Fred Hoyle

[venus]

A while back I purchased an interesting old *astronomy* book on 'ebay' called 'Astronomy' by Fred Hoyle 'a history of man's investigation of the universe. A bargain at around $10.00 including postage!
I see that now that there is a new book out about the author called 'Fred Hoyle' the man who brought space down to Earth
Fred Hoyle (http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/book_review_fred_hoyle_universe.htm l?912006)
Can't wait to read it. Fred Hoyle was a man with vision. In his introduction in the
'Astronomy' book he says quote....
the wealthiest nations will continue indefinitely to spend appreciable fractions of their incomes on the firing of instruments into space...... I think space research, along with radio astronomy, will eventually reach an equilibrium in relation to more traditional methods, and I think that in this equilibrium the major part of astronomy will continue to advance in much the way it has done in the past. ....... I see astronomy as a continuing process, in which each new technique has a place in relation to the whole, but in which no particular technique overwhelms the rest.' Fred Hoyle

[Robert_T]

Good Buy Venus!

I love these old astronomy books too. Fred Hoyle is certainly want of "the greats". :prey2:

I'm a little more cynical than Fred though on his comment -
"the wealthiest nations will continue indefinitely to spend appreciable fractions of their incomes on the firing of instruments into space......"

well plenty being fired up into space, but the vast bulk would be telecommunications or security related stuff compared with that intended to advance knowledge.

cheers,

[venus]

If "communication" isn't "advancing knowledge" I don't know what is?......

[Argonavis]

if spysats aren't advancing knowledge I don't know what is either... ;)

BTW does anyone know where I can download Satspy?

[venus]

Don't know about "Satspy" or is it "Spysat" ?
but "Galileo" looks promising.........
Galileo (http://science.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1075936.php/First_Galileo_signals_transmitted)

[33South]

Was the first astronomy book I owned my parents got it for my birthday in 1962, first year of print.

Bit worse for wear (like me) but wouldnt sell mine for no lousy ten bucks
Price tag still on it 63shillings in 1962 so 10$ today definitely a bargain.

Cover is different but its about the history of astronomy suspect its an updated version.


Enjoy.

[venus]

gee, you were lucky to have such astute parents, and you as well for hanging on to it.
Yes it was a bargain:)
Mine is copyright MCMLX11 same as yours.
Editor M. H. Chandler

[33South]

Snap!

Hope you dont mind me adding this to your thread, but I thought it might be of interest.

Amazing what you find when you start rummaging around.
With Astronomy was also a 1961 edition of Patrick Moores "Guide To The Stars", in itself not too amazing but when I opened out fell something I had forgotton all about a 1970 first day cover (addressed to me) for the 150th Anniversary of The Royal Astronomical Society. As it was posted at Slough its also got a special Sir William Herschel (first president) postmark.

[Robert_T]

Forgive my cynicism, you see I work in the communications industry and see first hand what it is mostly used for and it's not advancing knowledge... unless you count finding out or passing on who did what to who on big brother last night in that category. Of course there's good among the bad too and I've also experienced how the global internet and e-mail can bring researchers together collaboratively in ways never dreamed of, so I guess that fits into Fred's claim.

cheers,

[venus]

is this thread being jumbled by someone or am I being paranoid?

[venus]

Wow that is amazing!
Talking about things that fall outta books here is a clip from a 24/2/1909 Sydney Morning Herald newspaper that was stuck at the back of a Guide to the Southern Stars book I recently was loaned.
With an account of the Milky Way .........goes on to describe the Milky Way "as the frame or skeleton of the entire stellar universe."

[mickoking]

G,day all

Fred Hoyle was certainly a giant of science. I think what he will be rememberd for most, however are the words 'Big Bang':thumbsup:

Hoyles steady state theory of the universe was still in vogue when the book 'The Universe' was published in 1964. I remember borrowing this book from the adult section of the library when I was a kid (in the late 70's) and the pictures in it blew me away.

[Robert_T]

certainly not my intention to jumble anything Venus :confuse2: , we're cool,

I'm a big Fan of Fred Hoyle and of old Astronomy books

cheers,

[venus]

Another great find there with "The Universe" a wicked pic of the "Dish" in there too.........

[venus]

You assume I meant you?
didn't know how the two threads got intertwined here...........lol

[RAJAH235]

This is O.K. When you figure it out... :D L.
http://www.satscape.co.uk/

[Robert_T]

Hi Venus - meant to mention that Fred Hoyle first captured my attention and imagination with his book "On Stonehenge" published 1977 in which he advanced the theory that stonehenge was used by the ancient britons to calculate and predict eclipses. This was pioneering work in the field of archaeastronomy. As I'm passionate about both astronomy and archaeology this struck a bit of chord with me. Wondered whether he makes any mention of archaeoastronomy in his earlier Astronomy works?

cheers,

[venus]

I'm no expert on "Hoyle" and I did fluke buying the "Astronomy" book:)
but in that book Hoyle has chapter 3 devoted to Planetary Motion and Ancient Astronomy
with pics and illustrations of stone tablets that I guess would be classed as archaeoastronomy although didn't find any cyclopean masonary like "stonehenge" mention.

[space lover]

Geez, what has the youth of today become, I'v never even heard of this Hoyle:confused:

[Argonavis]

I have the 1962 edition of Fred Hoyle's Astronomy, and it is amazing how much the science of astronomy has learnt since then. This book was just a few years after Hoyle and Burbridge and the 2 Fowlers published their seminal paper on nucleosynthesis and worked out how stars convert elements and produce energy, and just before the discovey of the Cosmic Background Radiation of 3 degrees kelvin, which totally demolished Fred's steady state theory and left the Big Bang as the only explanation of the observed universe. Fred still would not accept it and tried to hang on to his steady state theory for far too long against all the evidence. But I still hear people saying "according to Hoyle".

Some of his speculations, such as the sci-fi ET intelligence of "Dark Cloud" and the hypothesis that pandemics are spread from outer space, are highly original.