What do you think?
Rate this book
The New Cosmos: Answering Astronomy's Big Questions
Immerse yourself in David J. Eicher's fascinating and spectacular exploration of the Cosmos. Featuring numerous color images including photos, maps and explanatory diagrams, he presents a series of celestial highlights ranging from our own solar system and galaxy to distant planetary systems and galaxies, and from the lives and deaths of stars to the overall composition and fate of the cosmos. Each chapter sets out the scientific history of a specific question or problem, before tracing the modern observations and evidence that helps answer or solve it. It will instil in you with a new sense of wonder at the amazing universe that we inhabit, simultaneously awakening both your humility as a cosmic speck of dust and your awe at our present understanding of the cosmos. This is essential reading for anyone with an interest in science, astronomy and space science.
295 pages, Hardcover
First published December 15, 2015
23 people are currently reading
180 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
June 16, 2019
The first great leap in observational astronomy came on an autumn night in 1609, when Italian physicist, mathematician, and astronomer Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) climbed to the top of his house to make a rooftop observation. A few weeks earlier Galileo, ever the ambitious teacher and inventor, had heard troubling news. Dutch opticians had made a device using curved lenses that could magnify distant objects, making them seem closer. Galileo heard this while he was in Venice, and believed that cheap so-called telescopes were even showing up for sale on the streets of Paris.
When English physicist and mathematician Isaac Newton (1642–1727) came along, the basis of astronomy in rational physics solidified. Newton’s Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy (Latin: Philiosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, or Principia for short), published in 1687, laid down classical mechanics, the laws of motion, and the law of universal gravitation – all keys to understanding the universe in a fundamental way.
Venus was first explored extensively, and mapped in nice detail, by the Magellan spacecraft in the early 1990s. Immediately, this mapping mission revealed some pretty amazing results that are still being worked on and puzzled over. Smooth plains created by major volcanic eruptions extensively cover the surface of Venus. The presence of sulfur in the venusian atmosphere suggests that occasional volcanic activity still takes place. But as the Moon and Mercury show us so well, the inner solar system has been heavily battered by small impacts – during the Late Heavy Bombardment and also, with less frequency, more recently.
Nothing drives astronomy like that oldest of all philosophical questions: Are we alone in the universe? Spacecraft missions concentrate on Mars because of the Red Planet's relative similarity to Earth and the existence of water there, leading to the possibility of microbial life. The rapidly growing cottage industry of finding and studying extrasolar planets looks forward to detecting Earth analogs that may also reveal atmospheric signatures of living beings. The discovery of life elsewhere in the cosmos would certainly mark one of the most incredible moments in human history, a milestone at which we would understand we are not unique in the universe.
Modern definitions of life start with a simple idea: When you see something that's alive, you know it. But the underpinning of the definition of life is more complex, and consists of several attributes. First, living things display order, for example in the arrangements of atoms in their molecules. Lots of inorganic molecules also have orderly arrangements of atoms (think water, salt, etc.), but living things must have order, while nonliving things don't necessarily need to be ordered. Second, living things reproduce or are products of reproduction. Reproduction is a necessity of life, as without it, life would not go on. Third, life exhibits growth and development. Living things grow and develop over time in part governed by their heredity, which is in turn controlled by inherited DNA. (Although this might not be true for life elsewhere.) Fourth, living organisms utilize energy from their environment, according to the second law of thermodynamics. Without energy from our environment, we would quickly die. Living beings take in energy and transform it in order to operate their bodies and counter entropy, which pushes everything in the universe from order to disorder. Life is, in large part, a fight against increasing entropy that we eventually will lose. Fifth, living things respond to their environment. Creatures may move around to find preferable temperatures or
sources of food.
