quite funny as well. Within the last week I watched an episode of “The Weakest Link” where a question was asked “If 50 Cent had to take a nickel and dime away from his name what would he have to call himself?” After a long pause the answer was “I don’t like math”. Ok - well that’s an answer...
The chapter about physicists being baffled was quite entertaining as well. The admission that you don’t know everything... and that’s ok - is quite humbling for a lot of people. That was one of the first life lessons I got from college... the more I learned the more I realized how much I didn’t know. That’s a good thing. Puts you in your place - makes you want to learn more.
One concept Tyson brought up many times and that I really related to was that as a species we need to try to continue to expand our understanding of the universe. If we turn away from things that are ‘hard’ and/or ignore math and science this is a recipe for bad times to come. I remember he was the first guest on Stephen Colbert’s The Late Show after Donald Trump won the presidential election in 2016. He said on this episode that we don’t need MAGA (to Make America Great Again), but rather should strive to Make America Smart Again. I was like “YES!!”
Along these lines one of the quotes I quite liked in the book was
“When people believe a tale that conflicts with self-checkable evidence it tells me that people undervalue the role of evidence on formulating an internal belief system. Why this is so is not clear, but it enables many people to hold fast to ideas and notions based purely on supposition.”
The context here is a bias against scientific principles despite convincing evidence. This quote applies to so many other things nowadays... scientific or otherwise. My rule has always been to get my news from multiple sources. This of course doesn’t guarantee accuracy, but if you only hear from it from one place... it’s probably not real.
Despite my “head start” there were several things I didn’t understand - no matter how many times I reread it. This includes the five points of Lagrange (maybe because I kept thinking about ZZ Top’s song La Grange 🌵), the three body problem sounds like a programming nightmare, and I will never understand the concepts where subatomic particles do weird things - like protons becoming neutrons etc etc. These things left me baffled, but as noted - that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
Another great story Neil threw in there was about the high school student doing his survey regarding Dihydrogen Monoxide... that stuff sounds very dangerous and probably should be banned (🤔 haha)
So my recommendation is to give this book a try. I learned a lot from it and found it clever and entertaining at the same time. The chapters are pretty short so if you aren’t quite following a section don’t despair - you will transition to a new topic soon enough. 🪐☄️✨🚀🛰📡🔭
You always remember your first... Physics book of course 😀 For me this was... umm - not this one - it was actually Stephen Hawking’s “A Brief History of Time”. Technically I read “The Illustrated Brief History of Time” (I like pictures 📷 - I thought the illustrations were helpful in visualizing the concepts). Being an Electrical Engineer I have some formal collegiate training in this discipline. A lot of engineers have two semesters each of chemistry / physics. At my school anyway we were required to have 1 chemistry and 3 physics. What’s that third semester all about you might ask? It’s the really weird quantum physics as well as an overview of general and special relativity theory. I’d like to say all this was very easy to me - it was not! I wound up getting an A, but many of the ideas really were way over my head.
So by the time I read ‘Death By Black Hole’ at least I had heard these ideas several different times. While I don’t think it makes me more likely to understand this stuff I think I have a bit of a head start compared to someone totally unfamiliar with this subject area. Nevertheless, I bought this about ten years ago and for whatever reason it sat on my bookshelf - collecting dust.
Why did I put it off so long? Several reasons... The first is that there are so many fictional books that call to me and - well... just seem like a lot more fun. Another is that despite the fact that I often watch science documentaries (my family makes fun of me) - this stuff can be kind of dry - and just like in college - I know that certain parts will either challenge me or leave me baffled (see below). Maybe it was because it wasn’t illustrated (dang it - I have to visualize this stuff on my own - haha)
Despite any reservations I may have harbored I rather enjoy Neil deGrasse Tyson. He is a frequent guest with Stephen Colbert and I find him very entertaining. True... I still hold a bit of a grudge for his part in expelling Pluto from our solar system’s planets club, but I understand his reasoning.
So what did I think of the book? Like so many non-fiction books I drag my feet on reading - my reaction was - as it usually is - “That was much better than I expected”. I thought Tyson did a pretty good job of explaining the concepts without feeling like the ideas were being dumbed down. As noted in the introduction each of the chapters were originally published in Natural History magazine from 1995-2005. Because they were spread out many of the ideas were repeated in several places. That was fine by me 😀 Did I mention some of these ideas are pretty complicated? Haha - I needed the repetition in spots.
Tyson didn’t just bury you with heavy concepts. Far from it. He did an excellent job of slowly unveiling many of these ideas alongside the historical figures that pioneered such knowledge over the centuries. I am a history geek too (yes... I usually watch those documentaries alone as well - haha) so I loved this. The quotes from so many brilliant people claiming that physics was essentially ‘all figured out’ by the end of the 19th century and that ‘future discoveries would be in refining data to the 6th decimal point’ were hilarious.
No history of our understanding of our solar system would be complete without the transition from the Aristotelian ‘Earth at the center’ view to the Copernican model that the ‘Sun is at the center and we are just a planet’ Despite what flat-Earthers might believe- the latter viewpoint is correct. Copernicus wasn’t quite right either - believing that the planets orbits are circular- when in fact they are elliptical- and in constant conflict with each other. Tyson continues on with a very humbling view of how as new technologies are discovered we have to either refine or totally tear down long held ideas as to how the universe works. The more we know - less unique we seem. The early chapter of how what you observe with your senses vs what you can measure with technology was extremely well done.
The chapter on Hollywood was quite funny. He begins the chapter by going on and on about how he gets annoyed by his prudish friends that when they go to movies based on books they ruin the movie for him by criticizing the movie because the book was better. I don’t know what he’s talking about... I’ve never heard that on GR 😜. After that he goes on to poke fun at movie inaccuracies that bug him with respect to science and math. This includes some big ones that I rather enjoyed including Titanic, The Right Stuff, and Contact. The thing he brought up about Contact was really funny - I admit I had not done the math myself.
