The Planet That Wasn't by Isaac Asimov

* Warning: this review is ridiculously long, partially because I had a lot to comment on, and partially because I’m sitting in an airport with nothing better to do *

I have a tendency to pick up random books by famous authors if they’re available for cheap, and apparently I don’t pay too much attention to the book’s actual description. Therefore, I started reading The Planet that Wasn’t expecting a scifi story. Whoops :-p turns out it’s a collection of essays on topics ranging from astronomy to chemistry to history. Kudos to whoever picked the title, they were probably hoping its scifi feel would lure in poor saps like me, and it worked!

Overview
Asimov was interested in any and all areas of science, and the breadth of topics covered in this book is quite impressive. They tend to be a bit rambling at the beginning, and the opening anecdote or topic often has little or nothing to do with the actual meat of the essay. Maybe that’s an accepted style for a series of essays, I haven’t read enough of them to be sure. Some of the articles get pretty technical, but he does a good job of simplifying and explaining things.

Overall, a very interesting book; the articles are mostly interesting and informative, although there are a few that just failed to grab my attention much at all. The early articles in particular have some very nice science history.

Recommended for: Scifi fans (especially Asimov fans) and science buffs

Parental worries: None, unless you’re particularly wary of atheist sentiments

Ramblings
As I’ve mentioned before, Asimov’s scorn for religion, spirituality, and anything that he deems ‘unscientific’ tends to get under my skin, and there’s plenty of that in these essays. Interestingly enough, however; I find his essays that directly address religious issues, “Star in the East” and “The Judo Argument”, far less offensive than his snarky comments offered as a sideline in other essays. He ends both of the religious articles with an ‘of course I’m only discussing this out of curiosity/the challenge, I don’t actually take it seriously’ type of line, but since he manages to suppress his sneer for the vast majority of the article, I don’t begrudge him a parting shot.

It’s worth noting that since these articles were all written in the 1970s, they’re obviously not the pinnacle of science that they were when first published, but still solid science, every one.

“The Planet that Wasn’t” - It sounds like the title of a fiction piece, but turns out to be a historical snapshot, paired with an argument for the 'inevitability' of coincidence. Asimov considers that people are far to 'disbelieving' of coincidence, too quick to attribute such things to a cosmic order or intelligence behind the universe. He considers them to be 'inevitable consequences of the laws of probability'. He starts out by telling the story of Saturn, the god who ate his children and was eventually defeated by Zeus. Due to a slight tilt in Saturn's rings, Galileo observed two small blips beside Saturn that disappeared and reappeared from time to time. Saturn, it appeared, was still swallowing his children. Add to this the fact that Jupiter, named for the greatest of the gods, turned out to be the largest planet in the solar system. Just coincidence, Asimov claims, and then goes on to tell of yet another astronomical coincidence: the planet that wasn't. In the mid-1800s, irregularities were observed in Mercury's orbit that could not be explained by Newtonian physics. Astronomers at the time hypothesized that this indicated the presence of another planet, even closer to the sun. The presence or lack thereof of this hypothetical planet, named Vulcan for it's proximity to the fiery orb, stymied astronomers until Einstein's Theory of Relativity solved the problem. The changes in Mercury's orbit that seemed to indicate the presence of an unknown mass were actually a result of the massive energy of the sun's gravitational field. Since energy=mass, the sun's gravitational field was itself acting as a small mass, tweaking all the planets ever-so-slightly. Vulcan, therefore, was cast from the sky, even as its namesake was once cast from Heaven.

The story is fascinating and well told, but I don't think it quite makes the point that Asimov was trying for. At current count we've got 3 of 9 planets (not counting Earth, but counting the hypothetical Vulcan) that share characteristics with their mythological namesakes that were unknown at the time of their naming. I'm not a statistician, but the laws of probability account for that, really? Instead of inevitability, what came to my mind was the theory of Tolkien's that all myths have some seed of truth in them.

“The Olympian Snows” – The title comes from the appearance of snow on several large Martian mountains, and the article covers the range of observations and theories regarding our celestial neighbor over the ages and how most of them were eventually disproved.

“Titanic Surprise” – Like all scifi writers and fans, Asimov was fascinated with the possibility of life on other planets. In this article, he takes a look at the possibility of extraterrestrial life in terms of the planet's size and temperature. Really interesting stuff, because it turns out that a planet's ability to maintain an atmosphere is related to a delicate balance between its gravitational field and the phase of its components. For example, Venus is hot enough to vaporize any volatile compounds and large enough to hold on to them. On the other hand, Pluto is so cold
that only the lightest elements remain gaseous, and so small that it cannot hold on to them. After going through this analysis for most of the solar system, he concludes that only Earth and Titan, a moon of Saturn, are capable of supporting solid, liquid and gas phases in their atmosphere, and therefore Titan is the best bet for extraterrestrial life. He also gives Jupiter credibility as a cradle of life, observing that there would be a section of Jupiter's atmosphere at some depth that would reach Earth-level temperatures.