The Big Rip hypothesis began its life in a paper published by American theoretical physicist Robert Caldwell of Dartmouth College and his colleagues in 2003. Taken with the physicists’ most likely case, some 60 million years before the Rip, gravity would become too weak to hold individual galaxies together. Milkomeda, which will by then have been a merged galaxy for billions of years, will begin to shred apart. Some 3 months before the Big Rip, the physicists calculate, whatever is left of our solar system, along with countless other solar systems in countless galaxies, would be torn asunder. In the final minutes of the Rip, stars and planets would be gravitationally unbound, and very close to the final instant of the Rip itself, atoms would come apart and matter would exist no
more. The Big Rip scenario is highly unlikely given what we know about dark energy. It violates certain physical principles that are likely to be true. But we are in the realm of possibilities here, and not empirical observations. So there are certainly other possibilities that may happen too.
Most cosmologists would suggest that another scenario, the Big Freeze, is where the universe is heading. This is a little more mainstream approach, given what we know about dark energy. Most cosmologists believe the universe will expand forever and that a colder, darker, lonelier cosmos lies in the deep future. As billions and even trillions of years roll on, redshifts will stretch photons into
undetectable wavelengths and eventually the supply of gas that could make new stars will be exhausted. Ultimately, stellar remnants will also be gone, leaving behind only black holes, which themselves will ultimately disappear due to Hawking radiation. An incredibly long way down the line, the universe will reach a point of inactivity called heat death.
Astronomers know there is a range of masses in which stars die as neutron stars, and a range of greater masses in which stars die as black holes. There is probably a maximum mass that any neutron star can have, and beyond that mass, gravity would overwhelm the neutron pressure. For masses far greater than the greatest neutron star mass, dying stars will form a black hole. The density of a neutron star is about 10 quadrillion times that of water.
When English physicist and mathematician Isaac Newton (1642–1727) came along, the basis of astronomy in rational physics solidified. Newton’s Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy (Latin: Philiosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, or Principia for short), published in 1687, laid down classical mechanics, the laws of motion, and the law of universal gravitation – all keys to understanding the universe in a fundamental way.
Venus was first explored extensively, and mapped in nice detail, by the Magellan spacecraft in the early 1990s. Immediately, this mapping mission revealed some pretty amazing results that are still being worked on and puzzled over. Smooth plains created by major volcanic eruptions extensively cover the surface of Venus. The presence of sulfur in the venusian atmosphere suggests that occasional volcanic activity still takes place. But as the Moon and Mercury show us so well, the inner solar system has been heavily battered by small impacts – during the Late Heavy Bombardment and also, with less frequency, more recently.
Nothing drives astronomy like that oldest of all philosophical questions: Are we alone in the universe? Spacecraft missions concentrate on Mars because of the Red Planet's relative similarity to Earth and the existence of water there, leading to the possibility of microbial life. The rapidly growing cottage industry of finding and studying extrasolar planets looks forward to detecting Earth analogs that may also reveal atmospheric signatures of living beings. The discovery of life elsewhere in the cosmos would certainly mark one of the most incredible moments in human history, a milestone at which we would understand we are not unique in the universe.
Modern definitions of life start with a simple idea: When you see something that's alive, you know it. But the underpinning of the definition of life is more complex, and consists of several attributes. First, living things display order, for example in the arrangements of atoms in their molecules. Lots of inorganic molecules also have orderly arrangements of atoms (think water, salt, etc.), but living things must have order, while nonliving things don't necessarily need to be ordered. Second, living things reproduce or are products of reproduction. Reproduction is a necessity of life, as without it, life would not go on. Third, life exhibits growth and development. Living things grow and develop over time in part governed by their heredity, which is in turn controlled by inherited DNA. (Although this might not be true for life elsewhere.) Fourth, living organisms utilize energy from their environment, according to the second law of thermodynamics. Without energy from our environment, we would quickly die. Living beings take in energy and transform it in order to operate their bodies and counter entropy, which pushes everything in the universe from order to disorder. Life is, in large part, a fight against increasing entropy that we eventually will lose. Fifth, living things respond to their environment. Creatures may move around to find preferable temperatures or
sources of food.