BTW - the chapter on math - and the fear of math - was quite funny as well. Within the last week I watched an episode of “The Weakest Link” where a question was asked “If 50 Cent had to take a nickel and dime away from his name what would he have to call himself?” After a long pause the answer was “I don’t like math”. Ok - well that’s an answer...
The chapter about physicists being baffled was quite entertaining as well. The admission that you don’t know everything... and that’s ok - is quite humbling for a lot of people. That was one of the first life lessons I got from college... the more I learned the more I realized how much I didn’t know. That’s a good thing. Puts you in your place - makes you want to learn more.
One concept Tyson brought up many times and that I really related to was that as a species we need to try to continue to expand our understanding of the universe. If we turn away from things that are ‘hard’ and/or ignore math and science this is a recipe for bad times to come. I remember he was the first guest on Stephen Colbert’s The Late Show after Donald Trump won the presidential election in 2016. He said on this episode that we don’t need MAGA (to Make America Great Again), but rather should strive to Make America Smart Again. I was like “YES!!”
Along these lines one of the quotes I quite liked in the book was
“When people believe a tale that conflicts with self-checkable evidence it tells me that people undervalue the role of evidence on formulating an internal belief system. Why this is so is not clear, but it enables many people to hold fast to ideas and notions based purely on supposition.”
The context here is a bias against scientific principles despite convincing evidence. This quote applies to so many other things nowadays... scientific or otherwise. My rule has always been to get my news from multiple sources. This of course doesn’t guarantee accuracy, but if you only hear from it from one place... it’s probably not real.
Despite my “head start” there were several things I didn’t understand - no matter how many times I reread it. This includes the five points of Lagrange (maybe because I kept thinking about ZZ Top’s song La Grange 🌵), the three body problem sounds like a programming nightmare, and I will never understand the concepts where subatomic particles do weird things - like protons becoming neutrons etc etc. These things left me baffled, but as noted - that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
Another great story Neil threw in there was about the high school student doing his survey regarding Dihydrogen Monoxide... that stuff sounds very dangerous and probably should be banned (🤔 haha)
So my recommendation is to give this book a try. I learned a lot from it and found it clever and entertaining at the same time. The chapters are pretty short so if you aren’t quite following a section don’t despair - you will transition to a new topic soon enough. 🪐☄️✨🚀🛰📡🔭
March 4, 2020
So I have a thing for Black Holes, so what?! You knew that already! You didn't? Well now you do.
I have had an obsession with Black Holes for as long as I can remember. It was perhaps one of the first phenomena of the big umbrella of Astronomy and Cosmology that I was introduced to and I immediately fell in love with; I mean what is there not to love. An equal or even grander obsession is awarded of course to the author of this brilliant book.
Of course, as with almost all scientific books, the title is pretty elusive. Yes, there was talk of Black Holes, a lot of talk, but there was a slew of other cosmological subjects too! But, of course, you will hear absolutely no complaints from me. As my favourite astronomer, I am inspired by Neil deGrasse Tyson much in the same way he was probably inspired by Carl Sagan.
There is probably no other human beings on this planet that have invested more to the field of astronomy like Sagan and Tyson have. I, of course, do not mean this in a scientific sense but a commercial one. Sagan and Tyson are to Astronomy what Bill Nye is to Science.
So for all intends and purposes, this review is in fact a form of praising for Neil deGrasse Tyson and his meaning to me as a person rather than a review of the actual book. There are simply some people out there who's literary work is completely overshadowed by their contributions to the subject upon which they write about, so I will dismiss the small quantity of repetitiveness inherent in all scientific books (especially ones comprising of several essays).
They tell you never to meet your heroes, that it is somehow inevitable to be disappointed by such an interaction; that the perfect image you have most definitely built of your heroes is most certainly to fall short of reality. But while I cannot claim to have met Neil deGrasse Tyson, I have at least had a closer glimpse to his personal opinions and thoughts. I shied away from this book for the longest time specifically for fear of being disappointed by the literary work of a person I probably hold the highest esteem of amongst all people.
I don't even recall when or how I was first "introduced" to Neil but what followed was an obsession that has lasted years, till this day. I have probably watched his 'Cosmos' show, inspired by Carl Sagan's Cosmos up to at least 5 times. Neil is funny, witty, intelligent and very very charismatic. If it wasn't for him, there would have definitely been so many different aspects of astronomy that I wouldn't have particularly grabbed. His style of "story-telling" transports you back to a time when anything interested you, when your explorer genes were yet to be suppressed; just like you were a little kid again. So it comes as no surprise that I read the entire book imagining Neil was narrating it to me, for I had completely memorised his pattern of speech and voice, and it is equally not surprising that I would love any work, literary or otherwise that Neil produces.
I ask nothing more of men of science, to be able to pass down the passion in the way that Neil has been very successful in doing is the calling for all of scientists, regardless of their field of study.
I have had an obsession with Black Holes for as long as I can remember. It was perhaps one of the first phenomena of the big umbrella of Astronomy and Cosmology that I was introduced to and I immediately fell in love with; I mean what is there not to love. An equal or even grander obsession is awarded of course to the author of this brilliant book.
Of course, as with almost all scientific books, the title is pretty elusive. Yes, there was talk of Black Holes, a lot of talk, but there was a slew of other cosmological subjects too! But, of course, you will hear absolutely no complaints from me. As my favourite astronomer, I am inspired by Neil deGrasse Tyson much in the same way he was probably inspired by Carl Sagan.
There is probably no other human beings on this planet that have invested more to the field of astronomy like Sagan and Tyson have. I, of course, do not mean this in a scientific sense but a commercial one. Sagan and Tyson are to Astronomy what Bill Nye is to Science.
So for all intends and purposes, this review is in fact a form of praising for Neil deGrasse Tyson and his meaning to me as a person rather than a review of the actual book. There are simply some people out there who's literary work is completely overshadowed by their contributions to the subject upon which they write about, so I will dismiss the small quantity of repetitiveness inherent in all scientific books (especially ones comprising of several essays).
