Bad Astronomy: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed, from Astrology to the Moon Landing "Hoax" [Paperback]

Of course, Albert Einstein is also purported to have won the Nobel Prize for his Theory of Relativity.

This is just one myth dispelled by "Bad Astronomy", by Phil Plait, a highly entertaining, thought-provoking, extraordinarily readable anthology of misconceptions about the oldest world's oldest science, Astronomy.

From reasons an egg will stand on end (if patiently balanced) even if it's not the Vernal Equinox to the phases of the moon, all is explained in the simplest of terms. One of the best is an explanation of how, during a wedding reception, Plait was able to relate the revolution of the moon around the earth to his daughter, as she stood on his feet while he danced with her (he was the earth, she was the moon) - after reading this, I demonstrated to my daughter, and (though she kept falling off from laughing) she understood as well as I. Further discussions of the moon and tides include diagrams which are simple and sensible - and eminently useful for teaching anyone who wants to learn.

Another misconception is the idea of seeing stars during the day, using as an example a child's prank of using "the tube" - down which another child (no doubt a prior victim) will pour water, dousing the unsuspecting child. Yet it is true that stars are sometimes visible as the sun sets, and that the moon and Venus are both visible in the blue sky. But can you sit at the bottom of a well at noon and see stars? Nope! Simple discussions of real experiments are presented, as well as the "findings" of a good friend of Plait's who insists it is possible. Plait is chagrined this man stands by this theory, yet as he is willing to accept, with the advent of research, perhaps someone will prove this concept true at some later date. It's doubtful, though!

The confusion Aristotle created with his theories of the geo-centric universe is also discussed; Aristotle's teachings are referenced without specifics, mentioned more because he refused to accept the facts of retrograde motion, disbelieving his own eyes. In truth, it is something of an anomaly to me: I cannot actually see it because my eyes work independently (results of bad surgery when I was pre-pubescent); I cannot focus nor can I judge distance. I have learned what retrograde motion is in scientific terms, and I accept it, but - and this is a failing many people have - I cannot actually see it, therefore, it is difficult for me to believe it strictly "on faith". Plait as usual employs simple examples to explain the concept, and while I still can't "see" the results, his explanation became the eye of the storm in my mind.

It's the type of book that stimulates my curiosity, something rare to me these days, as the world tumbles by, and I feel bombarded by more information than I could possibly use: information which, as proven in this text, is often incomplete - or completely wrong. Yet here I find myself alternately amused and fascinated by Plait's use of laymen's terms to discuss photons of light, gravity, seasons, and time. And yet, as I am inspired to learn more about the ever-changing science of astronomy, I recall the tales my mother told me, the same stories I pass on to my child, and I see the beauty of the errors taught to me. Romantic, yes, fun, and sometimes lessons are to be learned in the ancient (and erroneous) legends passed on through the ages; just as we learn and grow, even having the facts as they are presented by Plait, it's still nice to hear the version that sparks the imagination in so many fantastic ways.

By the way, in 1921, Einstein *did* win the Nobel Prize for his research on quantum theory - a mathematical form not Einstein's own, but first adapted by Max Planck.

Einstein was a wiseguy, though, well before his time. I'd be willing to bet the quote is accurate!