Old Book Reviews, Part Four: Worlds Without End

This is the fourth and last of the book reviews I had published in the SEPA Journal, o' those many years ago.  To be honest, I don't think I've read this book since I reviewed it, but after rereading the review, I would like too.  Sadly, I have a vague memory of donating it to Ritter Planetarium for a display on planet formation.  Sigh.

Worlds Without End—The Exploration of Planets Known and Unknown

By John S. Lewis

Copyright 1998

240 Pages

Helix Books-Perseus Books

ISBN 0-7382-0170-7

Paperback $13.00

 Buy at Amazon

Do we live on the best of all possible worlds? John Lewis, Professor of Planetary Sciences at the University of Arizona-Tuscon, puts this age-old question to the test in “Worlds Without End”.

I have to admit that I misread the cover notes of the book. When I first picked it up, I had assumed that it was a book on current ideas of planet formation, and how the new extra-solar planets are putting a slight kink into these ideas. In part, that’s what Worlds Without End is. But it is also much more.

The author does vividly describe the formation of our solar system. He goes into great detail about the chemical and physical properties of the accretion disk, step by step taking the reader through the processes of planet formation right up to the present day.

After explaining the solar system we have, he starts to tinker with reality by asking “what if”. What would the Earth be like if it were 10 times more massive than it is, or 1/10^th the mass, and everything else stayed the same? What if instead of a G star, our Sun was an O, F, or K? Lewis plays with the parameters of planets we know, and tries to come up with many, in not most, of the types of environments we can expect to find in the Universe.

Throughout the book, Lewis is searching for places where life might somehow exist. He considers almost every location: Very Earth-like planets, gas giants, satellites, and even brown dwarfs. He even examines star systems with two or more stars and planets ejected into interstellar space.

Not surprisingly, he dismisses many environments. A planet around an O or B star would not have enough time to become biologically interesting before it’s star died. The life zone around the lowest mass stars is so close that any planet there would be tidally locked at best, or ripped apart at worst.

Throughout the book, Lewis straddles the line between being too general and too technical. I found the book to be stimulating rather than challenging. His writing style is very well polished, each thought logically leading to the next. Even the flow between chapters was almost seamless.

In essence, Worlds Without End is a thought experiment, a scientifically grounded flight of fancy. He tries to answer the question of just how Earth-like a planet must be to be considered “Earthlike”. I found his conclusions to be both thought provoking and entertaining.

Old Book Reviews, Part Three: The Demon Haunted World

The third of my rediscovered book reviews first published in the the SEPA Journal.  The target audience of this review were planetarians and other astronomy educators, but that shouldn't take away from the overall gist of things.  BTW:  I really cannot endorse this book enough!  I've read it a few more times since this review, and I can honestly say that it is one of books that have had a great impact on my thinking. 

The Demon-Haunted World:  Science as a Candle in the Dark
by Carl Sagan
©1996
ISBN # 0-345-4096-9
Ballantine
$14.00
434 pages

 

Buy at Amazon

I have often wondered how today’s society would be viewed by an observer in the distant
future.  When I first posed that question to myself, I came up with answers such as great
advances in medical science, the first space flight, and the unleashing of the atom.  Over
the last few years, though, I started to look around and see things like 1-900 psychic
numbers, the Harmonic Convergence and other planetary alignments, and alien
abductions.  I began to wonder if we would be perceived any differently from the
superstitious peasants of the Middle Ages.

Since I have started working in the Planetarium community, I have spent much more time
thinking about such things.  We’ve all had our encounters with the public and their
misconceptions and misunderstandings about science.  Sadly, many of us are now more
surprised by the person who is well informed and curious, rather than misinformed and
afraid.

In The Demon-Haunted World, Carl Sagan takes a long, hard look at both our present and
past understanding of science and the world around us.  The overall picture he draws is
not pretty.  Even in this age of rapid scientific advancement and communication, we as a
whole still continue to be a superstitious, ignorant conglomeration of people.

The main functions of Sagan’s book are to define science and to show how its methods
and principles are invaluable tools in all aspects of life.  This he does very well.  A
secondary function of the book is to debunk much of the pseudo-science that is prevalent
in the world today.  This he does even better.

Sagan explores the phenomena of alien abduction in great detail, without wallowing in
too much minutia.  Like any good scientist must, he appears to approach the topic with an
open mind.  He lays out many arguments and evidence put forth by the believers of these
abductions, as well as the counter arguments.  Rather than just dismissing the claims, he
tries to discover the truth.  His conclusions are very lucid, even if they are what you
would expect.

Along the way, we discover an almost frighteningly close parallel between the belief in
aliens today and the belief in incubi and witches of yesteryear.  One begins to question
whether we have advanced at all.

Overall, the book was a joy to read.  I must say I was surprised at how easy it was to get
through, and how much of it stayed with me after I was done reading it.  I have only two
complaints about the book.  First, in many parts it feels like a set of shorter essays strung
together, sometimes seeming to shift from one topic to another.  Second, many of the
chapter titles are rather vague.  It’s hard to go back and locate a specific part for review.