They tell you never to meet your heroes, that it is somehow inevitable to be disappointed by such an interaction; that the perfect image you have most definitely built of your heroes is most certainly to fall short of reality. But while I cannot claim to have met Neil deGrasse Tyson, I have at least had a closer glimpse to his personal opinions and thoughts. I shied away from this book for the longest time specifically for fear of being disappointed by the literary work of a person I probably hold the highest esteem of amongst all people.
I don't even recall when or how I was first "introduced" to Neil but what followed was an obsession that has lasted years, till this day. I have probably watched his 'Cosmos' show, inspired by Carl Sagan's Cosmos up to at least 5 times. Neil is funny, witty, intelligent and very very charismatic. If it wasn't for him, there would have definitely been so many different aspects of astronomy that I wouldn't have particularly grabbed. His style of "story-telling" transports you back to a time when anything interested you, when your explorer genes were yet to be suppressed; just like you were a little kid again. So it comes as no surprise that I read the entire book imagining Neil was narrating it to me, for I had completely memorised his pattern of speech and voice, and it is equally not surprising that I would love any work, literary or otherwise that Neil produces.
I ask nothing more of men of science, to be able to pass down the passion in the way that Neil has been very successful in doing is the calling for all of scientists, regardless of their field of study.
February 15, 2012
For me this book was merely okay. I've read quite a bit of these types of books, physics for the layperson, and this book was probably my least favorite.
I don't like the overall tone of the book. Tyson makes a point to belittle the human race as much as possible and he comes across as pessimistic. By no means do I think humans are the pinnacle of perfection, but I think we're doing pretty well.
The content of the book was all over the place and only briefly touched on black holes and other cosmic quandaries. In fact the titular cosmological event, though an "entire" chapter, was hardly described while long tangents about minor events in historical figures' lives were expounded in detail.
I don't recommend this book to any but those that are cursorily interested in cosmology. I recommend Hawking, Brian Greene or Amir Aczel.
I don't like the overall tone of the book. Tyson makes a point to belittle the human race as much as possible and he comes across as pessimistic. By no means do I think humans are the pinnacle of perfection, but I think we're doing pretty well.
The content of the book was all over the place and only briefly touched on black holes and other cosmic quandaries. In fact the titular cosmological event, though an "entire" chapter, was hardly described while long tangents about minor events in historical figures' lives were expounded in detail.
I don't recommend this book to any but those that are cursorily interested in cosmology. I recommend Hawking, Brian Greene or Amir Aczel.
March 10, 2020
This book was much harder than Astrophysics for people in a hurry! I’m glad I have the paperback edition as well because I most definitely will be re-reading this! However, still wonderful and I always enjoy Neil Degrasse Tyson’s sense of humor even though most of the puns went over my head.
March 7, 2017
Another of those books that I think that if I would have read them when I was 15-25 years old , I would have changed my career.
The book is a collection of essays that appeared as a column in the Natural History magazine and are all related with space.
With great talent to simplify things in an interesting way, the author presents various aspects of the knowledge related to space:
The history of the research both from the technological and personal view
The mind boggling size and variety of the universe
The knowledge we know and the (much larger) knowledge we do not know
The role that god has in the space research (nothing positive there)
The search for life and its directions
And many smaller issues like various scientific goofs in sci fi movies
And many more….
As many of the subjects are hard to grasp, and hard to present with a short quote, I will bring an example from the movie goofs article, referring to the 1997 movie Contact:
Just as she establishes her love interest in ex-priest Matthew McConaughey, seated with the largest radio telescope in the world behind them, she says to him with passion: “If there are 400 billion stars in the galaxy, and just one in a million had planets, and just one in a million of those had life, and just one in a million of those had intelligent life, that still leaves millions of planets to explore.”
Wrong. According to her numbers, that leaves 0.0000004 planets with intelligent life on them, which is a figure somewhat lower than “millions.” No doubt that “one in a million” sounds better on screen than “one in ten,” but you can’t fake math.
The book did have it's flaws, some repetitions and some dull moments , but just a few.
If you like the subject….. read this book.
The book is a collection of essays that appeared as a column in the Natural History magazine and are all related with space.
With great talent to simplify things in an interesting way, the author presents various aspects of the knowledge related to space:
The history of the research both from the technological and personal view
The mind boggling size and variety of the universe
The knowledge we know and the (much larger) knowledge we do not know
The role that god has in the space research (nothing positive there)
The search for life and its directions
And many smaller issues like various scientific goofs in sci fi movies
And many more….
As many of the subjects are hard to grasp, and hard to present with a short quote, I will bring an example from the movie goofs article, referring to the 1997 movie Contact:
Just as she establishes her love interest in ex-priest Matthew McConaughey, seated with the largest radio telescope in the world behind them, she says to him with passion: “If there are 400 billion stars in the galaxy, and just one in a million had planets, and just one in a million of those had life, and just one in a million of those had intelligent life, that still leaves millions of planets to explore.”
Wrong. According to her numbers, that leaves 0.0000004 planets with intelligent life on them, which is a figure somewhat lower than “millions.” No doubt that “one in a million” sounds better on screen than “one in ten,” but you can’t fake math.
The book did have it's flaws, some repetitions and some dull moments , but just a few.
If you like the subject….. read this book.
March 25, 2017
Ok, so you're looking for a science book that's accessible to everyone - you've found it!
Neil goes over some really interesting concepts, but they aren't what I would say for advanced readers. Much like his work on Cosmos, the concepts are simple but entertaining and informative. This is a book you could give to beginners who are just dipping their toes into astronomy, physics and earth space sciences.
Like always, it's written in a warmer tone than say, Dawkins or Hitchens, and is even more accessible than Hawking although his works are written for the every day person as well.
I wouldn't say this is for kids, but kids who are "advanced" in reading and sciences would get a kick out of this.
I'd love to meet this guy one day. Him, Bill Nye, Carl Sagan and Stephen Hawking sparked my love of science in my high school years, and it became an obsession in my adulthood. Thanks, guys.
