Lonely Planets

Thomas Boutell writes "Are we alone in the universe? Any curious human being will recognize the question. David Grinspoon's Lonely Planets is a broad, newcomer-friendly and often hilarious exploration of the subject of extraterrestrial life. David Grinspoon is a respected planetologist with a particular focus on Venus. He is also a very engaging writer, able to translate dry scientific ideas for a general audience without patronizing. Most surprisingly, he can tell a joke, and as a representative of the scientific tribe, he can also take one. His first-hand experiences growing up surrounded by luminaries like Carl Sagan and Isaac Asimov enable him to tell the story of astrobiology and SETI as few others can." Read on for the rest of Boutell's review. Lonely Planets author David Grinspoon pages 440 publisher Ecco / Harper-Collins rating 10 reviewer Thomas Boutell ISBN 0060185406 summary A marvelously accessible, irreverent and fun exploration of the possibilities for other life in the universe.

Grinspoon, though, never falls victim to the temptation to proclaim that intelligent aliens are a scientific certainty, nor does he ridicule those who come to a belief in aliens by a less-than-scientific route.

The book begins with a historical perspective, telling the old stories of Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and Lowell in fresh and surprising ways. This makes even these chapters recommended reading for experts as well as newcomers to astronomy. Grinspoon is not content to repeat the usual pieties about these scientific "saints." For instance, he reveals that Galileo did much to intentionally antagonize the pope in his writings about the solar system. He also discusses the more off-the-wall beliefs that many early luminaries of science have held. He explores the link between the end of the earth-centered view of the universe and the beginning of a centuries-long popular craze for the idea of planets around every sun, and intelligent beings on every planet.

The second section of the book deals with the science of suns, planets, moons, and the potential life in, on and around them. All of the popular candidates, including Mars, Europa, and Titan, are discussed in nonscientist-friendly detail. Unearthly life is a broad subject, and Grinspoon does not cover it with perfect evenness. His chapters on cosmology, the early Earth, chemical evolution, and the cambrian explosion are great stuff; but after a quality discussion of DNA, he builds up the idea that RNA most likely evolved first, with ever quite saying what RNA is or explaining its role in our cells today.

But this is a rare omission. The science in the book is sound, and the footnotes and asides consistently entertaining. No song reference or movie quote is left unquoted, always to good effect. Throughout, Grinspoon maintains an almost unheard-of humility, always careful to point out how much we simply don't know about life on Earth, let alone life elsewhere.

The third and final section of the book could never have been written by a less honest or more egotistical scientist. It may also help that he plays in a reggae band. Titled "Belief," part three begins with a discussion of the development and present state of SETI, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, as nearly anyone with a screensaver knows. Grinspoon explores Fermi's paradox -- if they exist, why haven't they arrived on Earth, or at least said hello by radio? He doesn't duck the hard questions, and he brings us the human story of the SETI pioneers on both sides of the Iron Curtain. He acknowledges that the strong desire to believe in aliens is as something almost religious for many people, including scientists. And he gives the UFOlogists their due, taking a fascinating journey to the San Luis Valley of Colorado. If something really hasn't been adequately explained, he acknowledges that: "there are mysteries. Are we unfaithful to the church of Science if we admit that there are mysteries?" But he does point the finger at a few flimflam artists, and doesn't hide his disappointment with certain alien-visitation true believers who should probably know better.

Maybe the temptation to believe is not so hard to forgive. Where our knowledge is imperfect, our beliefs and hopes always become entwined. Grinspoon ends the book with a meditative chapter on "astrotheology," pulling together the threads of science and faith, exploring the moral implications of intelligent life elsewhere and sharing his own beliefs in the matter.

I recommend this book both for space buffs and for less "scientific," less skeptical readers on their gift lists. The book is worth reading for many reasons -- engaging writing, a friendly introduction to the science involved, eye-opening history, and a chance to learn a skilled planetologist's best guesses at what we may discover living or not living on, in or around Mars, Europa, and yes, Venus. Not since Sagan and Asimov passed away has there been a science writer with such a voice.

Will anyone hate this book? Maybe -- new agers, pot-haters, and supporters of the Bush administration could get their noses out of joint... but only if they read every footnote, and completely fail to take a joke. Most will be as entertained and informed as the rest of us.

You can purchase Lonely Planets from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

Comments

We know other life exists

[relrelrel]

the chances are simply too great for other life to _not_ exist somewhere.

Re:We know other life exists

[boutell]

Sure, but is there "other life" worth talking to that we have any likelihood of talking to in our lifetimes? That's very, very far from certain.