Another point he mentions about Jupiter is that it might be considered a sub-star, not quite big enough to ignite like the sun, but massive enough that some fusion is occuring in its core. Clarke also plays with this idea at the end of the 2001 series--mankind forces Jupiter just over that threshold, creating a second star halfway through the solar system. Its a fascinating idea, and really helps to put the scale of the Solar System in a more astonishing light.

“The Wrong Turning” – An analysis of the moons of various planets: how they were formed, what materials they’re made of, and what rules can be applied to their development. Fairly interesting, but after “Titanic Surprise”, I was getting a bit tired of the play-by-play of the solar system.

“The Bridge of the Gods” – A history of the study of light, particularly those properties that lead to rainbows. That part is interesting, but then he decides to take a dig at the mythology and theology concerning light. After a bit of retelling of Galileo’s troubles with the Church and Newton’s experiments with prisms that finally changed the way humanity thought about light, he comes up with this gem:

"To those who value the vision of the human mind organizing observations into natural law and then using natural law to grasp the workings of what had until then been mysterious, the rainbow has added significance and beauty through Newton’s discovery, because, to a far greater extent than before, it can be understood and truly appreciated. To those of more limited fancy, who prefer mindless staring to understanding, and simple-minded fairy tales of gods crossing bridges to the dancing changes of direction of light in accordance with a system that can be written as an elegant mathematical expression, I guess it is a loss."

You know what, Mr. Asimov? Screw you. Reducing the world to mathematical equations may be your idea of fulfillment, but there are many who are perfectly capable of appreciating both the scientific and romantic beauty of a rainbow. I love the old tales, and they are not diminished in the slightest by any scientific discovery, only enhanced because we have a more complete idea of how the phenomenon occurs.

“The Third Liquid” – On the nature of elements, specifically those that exist as liquids anywhere near environmental conditions.

“All Gall” – A discussion of cholesterol, its chemical properties and occurrence in the body. Slightly out of date, because we now know more about what role cholesterol plays in the body (I’m pretty sure it has to do with the cell membrane, but I forget the details)

“The Smell of Electricity” – Concerning ozone, its peculiar qualities, and the history of its discovery. I enjoyed the history, but when he moved on to chemical structure and bonds, my eyes started to glaze over.

“Silent Victory” – An analysis of the Earth’s atmosphere over its lifespan, and how the changing chemistry affected the development of life as we know it. I’ve always found atmospheric chemistry to be very interesting (at least on the overview scale, I’ve never gone too far into the topic), and Asimov gives a very good overview. If you’re interested in the topic, I’d also recommend James Lovelock’s Ages of Gaia and Lynn Margulis’ Microcosmos: Four Billion Years of Evolution from Our Microbial Ancestors.

“Change of Air” – This is an article that really dates the book, I’d say. Roughly around the time I was in elementary school (early 90s), the big environmental issue was the hole in the ozone layer, and this article must have been published just as the problem was being discovered. Following up on the ozone and atmosphere articles, it examines the discovery and widespread use of CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) for refrigeration and aerosols, and the threat they pose to the ozone layer. The really telling thing though, and the reason that I’m pretty sure the article was way ahead of its time, is that he never actually uses the phrases ‘hole in the ozone layer’, ‘CFCs’, or even ‘chlorofluorocarbons’, all of which were huge buzzwords for the ozone issue. I found this article to be an interesting look backward at environmental issues. (as well as good solid science, this was before any of the hype started) Last I heard, the hole in the ozone layer was actually shrinking. It’d be interesting to learn whether that’s a result of policy and behavioral changes on our part, or simply a natural occurrence. Are we actually releasing less CFCs than 20-30 years ago? I’d be quite surprised (but pleased) if that’s the case.