Neil goes over some really interesting concepts, but they aren't what I would say for advanced readers. Much like his work on Cosmos, the concepts are simple but entertaining and informative. This is a book you could give to beginners who are just dipping their toes into astronomy, physics and earth space sciences.
Like always, it's written in a warmer tone than say, Dawkins or Hitchens, and is even more accessible than Hawking although his works are written for the every day person as well.
I wouldn't say this is for kids, but kids who are "advanced" in reading and sciences would get a kick out of this.
I'd love to meet this guy one day. Him, Bill Nye, Carl Sagan and Stephen Hawking sparked my love of science in my high school years, and it became an obsession in my adulthood. Thanks, guys.
January 10, 2018
Entertainingly informative, Neil DeGrasse Tyson's
Death by Black Hole
was exquisitely written by this master storyteller and it took me to places I never thought existed and opened my eyes to the littlest and to the grandest discoveries and mistakes in the field of astrophysics.
Although I enjoyed reading this book, I admit that it was quite overwhelming at some points that it took me almost a year to finish it.
This book, like the facts in it, was indeed baffling in a good way.
Although I enjoyed reading this book, I admit that it was quite overwhelming at some points that it took me almost a year to finish it.
This book, like the facts in it, was indeed baffling in a good way.
February 1, 2017
There isn't anything particularly advanced in this book, though as it is a collection of essays, perhaps that is expected. It's easy to get into as a result, and Tyson has a good style that stays entertaining while being informative.
June 10, 2010
If the lovely fact that our sun will probably burn out in 4 billion years and our beloved Earth will turn into a huge ball of black rock because of it (until it's vaporized that is) bothers you, keeps you up in the night, this book might not be for you. If you're worried about an asteroid hitting somewhere between Hawaii and California in 2039 and Idaho becoming ocean front property (hmm, maybe an improvement?), then this book might not be for you. If you're worried about what might happen to you if you inadvertently get a little, tinsy bit too close to a black hole of death! (even your atoms get pulled apart) then again, I might not read this book.
Because, if you thought your ulcer was healing and you could eat salsa with your chips again. Think again! A collection of essays about a myriad of cosmic topics from Natural History magazine written by astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson (you've probably seen him on PBS, and no he's not the night sky guy with the weird voice), this book entertains. Frightens. Enlightens. And inevitably makes you feel much, much smarter for reading it. But believe me, sometimes this knowledge is a scary, scary thing! In fact, now I'd like to take some of it back. Oh, brain atrophy!
Except for a few about half way through that made my eyes start to glaze over, I found most of these essays really interesting and readable. Tyson is obviously one of those well known science professionals who is actually interested in, and good at, teaching (believe it or not!) instead of just doing research and publishing. So yes, they do exist..
Way, oh way back in the dark ages when I was in college I took a series of physics classes from an astronaut named Don Lind. He was a cocky ass who said stuff like, if you ever get a chance to fly in space.. . I wanted to slap him...anyway, I remember learning about prisms and color and how our brain interprets it, and thinking that was the coolest thing! I remember telling my twelve year old sister about it, about how a prism works and why we are able to see that myriad of colors without moving our eyes (look it up, it's really cool!). She looked at me like I was a martian from outer space who'd just landed and interrupted an episode of Get Smart, and made fun of me for years because of it.
Well, neiner neiner. Now I feel vindicated.
Sort of..
Crap, she's probably still making fun of me.
Oh well..
Because, if you thought your ulcer was healing and you could eat salsa with your chips again. Think again! A collection of essays about a myriad of cosmic topics from Natural History magazine written by astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson (you've probably seen him on PBS, and no he's not the night sky guy with the weird voice), this book entertains. Frightens. Enlightens. And inevitably makes you feel much, much smarter for reading it. But believe me, sometimes this knowledge is a scary, scary thing! In fact, now I'd like to take some of it back. Oh, brain atrophy!
Except for a few about half way through that made my eyes start to glaze over, I found most of these essays really interesting and readable. Tyson is obviously one of those well known science professionals who is actually interested in, and good at, teaching (believe it or not!) instead of just doing research and publishing. So yes, they do exist..
Way, oh way back in the dark ages when I was in college I took a series of physics classes from an astronaut named Don Lind. He was a cocky ass who said stuff like, if you ever get a chance to fly in space.. . I wanted to slap him...anyway, I remember learning about prisms and color and how our brain interprets it, and thinking that was the coolest thing! I remember telling my twelve year old sister about it, about how a prism works and why we are able to see that myriad of colors without moving our eyes (look it up, it's really cool!). She looked at me like I was a martian from outer space who'd just landed and interrupted an episode of Get Smart, and made fun of me for years because of it.
Well, neiner neiner. Now I feel vindicated.
Sort of..
Crap, she's probably still making fun of me.
Oh well..
July 3, 2013
I can already see the masses of Tyson fans charging ahead just to light me aflame for having the audicity to doubt a word he says, but so I must. To be fair, I love Neil deGrasse Tyson. I saw him speak at USC, I've watched his lectures and his interviews, and I think he has done more for popularizing science than anyone else. But none of that a writer makes. This is especially true of sarcastic and sardonic wit.
Being funny in text is what I would rate as the most challenging things to accomplish (some comics may agree) because it loses so much of the presence, tone, and body language that makes something funny. Tyson is a legitimately funny person, I promise this, but aside from the knowledge that he wrote this, none of that translates well. I could guess that this is because much of his humor is in his intonations, pauses, and timing, something any classclown can tell you about. But not any classclown can write a best-selling comedic novel, nor can just any astro-physicist write a truly comic novel, or at least one which transfers that genius.
What I'm getting at is that this book is dry. It seeks to inform, but it does so in a way that is just a little bit uninteresting and just a little bit reminscent of my astronomy courses. Interesting stuff, but the delivery was just all wrong.
This wasn't assisted by the fact that the structuring of the book is terrible. To be fair, Tyson admits at the outset that this is little more than a collection of essays slapped back to back and tidied up a bit to try and make them fit, but that is exactly how they read. The transitions are generally poor and always jarring. The sentences don't blend together so much as float like an oily film, and trying to read too many consectutive pieces put together makes me feel as if my brain were a poorly done game of tetris - too many holes and not enough matching lines.