Re:We know other life exists

[AKAImBatman]

the chances are simply too great for other life to _not_ exist somewhere.

Somebody's been watching Sagan again. Have you ever calculated the actual odds of life? The odds of it spontaneously appearing are bad enough, but the various balances that allow earth to sustain life after the fact, make the number tremendous. How tremendous? Well, let's just say that there are so many zeros on the end that we don't even have a name for it. If you want to talk about "chances", then the chances are good that we're alone.

Feel free to argue the "tremendous waste of space" argument. That's a bit more sensible, but not rooted in any actual science.

Personally, I kind of liked it when "Space: Above and Beyond" said that the aliens were actually descended from organic ejecta from Earth that made its way across the galaxy. Much more believable than separate evolutions. That being said, shows like Star Trek are much more interesting if we ignore that little detail. :-)

Re:We know other life exists

[B'Trey]

Have you ever calculated the actual odds of life?

No, and neither have you or anyone else. There are simply too many variables that we have no way to quantify. The simple answer is that we don't know, we have no way of knowing (now or in the reasonably near future), and any claims to the contrary are sheer speculation.

Re:We know other life exists

[Perl-Pusher]

Have you ever calculated the actual odds of life?

Well how exactly do you arrive at a true calculation of the odds? Have we mapped enough of the universe to know how many planets there are? Have we travelled outside our own solar system to even look at others? If so, and since all stars and planets presumably follow the same physical laws, what was so special about earth that it is the anomoly of anomolies? Do we really know enough about the universe to calculate the odds of life. Do we really know how life started here? The exact conditions to create life? If so, then why is it we have not been creating life from scratch? What exactly is self awarenes and intelligence. My dog seems very self aware, not smart but alive and self aware. Are we really the most intelligent creature on our own planet? Whales have much larger brains and seem to have a language, if we could talk to whales and test them, is it possible we are less inately intelligent? Until we know how to create life with 100 percent certainty and know with 100 percent certainty that life cannot exist in another form, exactly how many planets there are, and why did the universe form. What caused the big bang? What existed before the big bang? Was there really a big bang? Or did the universe start expanding from a smaller universe and not a singularity? How would we know? You can't really calculate the odds with any certainty. You would only be using big made up numbers to show how smart you are and make statements that you nor anyone else can really back up with hard facts.

Re:We know other life exists

[B'Trey]

Yes, I'm familiar with it. I posted this link to a speech by Michael Chrichton in an earlier post. He says it better than I can:

The problem (...with the Drake equation...), of course, is that none of the terms can be known, and most cannot even be estimated. The only way to work the equation is to fill in with guesses. And guesses-just so we're clear-are merely expressions of prejudice. Nor can there be "informed guesses." If you need to state how many planets with life choose to communicate, there is simply no way to make an informed guess. It's simply prejudice.

As a result, the Drake equation can have any value from "billions and billions" to zero. An expression that can mean anything means nothing. Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless, and has nothing to do with science.

Look at your post. fi can be anywhere from 0 to 100%. At the risk of seeming hubristic, I'll quote myself: There are simply too many variables that we have no way to quantify. The simple answer is that we don't know, we have no way of knowing (now or in the reasonably near future), and any claims to the contrary are sheer speculation. The Drake equation and your sheer speculations on what the values may be not only do not disprove my statement, they're excelling evidence in support of it. Thanks for posting.

Re:We know other life exists

[B'Trey]

You can rephrase if you like. The fact simply remains that we have no idea how common planets are, how wide the habitability zone is, what conditions favor life, what conditions allow life, what type of life is possible, or any of a host of other things we need to know before we can make any reasonably accurate estimation on the possibility of life. We're just guessing.

A common point that bolsters those calculations is the fact that no other life has been discovered in our Solar System to date.

Just out of curiosity, what percentage of the Solar System other than earth would you say we've explored? Wouldn't you agree that it would be reasonable to insist that we check out, oh, at least a millionth of one percent before we declare that there is no other life in the Solar System?

Either way is scary

[YrWrstNtmr]

Either we are truly alone in the universe. There are zero other 'intelligent' lifeforms out there. Anywhere. We are absolutely alone.

Or, there are others. If there are >0 other 'intelligent' lifeforms, then presumably there should be many others. And some of those will not be very friendly. Or even if not friendly, we might be so far below their notice as to be paved over for a new bypass, without them noticing. Does the bulldozer driver notice the anthill he just smoothed over?

