Fernando Franco Franco itibaren Nandgaon, Maharashtra 423106, Índia
I didn't like the way things had to end.
Please see my review of X Stands for Unknown ([http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/98...]) for general comments on Isaac Asimov's science essays. However, I'll add one more here: One of the joys of reading Asimov's science fact is that he usually takes care to provide a historical context for scientific discoveries. That way, even if the topic itself is outdated (and even wrong, perhaps), the essay is still worth reading, for studying the history and methods of scientific inquiry is always instructive (and, to me, enjoyable). Quasar, Quasar, Burning Bright, the 13th collection of Asimov articles for the Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, covers the period of May, 1976 through September, 1977. It begins with two essays speculating about properties of superheavy elements. There follows "It's a Wonderful Town," a discussion of New York, the author's home town, and its future given contemporary trends in migration. Three essays chart the rise of the USA to world leadership as a direct result of technological advances and innovation. Asimov outlines the contemporary theory explaining the recent series of Ice Ages (probably not quite correct, though the basic concepts are still relevant) in a series of three essays. Next, he retells the history of the discovery of the three planets (well, two planets and dwarf planet) discovered during historical times—Uranus, Neptune and Pluto. Turning to matters of the greater Universe, Asimov writes, in three articles, about the brightest (compact) objects in the Universe (quasars, now called "active galactic nuclei"), and about the densest (i.e., neutron stars and black holes). Lastly, there appears an excellent diatribe, "Asimov's Corollary," about the American public's extreme skepticism of revolutionary ideas in legitimate science, and simultaneous willing credulity in all forms of crazy pseudoscience. Asimov's Corollary says, "If a scientific heresy is ignored or denounced by the general public, there is a chance it may be right. If a scientific heresy is emotionally supported by the general public, it is almost certainly wrong." He also gives a list of arguments he will automatically, and it is an excellent one. They include arguments from authority ("The Bible says so"); arguments from internal conviction ("I believe it, therefore it's true"); arguments from personal abuse ("You're an athiest, and therefore wrong"); arguments from irrelevance ("Teaching evolution leads to abortion"); and arguments from anecdote ("My cousin's brother-in-law was abducted by aliens....").