But hey, I'm for anything that gets people reading, and I'm especially for anything that gets people reading about the world and about science. It goes without saying that I'm far happier this book is out there and so widely read than never having been published. I just prattle on because I'm a snot-nose with too many standards.
Being funny in text is what I would rate as the most challenging things to accomplish (some comics may agree) because it loses so much of the presence, tone, and body language that makes something funny. Tyson is a legitimately funny person, I promise this, but aside from the knowledge that he wrote this, none of that translates well. I could guess that this is because much of his humor is in his intonations, pauses, and timing, something any classclown can tell you about. But not any classclown can write a best-selling comedic novel, nor can just any astro-physicist write a truly comic novel, or at least one which transfers that genius.
What I'm getting at is that this book is dry. It seeks to inform, but it does so in a way that is just a little bit uninteresting and just a little bit reminscent of my astronomy courses. Interesting stuff, but the delivery was just all wrong.
This wasn't assisted by the fact that the structuring of the book is terrible. To be fair, Tyson admits at the outset that this is little more than a collection of essays slapped back to back and tidied up a bit to try and make them fit, but that is exactly how they read. The transitions are generally poor and always jarring. The sentences don't blend together so much as float like an oily film, and trying to read too many consectutive pieces put together makes me feel as if my brain were a poorly done game of tetris - too many holes and not enough matching lines.
But hey, I'm for anything that gets people reading, and I'm especially for anything that gets people reading about the world and about science. It goes without saying that I'm far happier this book is out there and so widely read than never having been published. I just prattle on because I'm a snot-nose with too many standards.
August 24, 2021
We, the humans always believes that he is the ultimate being in this world, until and unless science comes and overcomes the human ego. Ages before, we thought that the earth was flat and the sun rotated around the earth. Later it proved to be wrong and found that the earth rotates around the sun. Humans again believed that we are at the centre of the universe, until and unless we discovered galaxies other than the Milky way. We are not at all at the centre, we are in some dusty corner of this vast universe. Science/astrophysics always hit hard at the ego of humans and it will never stop.
March 12, 2009
A great title for a book, that alone made me want to read it. Of course, this is the type of book I will almost always pick up from the library. It is a collection of essays on science for the magazine Natural History. It covers a wide range of topics, usually relating to physics, from particle physics to astrophysics. I love this stuff and I only wish I retained enough math to be able to read more technical discussions than these rather general essays.
The essays are informative and entertaining. A lot has changed in the 17 years since I took my particle physics class at BYU, so I am always interested to learn more. Not only does he describe what is happening in science, he describes the edges very well. By edges I mean the places where scientists are not sure what is happening and are actively searching for answers. That is always the most interesting part of any science. The problem today is that to get to that edge, you have to take years of schooling to understand what they are looking for. Once the edge could be explored in your home lab or a field (if you were Benjamin Franklin) now you need millions of dollars and a space telescope.
The book is a bit repetitive, though that often happens with collections of essays because each one had to be self contained and couldn't refer to last month's issue. There has been a bit of editing to smooth out the sequencing and to make it an easier read.
While I enjoyed all the essays, I took exception to the last one, entitled, The Perimeter of Ignorance. Here is the author's basic premise,
Writing in centuries past, many scientists felt compelled to wax poetic about cosmic mysteries and God's handiwork. Perhaps one should not be surprised at this: most scientists back then, as well as many scientists today, identify themselves as spiritually devout.
But a careful reading of older texts, particularly those concerned with the universe itself, shows that the authors invoke divinity only when they reach the boundaries of their understanding. They appeal to a higher power only when staring at the ocean of their own ignorance. They call on God only from the lonely and precarious edge of incomprehension. Where they feel certain about their explanations, however, God hardly gets a mention.
He goes on from this hypothesis to give some quotes from Newton and other scientists, who do indeed see an explanation for the unexplainable in the presence of God. He then links this tendency to the current vogue for intelligent design. That also follows, more or less. I have my own issues with intelligent design, at least how it is being explained and used in the public sphere, but I won't go into all that here. The problem I have is that the author considers an appeal to deity as an admission of failure and the mental equivalent of throwing up your hands and saying, "Heck if I know, only God could figure that out, I will just go find something easier to study, like Paris Hilton." He says, in talking about intelligent design and the dangers of it,
I don't want students who could make the next major breakthrough in renewable energy sources or space travel to have been taught that anything they don't understand, and that nobody yet understands, is divinely constructed and therefore beyond their intellectual capacity.
Since when is saying something is divinely designed the same as saying we are not capable of understanding it? As a devout person, but one who would have been a scientist, if not for a few chance decisions and a problem with basic arithmetic, I find everything divinely inspired, even those things we do understand. Too many people equate religion with ignorance, without considering the fact that the intelligent people who believe, must have a valid reason for doing so. And similarly, there are many ignorant people who have no religion. I cringe whenever a particularly proud, ignorant and Christian person is on the news saying something stupid because that just reinforces this ignorance=religion stereotype. I'm here to say intelligence=true religion. Believing in ignorance is just superstition whatever belief it may be. The more you understand your own beliefs, the more you want to learn. Our brains are designed to increase in knowledge, anything that does that helps all of us, no matter what the information may be.
The essays are informative and entertaining. A lot has changed in the 17 years since I took my particle physics class at BYU, so I am always interested to learn more. Not only does he describe what is happening in science, he describes the edges very well. By edges I mean the places where scientists are not sure what is happening and are actively searching for answers. That is always the most interesting part of any science. The problem today is that to get to that edge, you have to take years of schooling to understand what they are looking for. Once the edge could be explored in your home lab or a field (if you were Benjamin Franklin) now you need millions of dollars and a space telescope.
The book is a bit repetitive, though that often happens with collections of essays because each one had to be self contained and couldn't refer to last month's issue. There has been a bit of editing to smooth out the sequencing and to make it an easier read.