Re:Either way is scary

[YrWrstNtmr]

many = hundreds/thousands.

Personally, I too believe there are other life forms out there. Some of them even intelligent.

If conditions exist that there can be one intelligent species (and it does--us), then it should follow that similar conditions will exist elsewhere. There are far too many stars/planets out there for it not to. This planet does not appear to be that unique.

As far as colonization on a mass scale, I don't think so. The distances are too great to hold any societal structure together (At least as we know it).

How could you not make jokes?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're in the planet business, which has a sample size of under a dozen. And most of those remain mysteries. It would be foolish to believe we know anything. Most conclusions have to be educated guesses. This guy seems to have a proper sense of a field that is still mostly mystery.

Re:How could you not make jokes?

[BWJones]

You're in the planet business, which has a sample size of under a dozen. And most of those remain mysteries. It would be foolish to believe we know anything. Most conclusions have to be educated guesses. This guy seems to have a proper sense of a field that is still mostly mystery.

Ahhh, but the physics of gravity and the math behind formation of bodies in space is well worked out. Biological science (at least here on earth) is also an area of intense study that should provide some insight into how biological mechanisms such as biosynthetic reactions might occur. Chemistry and geological science are also well studied fields here on earth and on other planets that can provide clues as to how processes happen on other worldly bodies.

This is the role of science you know. Make observations, formulate hypothesis and test them. If we took the point of view that mysteries are mysteries and there is no point in examining them, we would still be in the dark ages.

Fermi's paradox?

[nizo]

I have to admit, the idea of intelligent life out there somewhere is an interesting topic, but I am beginning to wonder based on Fermi's paradox (which I believe is summed up below):

David Grinspoon: I agree that, given the time and energy constraints, any intelligent creatures would have to be nuts to attempt interstellar travel. But you would also have to be nuts to attempt to cross the ocean in a rowboat, and people have done that. Why do we need to go one-tenth the speed of light? What's the hurry? So what if travel times are thousands of years? From the perspective of an individual human life at this stage in our evolution, this seems like a long time. But will the galaxy never, ever, anywhere, produce a creature or cultural entity that doesn't find this span of time daunting? Even at these slow speeds, if someone decided to start spreading across the galaxy they would be able to spread across the whole Milky Way in a few hundred million years, tops, which is still short compared to the life of the galaxy.

(This was ripped straight from here for those who wish to read more.

Re:Fermi's paradox?

[Angry Toad]

Fermi's paradox has lots of assumptions. Foremost, that we would recognize it if "they" were here or had been here. Leaving UFOs to the side for a bit, they could easily be here without detection. If they arrived for a couple of weeks 50000 years ago (let alone 1 million or 20 million) we would never know about it unless they decided to leave a permanent monument - but presupposing they would do so makes assumptions about their motives, which I think is a danerously silly practice since we're already talking hypotheticals here.

Fermi's paradox seems to me to be asking us: if life exists elsewhere in the galaxy, then why aren't they landing on the White House lawn or at least running around yelling "Helllooooo! We're Alieeeennnns! Over HEEEREE!". Since we don't see them either they never existed at all, or their motives preclude setting up a colony or an "ALIENS WERE HERE" monument. Since we can't decide between these alternatives, that's not much use.

Alone? I hope so!

[shakamojo]

I actually really do hope that we're alone, at least in our neck of the galaxy. I look at it this way, is there any species that is more "advanced" than another that doesn't prey on the weaker species? In nature, it seems that the strong always dominate the weak. If there is advanced life out there, how long do you think it would be before they dominated us? If the natural history of our particular planet is any indicator, I'm hoping that we don't run into any more "advanced" species in my lifetime!

Re:Statistically

[bhny]

statistics don't dictate anything on this

all we know is intelligent life occurred once. there's no way to extrapolate from a sample group of 1

What we DON'T know about other life existing. . .

[Salgak1]

Chess the Cat writes:

Life may be common throughout the universe. But I highly doubt there is another intelligent lifeform out there. And since the burden of proof lies with you let's see what you got.

Either intelligent life is so rare to be nearly impossible, or it's common seem to be the two default positions. Allow me to suggest a third: We have no idea how common intelligent life is Out There, as we lack ANY data whatsoever. So likelyhood is SHEER SPECULATION at this point. And getting the information to make a well-founded projection will require some significant interstellar capability on our part. . . .

Even the statement that LIFE is common has yet to be proven. . .

