28 of 31 people found the following review helpful
This review is from: Cosmos: A Field Guide (Hardcover)
I have more "coffee table" books on Astronomy than I do surface area on my coffee tables. This book makes it so I could get rid of all the rest as it is not only more complete but more beautiful than the rest combined.
There are some errors in it that make absolutely no sense why they were made (spelling and the Venusian orbit issue listed above). However... the science is solid and more importantly for a book like this, the images are unmatched in print.
Just like any book of this type, fingerprints on the pages are inevitable and annoying against a black background, but I wouldn't trade for white backgrounds because these images need the black to really show their visual range.
The information is also very current. Pluto is not considered a planet, the idea of neutrinos contributing to Dark Matter, and a host of other relatively recent developments are included. The progression is also very clean and straight forward starting at earth and progressing out to the large scale of the universe, which is something most of these books don't spend enough time on despite it being one of the most fascinating developments in cosmology recently.
If you want to learn the science, this isn't quite the book you're looking for. It's awkward to hold for long reading sessions due to the size, and not exceptionally in depth. However, the images can't be beat (not until Hubble's replacement goes live in a few years) and the science is comprehensive enough to let you know what you are looking at.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-1 of 1 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 31 Dec 2008 00:08:26 GMT
R. While says:
What spelling mistakes are those? It's written by an Englishman so therefore it's written in proper English, not the diluted American-English. But yeah there are a few numerical errors here and there.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›