While I enjoyed all the essays, I took exception to the last one, entitled, The Perimeter of Ignorance. Here is the author's basic premise,
Writing in centuries past, many scientists felt compelled to wax poetic about cosmic mysteries and God's handiwork. Perhaps one should not be surprised at this: most scientists back then, as well as many scientists today, identify themselves as spiritually devout.
But a careful reading of older texts, particularly those concerned with the universe itself, shows that the authors invoke divinity only when they reach the boundaries of their understanding. They appeal to a higher power only when staring at the ocean of their own ignorance. They call on God only from the lonely and precarious edge of incomprehension. Where they feel certain about their explanations, however, God hardly gets a mention.
He goes on from this hypothesis to give some quotes from Newton and other scientists, who do indeed see an explanation for the unexplainable in the presence of God. He then links this tendency to the current vogue for intelligent design. That also follows, more or less. I have my own issues with intelligent design, at least how it is being explained and used in the public sphere, but I won't go into all that here. The problem I have is that the author considers an appeal to deity as an admission of failure and the mental equivalent of throwing up your hands and saying, "Heck if I know, only God could figure that out, I will just go find something easier to study, like Paris Hilton." He says, in talking about intelligent design and the dangers of it,
I don't want students who could make the next major breakthrough in renewable energy sources or space travel to have been taught that anything they don't understand, and that nobody yet understands, is divinely constructed and therefore beyond their intellectual capacity.
Since when is saying something is divinely designed the same as saying we are not capable of understanding it? As a devout person, but one who would have been a scientist, if not for a few chance decisions and a problem with basic arithmetic, I find everything divinely inspired, even those things we do understand. Too many people equate religion with ignorance, without considering the fact that the intelligent people who believe, must have a valid reason for doing so. And similarly, there are many ignorant people who have no religion. I cringe whenever a particularly proud, ignorant and Christian person is on the news saying something stupid because that just reinforces this ignorance=religion stereotype. I'm here to say intelligence=true religion. Believing in ignorance is just superstition whatever belief it may be. The more you understand your own beliefs, the more you want to learn. Our brains are designed to increase in knowledge, anything that does that helps all of us, no matter what the information may be.
September 17, 2010
DEATH BY BLACK HOLE AND OTHER COSMIC QUANDARIES BY NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON: An astrophysicist for the American Museum of Natural History, director of the world famous Hayden Planetarium, and columnist for Natural History magazine, Neil DeGrasse Tyson brings to the non-scientific world the ideal book for those fascinated with space, the cosmos, black holes, and all the questions and wonders therein. Death by Black Hole is the perfect book for the reader who wants answers to questions about the universe in a simple and clearly defined way so that even if they know next to nothing about science and it’s jargon, Tyson makes it easily understandable.
While I was hoping for something a little more in depth in the style of Brian Greene’s The Fabric of the Cosmos or Lee Smolin’s The Trouble With Physics, Death by Black Hole nevertheless provides quick and simple answers to many questions everyday readers without a science background have about physics, the universe, space, and most matters dealing with the cosmos. The book is a selection of his columns in Natural History that are organized in a somewhat textbook fashion. Tyson starts with the idea of science and nature in its basic form, how humanity views Earth, the solar system, the universe. Along with this discussion, Tyson also gives minor history lessons on the development of different ideas in physics and astronomy, what people came up with what big ideas and how the progression led to the development of the big theories of our current time with string theory and relativity. Going on from here, Death by Black Hole address the crucial steps that led to the formation of the universe and its development over the many billions and billions of years, again explaining how it is that scientists know what they do and what instruments were used, as well as the history of who invented and used said instruments.
It is then that Tyson finally turns to the subject matter of the title of the book in the section “When the Universe Turns Bad: All the Ways the Cosmos Wants to Kill Us.” Here he addresses the complex and still relatively unknown subjects of chaos theory, dark matter (which constitutes over 90% of all matter in the universe, while we still know next to nothing about it), and finally black holes. Tyson takes the reader on a hypothetical journey with what would happen if one were to be sucked into a black hole and how as they approached the event horizon, they would become stretched until the elasticity point of their skin was surpassed and the body would be torn into thousands then millions of little pieces.
With many questions now answered, in the next section Tyson discusses how science is viewed by the media, Hollywood, and people around the world in general. The final section addresses the concept of science and religion, again taking the reader on a historic journey through the development of first religion, then science, and the struggle that has ensued for centuries. It is the perfect end to a book on science, as Tyson lectures the importance of supporting fact and reality in a time when there are many who believe more in faith, even when all the evidence is to the contrary.
For more book reviews, and author interviews, go to BookBanter.
While I was hoping for something a little more in depth in the style of Brian Greene’s The Fabric of the Cosmos or Lee Smolin’s The Trouble With Physics, Death by Black Hole nevertheless provides quick and simple answers to many questions everyday readers without a science background have about physics, the universe, space, and most matters dealing with the cosmos. The book is a selection of his columns in Natural History that are organized in a somewhat textbook fashion. Tyson starts with the idea of science and nature in its basic form, how humanity views Earth, the solar system, the universe. Along with this discussion, Tyson also gives minor history lessons on the development of different ideas in physics and astronomy, what people came up with what big ideas and how the progression led to the development of the big theories of our current time with string theory and relativity. Going on from here, Death by Black Hole address the crucial steps that led to the formation of the universe and its development over the many billions and billions of years, again explaining how it is that scientists know what they do and what instruments were used, as well as the history of who invented and used said instruments.
It is then that Tyson finally turns to the subject matter of the title of the book in the section “When the Universe Turns Bad: All the Ways the Cosmos Wants to Kill Us.” Here he addresses the complex and still relatively unknown subjects of chaos theory, dark matter (which constitutes over 90% of all matter in the universe, while we still know next to nothing about it), and finally black holes. Tyson takes the reader on a hypothetical journey with what would happen if one were to be sucked into a black hole and how as they approached the event horizon, they would become stretched until the elasticity point of their skin was surpassed and the body would be torn into thousands then millions of little pieces.