I don't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Whether or not there are other forms of intelligent life in the universe is an interesting exercise, and we may someday hear from them via radio waves, but it's not likely that we'll ever actually meet them. The distances are just too far. The fastest objects mankind has ever created are the Voyager crafts, which are cruising at a mere 35,000 mph. Having just past the outer-most planets, they have something like 50,000 years until they'll make their way past the Ort Cloud, which is the hypothetical edge of our solar system, at which point our Sun wouldn't even be the brightest star in the sky from that vantage point.

Science Fiction aside, we're not going anywhere and anywhere's not coming here. Our species hasn't been around, heck, mammals haven't been around as long as it would take us to reach a star system that could possibly support life.

If we don't score some info on Mars or Europa, we are for all intents and purposes, alone.

Re:Take care of your own planet!

[B'Trey]

I don't think its reasonable to presume that humans will never see these sights first hand. We have no way of knowing what life will be like in a hundred or a thousand years. Look at how much your life is different from someone who was your age in 1904. We simply don't know what technology will accomplish. Any presumptions we make are merest speculations with no evidence to support them.

Are we alone in the universe?

[lawpoop]

Previous question: Are we alone in our $land?
Current question: Are we alone in the universe?
Next question: Are we alone in the $next_step_up?

Seriously, the conversation could go like this:
Us: Horray! You found us! We're not alone!
Aliens: Sorry, but we're are actually terribly alone. As far as we can tell, all other dimensions are totally lifeless.

Prime directive

[XeroDegrees]

Has anyone ever thought the reason no lifeforms have made contact is some sort of Lex Galactica?
If they did make contact they would destroy all our high-tech industries overnight (by introducing us to their higher-technologies)
Pharmacuticals,hardware,soft ware,transportation all become obselete instantly, making millions unemployed and destroying our economies.

Re:Mars

[Slowping]

The shockwaves that it would send through religion would be huge

Only for religions that believe humans (and Earth) are "chosen ones" to represent the "one true god". There are other religions that are much more open towards other forms of intelligent life (eg Buddhism).

What nature shows are you watching???

[ianscot]

...is there any species that is more "advanced" than another that doesn't prey on the weaker species?

Lions do not prey on ants or cranes. Orangutans don't catch the rabbits that live in their enclosure with them at one of my local zoos. Why aren't they attacking each other? Which of those species is most "advanced"?

You don't know what you mean by that word, even as it applies to nature.

In nature, it seems that the strong always dominate the weak.

Not so. The natural world is way the heck more complex, and far more likely to result in peaceful coexistence or symbiotic relationships, than you're imagining. I notice the chickadees and nuthatches and wrens in my back yard aren't engaged in anything but a sort of indirect competition for the resources that they all need. I notice that some species of bird choose to "mob" birds of prey when it's mating season, whereas others do it all year round, and others don't at all. Which species is "stronger" than the others, please?

In this case, anyway, what you're saying amounts to a variation on social Darwinism, so let's take an example: Columbus landed in the new world, and one of the things his crew noticed immediately was that people lived much longer among the "Indians" than they did in Europe. Everyone was struck by all the elderly people around. So, which society was "more advanced"? Were the Europeans 'superior models' because they'd been exposed to diseases that American populations had never seen? (Does that make Africans superior to Europeans who never could truly colonize the malarial latitudes there?)

Life as a hierarchy of "advanced" and "less advanced" creatures is a misrepresentation of nature (and Darwinism), and applied to social interactions among intelligent beings, it's even more ridiculously oversimplified.

(In my book you'd be more justifiably nervous based on the way invasive, non-native species have devastated native populations. The equivalents of Chestnut Blight should keep you up at night, if you're really worried about aliens. Eurasian House Sparrows are much closer to the real worry - unintended and indirect consequences being far more likely than little green men with Napoleon complexes.)

Scale matters

[Ars-Fartsica]

Scale is extremely important in the physical universe.

If we were the size of ants our mouths would not be able to break the surface tension of water, and we would die. Hence many insects have sharp pointed mouths/beaks. If we were as big as a whale, the rate of increase in the mass of muscle vs bone would crush us. Hence whales live in the ocean where the water can support their weight.

I still haven't seen the other reason..

[NickRuisi]

I still haven't seen the main other reason why we (H.Sap) seems so alone in this universe - specifically, that we might be one of the first intelligent species to evolve.

It's not that hard to imagine. Given the currently accepted age of the universe (~15 billion years), and the age of the solar system (5 billion years), we very well might be the "old ones" you read about in scifi novels.

Makes you think.