“The Wicked Witch is Dead” – It takes awhile to get to the point of this essay (how science has destroyed the wicked witch stereotype), because in addition to the rambling intro, Asimov spends a couple of pages being snippy about religion. To be fair, he’s talking about the horrors of witch hunts, so most of his condemnation is well deserved, but it reaches further than the topic at hand. And some of his reasoning is faulty, I’d say. For example, he discusses the biblical Witch of Endor: “If we interpret the Bible literally, we cannot think that witchcraft is a delusion. No, it is a competing religion making use of powerful supernatural forces, and, because it is competing, it is evil by definition.” Now wait a minute. If we’re interpreting the Bible literally, you can’t accept that witchcraft is real and then decide that it’s harmless. You have to also accept (or at least consider) that if it was a real power, it was an evil one. Basically, you have to accept that there are value judgments attached to the supernatural. Some supernatural forces are good, and contact with them is encouraged, while others are bad, and contact with them is forbidden. Now, if you want to interpret the Bible as an atheist and say that the definition of evil was any competing religion, then that’s at least an honest interpretation (dead wrong, I’d say, but at least honestly wrong), but you can’t just pick and choose what you’re going to be literal about.

Anyway, religious rantings aside, the point of the article is that the whole idea of the ‘wicked witch’ came from a) the fact that old women were very unusual in societies before modern medicine made childbirth less dangerous, and b) lack of dental care gave old people without teeth a very different facial structure than younger people, thus making them not only unusual but alien as well. Because they were so unusual and strange looking, they became the pariahs of society and cast as witches. Asimov points out that with the advent of safe childbirth, which gave women a longer life expectancy than men, and dental care, which allowed the elderly to keep their original facial structure, the wicked witch disappeared from society. Interesting stuff.

“The Nightfall Effect” – This article is basically a reply to many comments Asimov had received objecting to the possibility of mankind’s expansion into space. It’s an interesting article, all about the tenacity and intelligence of mankind, and their ability to overcome any barrier. This I agree with, and I do believe that mankind not only will, but must eventually move past our home planet, if they are to survive. But here’s where he gets it wrong, imho: Asimov thinks that if we are able to control the population problem and end war, then we will be sufficiently advanced to expand into space. If, on the other hand, we create an overpopulated, war and strife-ridden world, we will never make it off the planet. But he is ignoring his own arguments when he makes this conclusion. In answer to several of the objections raised, he holds as an example the colonization of America and other great migrations into uncharted territory. These migrations were not accomplished because things were nice and quiet back home, but in response to persecution or other hardships. If we do manage to create a near-utopia here on Earth, there will be no drive to explore, no reason to expand. No, mankind will only leave the planet when it becomes imperative for us to do so—either when we become so crowded that we must have more room, or when resources in space become easier to access than the dwindling resources on Earth.

“The Rocketing Dutchmen” – Asimov takes on UFO fanatics, and mourns that their mix of science, imagination and delusion blocks any serious study into the explanation for the handful of verified but unexplainable sightings of unidentified flying objects.

“Best Foot Backward” – Asimov answers those who claim that science has accomplished ‘nothing of real value’. The original claim is that all science has done is make our lives longer, but not improved the ‘spiritual’ quality of life. Asimov argues that on the contrary, science has made incredible improvements to the human condition, and draws several pictures of what would happen if we really turned our back on technology, as many luddites seem to be suggesting. I’m pretty much in Asimov’s camp on this one—although I am far from worshiping science as the solution to all man’s problems, you would have to be a fool not to recognize the good it has done. He includes a bit about how religion is the truly useless institution, but this post is way too long already for me to bother pointing out the fallacies in that one.

“Thinking About Thinking” – An analysis of the different measures of intelligence, and how subjective they are. Pretty interesting, although it basically boils down to “you can’t quantify intelligence”

“Star in the East” – An analysis of the possible scientific explanations of the Star of Bethlehem. I really liked this article, because although I’ve heard the common possibilities that it was a supernova or a comet, Asimov dismisses these as too easy. If it were that obvious, he points out, King Herod would not have needed to ask the Wise Men for an explanation when they came to visit him. So he goes into several different possibilities, the most impressive of which (imho) was that it wasn’t an actual visible star, but a very rare astrological event in which the Sun’s position at the vernal equinox moved from the constellation of the Ram to the Fish (the Sun switches constellations every 2,000 years or so, and the actual point of the switch could be calculated). He also points out several different alignments of the planets and stars that could have been significant only to astrologers and would also point them in the direction of Judea. Very interesting, very cool.

“The Judo Argument” – Asimov addresses several arguments for the existence of God that he calls ‘Judo Arguments’: arguments that use scientific knowledge to prove the existence of God. It’s a really interesting article, since Asimov actually finds these arguments interesting and valid, and addresses them seriously. Personally, I do not think that science is capable of definitively proving or disproving the existence of God (think about the definition of supernatural for a minute), but I still appreciate the analysis and argument.