With many questions now answered, in the next section Tyson discusses how science is viewed by the media, Hollywood, and people around the world in general. The final section addresses the concept of science and religion, again taking the reader on a historic journey through the development of first religion, then science, and the struggle that has ensued for centuries. It is the perfect end to a book on science, as Tyson lectures the importance of supporting fact and reality in a time when there are many who believe more in faith, even when all the evidence is to the contrary.
For more book reviews, and author interviews, go to BookBanter.
March 24, 2014
in this young, still fertile century, there may not be a better emissary and evangelist for scientific curiosity than neil degrasse tyson. the bronx-raised astrophysicist's ability to succinctly, accessibly, and entertainingly convey even the headiest and most complex of subjects is itself a marvel. death by black hole: and other cosmic quandaries collects 42 of tyson's essays from natural history magazine, published over 11 years beginning in 1995.
death by black hole is divided into 7 sections; each delving into a particular realm of scientific inquest and knowledge. spanning 13.8 billion years, tyson considers everything from the big bang and inflation to the current state of science education and its detractors. as with all of his writing (or media appearances), tyson is remarkably erudite, good-natured, and gifted with a fantastic, if sometimes charmingly corny sense of humor. even subjects that may already be well familiar to the reader are offered in a refreshing, thought-provoking way.
tyson covers all of the usual astronomical and cosmological subjects, frequently veering into philosophical and pragmatic asides. while his own interest in the subject is clearly insatiable, his talent for engaging others and making them as excited is most notable. it would be difficult for a reader with even a cursory enthusiasm to muster the escape velocity necessary to avoid the pull of tyson's abundant passion and fervor.
ndt is an irreplaceable asset not only to the science community at large, but to anyone that values the role of education and curiosity in a free society. death by black hole is a veritable buffet for the imagination... and what better conduit to the stars than the essays of neil degrasse tyson.
death by black hole is divided into 7 sections; each delving into a particular realm of scientific inquest and knowledge. spanning 13.8 billion years, tyson considers everything from the big bang and inflation to the current state of science education and its detractors. as with all of his writing (or media appearances), tyson is remarkably erudite, good-natured, and gifted with a fantastic, if sometimes charmingly corny sense of humor. even subjects that may already be well familiar to the reader are offered in a refreshing, thought-provoking way.
tyson covers all of the usual astronomical and cosmological subjects, frequently veering into philosophical and pragmatic asides. while his own interest in the subject is clearly insatiable, his talent for engaging others and making them as excited is most notable. it would be difficult for a reader with even a cursory enthusiasm to muster the escape velocity necessary to avoid the pull of tyson's abundant passion and fervor.
ndt is an irreplaceable asset not only to the science community at large, but to anyone that values the role of education and curiosity in a free society. death by black hole is a veritable buffet for the imagination... and what better conduit to the stars than the essays of neil degrasse tyson.
to deny or erase the rich, colorful history of scientists and other thinkers who have invoked divinity in their work would be intellectually dishonest. surely there's an appropriate place for intelligent design to live in the academic landscape. how about the history of religion? how about philosophy or psychology? the one place it doesn't belong is the science classroom.
if you're not swayed by academic arguments, consider the financial consequences. allow intelligent design into science textbooks, lecture halls, and laboratories, and the cost to the frontier of scientific discovery - the frontier that drives the economies of the future - would be incalculable. i don't want students who could make the next major breakthrough in renewable energy sources or space travel to have been taught that anything they don't understand, and that nobody yet understands, is divinely constructed and therefore beyond their intellectual capacity. the day that happens, americans will just sit in awe of what we don't understand, while we watch the rest of the world boldly go where no mortal has gone before.
September 25, 2015
Teško se odlučujem za čitanje znanstvene knjige, jer mi koncentracija nije kao što je nekad bila, a i očito je da su se i neki neuroni i njihove međusobne veze ugasili... ali ipak, ne dam se :-)
"Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries", Neila deGrasse Tysona je čitko i vrlo razumljivo štivo ne samo o crnim rupama, nego, kako kaže i podnaslov "ostalim kozmičkim nedoumicama" koje nisu nužno astronomske prirode. Knjiga je nastala skupljanjem preko 40 najdražih Tysonovih eseja originalno objavljenih u časopisu Natural History. Sve je prožeto odličnim humorom i pisano je neopterećeno nepotrebnim detaljima, a čak bih rekao i razigrano. Tako da je tu i cijeli rant o greškama u poznatim filmovima. Naprimjer film Kontakt (koji planiram pogledati jer sam ga davno gledao, a upravo sam - konačno! - pročitao i knjigu), u jednoj sceni glavni lik, kojeg glumi Jodie Foster, kaže:
"If there are 400 billion stars in the galaxy, and just one in a million had planets, and just one in a million of those had life, and just one in a million of those had intelligent life, that still leaves millions of planets to explore."
Tyson nastavlja:
"Wrong. According to her numbers, that leaves 0.0000004 planets with intelligent life on them, which is a figure somewhat lower than “millions.” No doubt that “one in a million” sounds better on screen than “one in ten,” but you can’t fake math."
Kako kaže u nastavku ne krivi toliko scenariste koliko samu Jodie Foster koja je završila studij na prestižnom Yale sveučilištu, a nije ukazala na tu grešku.
Ima i dio o odnosu znanosti i religije. A na kraju se morao osvrnuti i na "inteligentni dizajn", koji religijske grupe u SAD-u već godinama pokušavaju ugurati u školske znanstvene udžbenike, kao da se radi o teoriji koja ima isti kredibilitet kao Teorija evolucije.
Evo citata gdje se šaljivo osvrnuo na "savršenost" dizajna naših tijela:
"We eat, drink, and breathe through the same hole in the head, and so, despite Henry J. Heimlich’s eponymous maneuver, choking is the fourth leading cause of “unintentional injury death” in the United States. How about drowning, the fifth leading cause? Water covers almost three-quarters of Earth’s surface, yet we are land creatures—submerge your head for just a few minutes and you die."
I nešto kasnije:
"And what comedian configured the region between our legs—an entertainment complex built around a sewage system?"