Even so, The Demon-Haunted World is one of the best non-fiction books I have ever
read.  After completing it, I felt inspired and invigorated in my work as a planetarian.  I
wholeheartedly recommend this book to anyone, especially those in the science education
field.

Old Book Reviews, Part Two: Blind Wachers of the Sky

This is the second of old book reviews I found in my archives.  First published in the SEPA Journal, (Southeastern Planetarium Association) it was written for an audience already familiar with the history of astronomy.  Still, that shouldn't take away from the original message of the piece, which is to READ THIS BOOK!  :)

Blind Watchers of the Sky -- The People and Ideas that Shaped Our View of the
Universe.
by Rocky Kolb
©1996
ISBN # 0-201-15496-X Pbk
Helix Books
$14.00
338 pages

 

Buy it at Amazon

Before I begin my review of this book, I feel I should -in the spirit of full disclosure-
admit that I have a strong bias in favor of the chosen subject matter and writing style.
There, now that that’s out of the way, the rest of what I have to say boils down to this:
READ THIS BOOK!  It really is a treasure, and should be the source of a great deal of
inspiration to all of us.

Like several other books in the last decade (The God Particle and Coming of Age in the
Milky Way come to mind) Mr. Kolb’s book takes us on a historical journey of science. In
some ways, the scope of that journey is smaller and more focused than is presented in the
other two books, but is also more warm and intimate, more human.

Blind Watchers of the Sky is divided into three parts:  The Solar System, The Galaxy, and
The Universe. Roughly chronological, the story of how we as a civilization have
expanded our understanding of the scope and workings of our universe starts with Tycho
Brahe and works up to today (or at least 1996).

If forced to pick, I would have to say that part one was my favorite. The four chapters
here concentrate on Brahe, Kepler, Galileo and Newton, respectively. Most of us are at
least somewhat familiar with the lives of these legends, but Mr. Kolb breathes life into
them as people. His relaxed writing style really soars here.  Especially nice is Mr. Kolb’s
tendency to put historical events in the context of modern times. (Imagine Tycho Brahe
having to deal with a congressional committee!)

Part two relates how we began to come to terms with the size of our surroundings, from
the Earth and the solar system, all the way to the farthest galaxies. (hint:  we know how
big the universe is because of a hole in the ground in Aswan.) It also has one of the best
recountings of the Shapley/Curtis debates on the nature of the spiral nebulae.

Part three takes us into the realm of the expanding universe. (“The expansion of the
universe is an expansion of space, not an expansion of galaxies into space” is now my
new mantra whenever my mind boggles.) Hubble, Einstein, Penzias, Wilson, and others
are covered here.  Like every other character in his narrative, Mr. Kolb truly fleshes them
out, makes them real.

Blind Watchers is intended for the lay reader, but should be fascinating to even the most
technical among us. The stories related within it’s pages are our stories, our common
heritage in the world of astronomy. It is a pleasant look back at the past, to see how far
we have come. Only with that understanding, can we appreciate how far we have yet to
go.

Old Book Reviews, Part One: Starry Messenger

I was going through some old files the other day, when I found some book reviews I had published in the Southeastern Planetarium Association (SEPA) Newsletter in the late 90's.  I thought they were fun, or at least something to pad my blog with, so without any more delay, here is the first of up to four.  

Starry Messenger:  Galileo Galilei
Created and Illustrated by Peter Sis
© 1996
Frances Foster Books
37 pages
$16.00

 

http://www.petersis.com/content/starry_messenger.html

While visiting Nashville, TN last year, Waylena McCully and I were fantasy shopping in,
where else, the local book stores. Walking that thin line between desire and sensibility is
always a risk, but we both managed to escape with our wallets non the worse for wear.
This was made all the more remarkable when you take into account the surprising find of
the year.

Waylena was browsing the children’s section when she happened upon a gem of a book.
Starry Messenger has the look and feel of a children’s book, but it’s subject matter is a
little heavier than most of the genre.

Drawn in first by its ornate and beautiful artwork, we sat and read the whole book right
there, mesmerized by each turn of the page.  Each page is divided into wonderful
drawings and two kinds of text.  Large, friendly fonts relate the basics of Galileo’s life
and his accomplishments.  Acting as a supplement to this, handwriting give’s details for
the more curious, but is not needed if reading the book to a child.  (More on that later.)

As we read the book there in the store, a passerby would have heard the following
exchange:  “You don’t think it will go into...”  “No way, it couldn’t...”  To the surprise of
both of us, it did. 

For a children’s book, Starry Messenger deals with the trial and conviction of Galileo
quite frankly and openly.  One of the passages in the book reads:  “Galileo was afraid. He
knew that people had suffered terrible torture and punishment for not following
tradition.” We were both quite impressed with the honesty.  However, I’m not sure that
all parents would feel the same way that we did.