The Big Rip hypothesis began its life in a paper published by American theoretical physicist Robert Caldwell of Dartmouth College and his colleagues in 2003. Taken with the physicists’ most likely case, some 60 million years before the Rip, gravity would become too weak to hold individual galaxies together. Milkomeda, which will by then have been a merged galaxy for billions of years, will begin to shred apart. Some 3 months before the Big Rip, the physicists calculate, whatever is left of our solar system, along with countless other solar systems in countless galaxies, would be torn asunder. In the final minutes of the Rip, stars and planets would be gravitationally unbound, and very close to the final instant of the Rip itself, atoms would come apart and matter would exist no
more. The Big Rip scenario is highly unlikely given what we know about dark energy. It violates certain physical principles that are likely to be true. But we are in the realm of possibilities here, and not empirical observations. So there are certainly other possibilities that may happen too.
Most cosmologists would suggest that another scenario, the Big Freeze, is where the universe is heading. This is a little more mainstream approach, given what we know about dark energy. Most cosmologists believe the universe will expand forever and that a colder, darker, lonelier cosmos lies in the deep future. As billions and even trillions of years roll on, redshifts will stretch photons into
undetectable wavelengths and eventually the supply of gas that could make new stars will be exhausted. Ultimately, stellar remnants will also be gone, leaving behind only black holes, which themselves will ultimately disappear due to Hawking radiation. An incredibly long way down the line, the universe will reach a point of inactivity called heat death.
Astronomers know there is a range of masses in which stars die as neutron stars, and a range of greater masses in which stars die as black holes. There is probably a maximum mass that any neutron star can have, and beyond that mass, gravity would overwhelm the neutron pressure. For masses far greater than the greatest neutron star mass, dying stars will form a black hole. The density of a neutron star is about 10 quadrillion times that of water.
August 17, 2024
Perhaps not cutting edge anymore as it came out in 2015, but a fascinating look at what we think we know about the universes origins, its present state, and its future.
I particularly liked how the author again and again helps the reader to appreciate, to the degree that our minds can deal with that fact, the immensity of the universe. For example just knowing that Voyager 1 won't even exit the solar system-after passing through the Oort Cloud--to enter interstellar space for another 28,000 years. He then discusses the scale of the solar system, which is not at all like what one might think from looking at solar system models in school. On a scale of 1 cm equaling 1 astronomical unit (AU), the distance between the sun and earth is 1 cm. Mars is 1.5 cm from the sun. Jupiter is 5 cm. But then Neptune is 30 cm from the sun. The Kuiper belt up to 50 cm from the sun. OK, good enough, but then you have to go 100 meters further out to get to the inner edge of the Oort Cloud that surrounds our solar system. The outer edge of the Oort Cloud would then be 1000 meters from the sun, keeping in mind that Earth is only 1 cm from the sun. Meanwhile humans in spaceships have barely traveled 1/389th cm from Earth. That is how far we are from even traveling to the edge of interstellar space, much less reaching out to the nearest star. On this scale of 1cm = 1 AU, the nearest star is about 266,000 cm from the Earth (4.2 light years). And of course 4.2 light years is nothing in a universe that is 93 billion light years across, or even in just our galaxy that is about 105,700 light years across. The scale could unhinge the mind if one thought about it too much. Anyway, a fascinating read.
I particularly liked how the author again and again helps the reader to appreciate, to the degree that our minds can deal with that fact, the immensity of the universe. For example just knowing that Voyager 1 won't even exit the solar system-after passing through the Oort Cloud--to enter interstellar space for another 28,000 years. He then discusses the scale of the solar system, which is not at all like what one might think from looking at solar system models in school. On a scale of 1 cm equaling 1 astronomical unit (AU), the distance between the sun and earth is 1 cm. Mars is 1.5 cm from the sun. Jupiter is 5 cm. But then Neptune is 30 cm from the sun. The Kuiper belt up to 50 cm from the sun. OK, good enough, but then you have to go 100 meters further out to get to the inner edge of the Oort Cloud that surrounds our solar system. The outer edge of the Oort Cloud would then be 1000 meters from the sun, keeping in mind that Earth is only 1 cm from the sun. Meanwhile humans in spaceships have barely traveled 1/389th cm from Earth. That is how far we are from even traveling to the edge of interstellar space, much less reaching out to the nearest star. On this scale of 1cm = 1 AU, the nearest star is about 266,000 cm from the Earth (4.2 light years). And of course 4.2 light years is nothing in a universe that is 93 billion light years across, or even in just our galaxy that is about 105,700 light years across. The scale could unhinge the mind if one thought about it too much. Anyway, a fascinating read.