Pametno isprepleteno s tim šaljivim i lakšim poglavljima tu je i opis nastanka svemira prema Teoriji velikog praska, gdje sam se malo pogubio i neke dijelove morao čitati par puta, iako sam već ne znam koliko puta gledao i predavanja i čitao o tome. Zatim je tu, naravno, i opis kako bi izgledala smrt upadanjem u crnu rupu (s nogama naprijed). Uglavnom već sam razdužio pa neću u detalje ali samo da kažem da će pojam "špagetizacija" sigurno ući u riječnike.
"Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries", Neila deGrasse Tysona je čitko i vrlo razumljivo štivo ne samo o crnim rupama, nego, kako kaže i podnaslov "ostalim kozmičkim nedoumicama" koje nisu nužno astronomske prirode. Knjiga je nastala skupljanjem preko 40 najdražih Tysonovih eseja originalno objavljenih u časopisu Natural History. Sve je prožeto odličnim humorom i pisano je neopterećeno nepotrebnim detaljima, a čak bih rekao i razigrano. Tako da je tu i cijeli rant o greškama u poznatim filmovima. Naprimjer film Kontakt (koji planiram pogledati jer sam ga davno gledao, a upravo sam - konačno! - pročitao i knjigu), u jednoj sceni glavni lik, kojeg glumi Jodie Foster, kaže:
"If there are 400 billion stars in the galaxy, and just one in a million had planets, and just one in a million of those had life, and just one in a million of those had intelligent life, that still leaves millions of planets to explore."
Tyson nastavlja:
"Wrong. According to her numbers, that leaves 0.0000004 planets with intelligent life on them, which is a figure somewhat lower than “millions.” No doubt that “one in a million” sounds better on screen than “one in ten,” but you can’t fake math."
Kako kaže u nastavku ne krivi toliko scenariste koliko samu Jodie Foster koja je završila studij na prestižnom Yale sveučilištu, a nije ukazala na tu grešku.
Ima i dio o odnosu znanosti i religije. A na kraju se morao osvrnuti i na "inteligentni dizajn", koji religijske grupe u SAD-u već godinama pokušavaju ugurati u školske znanstvene udžbenike, kao da se radi o teoriji koja ima isti kredibilitet kao Teorija evolucije.
Evo citata gdje se šaljivo osvrnuo na "savršenost" dizajna naših tijela:
"We eat, drink, and breathe through the same hole in the head, and so, despite Henry J. Heimlich’s eponymous maneuver, choking is the fourth leading cause of “unintentional injury death” in the United States. How about drowning, the fifth leading cause? Water covers almost three-quarters of Earth’s surface, yet we are land creatures—submerge your head for just a few minutes and you die."
I nešto kasnije:
"And what comedian configured the region between our legs—an entertainment complex built around a sewage system?"
Pametno isprepleteno s tim šaljivim i lakšim poglavljima tu je i opis nastanka svemira prema Teoriji velikog praska, gdje sam se malo pogubio i neke dijelove morao čitati par puta, iako sam već ne znam koliko puta gledao i predavanja i čitao o tome. Zatim je tu, naravno, i opis kako bi izgledala smrt upadanjem u crnu rupu (s nogama naprijed). Uglavnom već sam razdužio pa neću u detalje ali samo da kažem da će pojam "špagetizacija" sigurno ući u riječnike.
January 5, 2013
My main dissatisfaction with this book is that it's a series of collected magazine columns. This does seem a bit like criticising an apple because it's not a banana, however I think Tyson would have be been better advised to hire an editor to whip this into an actual book, rather than just reprint the original short essays. For example, in chapter 25 Tyson critiques the concept of the "Goldilocks Zone", discussing the myriad ways life could flourish in environments entirely dissimilar to our own e.g. in seas of liquid ammonia or methane. But then in the following chapter Tyson contends that life will only originate on a planet with a temperature that allows liquid water i.e. in the Goldilocks Zone. Originally these essays would have been published months or years apart, but juxtaposed like this it is a frustrating read, to say the least.
The other problem with short essays is that things just start to get interesting and it's over. In chapter 21 Tyson briefly mentions technetium; an element with a half-life of only 2 million years, but which is nevertheless found in red giant stars.
"In other words, the star cannot have been born with the stuff, for if it were there would be none left by now. There is also no known mechanism to create technetium in a star's core and have it dredge itself up to the surface where it is observed, which has led to exotic theories that have yet to achieve consensus in the astrophysics community"
But you know, those diverse and exotic theories are exactly what I'd like to hear about! That was the most interesting part of the book for me, and it just gets left lying gasping on the floor.
Also, sadly, the book is aimed at someone who has done little or no prior science reading; a far broader generalist audience that I hoped for. I 100% agree with Maria's review, when she says this would be a good high-school-level book. If you don't generally read pop-science, but would like to learn more about how our universe works, I definitely recommend this book. Tyson is a great writer: engaging and able to explain complex ideas simply, with a dash of humour.
For me it's a 2.5, rounded up.
The other problem with short essays is that things just start to get interesting and it's over. In chapter 21 Tyson briefly mentions technetium; an element with a half-life of only 2 million years, but which is nevertheless found in red giant stars.
"In other words, the star cannot have been born with the stuff, for if it were there would be none left by now. There is also no known mechanism to create technetium in a star's core and have it dredge itself up to the surface where it is observed, which has led to exotic theories that have yet to achieve consensus in the astrophysics community"
But you know, those diverse and exotic theories are exactly what I'd like to hear about! That was the most interesting part of the book for me, and it just gets left lying gasping on the floor.
Also, sadly, the book is aimed at someone who has done little or no prior science reading; a far broader generalist audience that I hoped for. I 100% agree with Maria's review, when she says this would be a good high-school-level book. If you don't generally read pop-science, but would like to learn more about how our universe works, I definitely recommend this book. Tyson is a great writer: engaging and able to explain complex ideas simply, with a dash of humour.
For me it's a 2.5, rounded up.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,535 reviews