The artwork is absolutely outstanding, and is by far the best part of the book.  Large,
woodcut type color illustrations range from the simply beautiful to downright frightening.
Each is superbly detailed, and will supply literally hours of enjoyment examining them.

Now over a year later, I have finally tracked down a copy of the book for very my own. I
highly recommend it for anyone interested in the history of astronomy and science.  It is
well worth the price for the pictures alone. (Have I mentioned how stunning they are?)

But as far as giving the book to a kid, I really don’t know.  To be honest, I would be
hesitant to read it to any child without clearing it with their parents.  That said, Starry
Messenger will be proudly displayed on my bookshelf.

On taxes, and how net worth is distributed in America

Not too long ago, my father sent me the following joke via e-mail.

Subj: U of Georgia explains the tax system in 3 minutes

No magic, no slight of hand, just a brief, simple example of the facts:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten
comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go
something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the
arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all
such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily
beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.The group still wanted to
pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were
unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six
men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that
everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six
is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth
man and the sixth man would now also each end up being paid to drink
his beer. So,the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by
roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each
should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to
drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare
their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to
the tenth man," but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too.
It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"

"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I
got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get
anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down
and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they
discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of
them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax
system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from
a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they
just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas
where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

Well, I was having a day at the time, and really felt like ranting.  This was my opportunity.  As I haven't posted in a while, I figured I would share my response to the joke.  No, it's not funny, but I think it makes some good points about the necessity of our tax system being progressive.  Comments are, of course, welcome.

Well, that's cute and all, but it hardly explains the whole system. It's a bit more complex than that. Let's not forget that the tax code has to accomplish many things all at once, not the least of which is providing the services that all of us need. First and foremost, it must leave tax payers enough to live on, and considering how steep the income and total worth curves are, it can't be done without each person playing their part.

For example, in this (very simple minded) scenario set up in the original e-mail, if the tenth man decided to "opt out", there would be no roads for him to even travel on to find another bar, no police to protect him from all the drunk drivers out there drinking free beer, and no regulators to make sure the airplane he charters out of the country meets at least the minimum of safety requirements. (And on regulations, if you trust that corporations running on the profit motive will self regulate and not cut corners, then I refer you to work and safety conditions in 1900, or many products coming out of China and other countries.)

And even if they do make it out of the country, they will have to deal with much higher taxes (and better services) in much of Europe, or spend more money on graft, corruption, and private security in the third world. Good luck there.

In reality, incomes and net worth at the highest levels have risen so much that the tax code just hasn't kept up. There is a real need for several more tax brackets. By way of example, I point to the following two articles:

http://news.oxerjen.com/the-400-richest-americans-are-now-richer-than-the-bottom-50-percent-combined/

http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2009/04/15/the-400-richest-americans-and-their-terrible-tax-burden/

The short version of these links shows the following: The 400 wealthiest Americans are worth more than the bottom 50% of us. While the over all percentage of taxes paid by this group has gone up slightly over the last 20 years, the percentage of income tax paid has gone down. (This group's wealth has risen so sharply that even with the lower percentage, they end up paying more actual cash.)

BTW: as of 2007, the median net worth of households in the U.S. is $120,300. (for those of you that have not taken stats in a while, that simply means that you line up each house hold's worth, from lowest to highest, and pick the middle one.) If we take the mean, or add up all the net worths and divide by the number of households, it jumps up to $556,300. The uber-rich really skew the numbers.

http://www.investingblog.org/archives/707/average-and-median-net-worth-data/

And what about you? Are you rich? Well, the median household income for the US (2009) was $49,777. Congratulations, if you made more than that (all members combined in your house) then you are in the richer half of the nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income

Okay, so maybe the top half doesn't make you rich. Does your household bring in $65K? You're in the top third. $100k? Top 17%. How about $250k? Now you're in the top 1.5% of US households. Consider yourself lucky. You were probably born into a white, middle class to upper middle class home, had good schools, and plenty of well off friends to network with.

http://www.mybudget360.com/how-much-does-the-average-american-make-breaking-down-the-us-household-income-numbers/

The top federal tax bracket (2010) in the US is 35%. That kicks in at $373,650, both for joint filing and single earners, effecting about 1% of us. 

http://www.moneybluebook.com/2010-federal-income-tax-brackets-irs-tax-rates/

I don't begrudge the uber-rich, or even the moderately well off their money. They earned it, absolutely. But we are all in this together, and the only way the system will work is if we all kick in what we can, when we can.

There is plenty of room for argument about our tax code, and it's more than time for us to have a national debate on this. But this is a complex subject, with many people more interested in protecting their own vast fortunes by twisting facts and manipulating emotions. The only way to come to a reasonable consensus is to be honest about the facts, figures, and desired outcomes.

It certainly doesn't help to spread simple metaphors that any collage professor, or even high school teacher, that I ever had would laugh out of the class room.