December 8, 2021
The book is fascinating, dense in information, and beautifully illustrated. I am pleased to have read it.
It is also a challenge to read. Some chapters are easy to understand but others are difficult. Most chapters were beautifully presented but some were more vague and less interesting. I thought his best work was wonderful in the early chapters and in his descriptions of dark matter and dark energy.
It is also a challenge to read. Some chapters are easy to understand but others are difficult. Most chapters were beautifully presented but some were more vague and less interesting. I thought his best work was wonderful in the early chapters and in his descriptions of dark matter and dark energy.
March 2, 2019
I wanted something to catch me up in the field, given that my degree was nearly 30 years ago now. This was a good compromise between general reading and detail, although I would have preferred more detail. This was engagingly written and covered the breadth of topics I needed it to. I would recommend for anyone looking for a fairly up to date summary of modern astronomy and astrophysics.
March 26, 2021
It is a nice popular introduction about four or five years old at the time of reading. This is stuff I spend a lot of time on so nothing really new in it for me but pleasurable and accessible to a newbie to the subject. Cute illustrations. Learn about the solar system, local stars, our galaxy, and our universe. Good stuff.
August 1, 2017
A good read
I like this book because it gives information on the latest astronomical advances. It's a very easy read for the armchair astronomer.
I like this book because it gives information on the latest astronomical advances. It's a very easy read for the armchair astronomer.
March 5, 2018
Cannot recommend this enough for a full(er) understanding of our solar system, galaxy, and the universe. Will keep going back to this
July 4, 2020
David Eicher is not a Superstar like DeGrass, but he focuses all his effort to explain the main: Cosmos.
If you read the original "COSMOS" (Carl Sagan), you will enjoy this updated one without any kind of problems. This is a gift for everyone want to know more about lastest update from the Universe.
A Masterpiece. Until Milkomeda comes to us
If you read the original "COSMOS" (Carl Sagan), you will enjoy this updated one without any kind of problems. This is a gift for everyone want to know more about lastest update from the Universe.
A Masterpiece. Until Milkomeda comes to us
June 19, 2016
This is a thin but nicely crafted book with lots of great photographs. Eicher does a good job of focusing on Astronomy's big questions. The book is broken up into essays centered around specific questions about things like dark energy and dark matter. Unfortunately, Eicher can be mind-numbingly boring. I found myself nodding off to sleep several times. He doesn't know when to stop with the details. Venus is a fascinating planet, but I just couldn't care about the specifics about every single part of its surface. I am actually somewhat grateful for sometimes tedious prose because it served as a reminder to me that there are limits to my fascination with science, and that is why I didn't end up in that field. Another gripe: Eicher strangely gives birth and death years to every astronomer mentioned. I mean, who the hell cares? It was kind of depressing because it highlighted how few women are in the field, and that the field is dominated by old guys.
April 17, 2016
Same general concept as in Carl Sagan's concept, - the most current knowledge of the most interesting topics for the general public starting with water on Mars, Venus' weirdly young surface, the rather recent knowledge of the shape of the Milky Way, how life would end on Earth, what we know about dark matter and dark energy (not much) and why Pluto isn't a planet.
There's information about how and who made the discoveries without going into mathematical details (But you can find two mentions of equations - one of Einstein's and one of Drake's).
If you only ever read one book about astronomy - this one is a great one.
If you read a lot of astronomy books and news, - it's a nice refresher course :)
There's information about how and who made the discoveries without going into mathematical details (But you can find two mentions of equations - one of Einstein's and one of Drake's).
If you only ever read one book about astronomy - this one is a great one.
If you read a lot of astronomy books and news, - it's a nice refresher course :)
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews