What do you think?
Rate this book
Discovery Spaceopedia: The Complete Guide to Everything Space
Blast off into space with Discovery Spaceopedia to explore our solar system and mysterious, far-off galaxies. Created with Discovery Channel's leading space expert, Hakeem Oluseyi, Spaceopedia is filled with incredible facts, more than 400 full color NASA photos, and profiles of groundbreaking astronauts and scientists including Neil Armstrong, Edwin Hubble, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Readers will learn all about black holes, orbits, constellations and more with special features on the Curiosity and Rosetta Comet landings, and the current number of earth-like planets in the universe that may have intelligent life!
Don't miss the other books in the Bugopedia , Snakeopedia , Dinopedia , and Sharkopedia !
Don't miss the other books in the Bugopedia , Snakeopedia , Dinopedia , and Sharkopedia !
192 pages, Paperback
First published October 13, 2015
11 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
December 4, 2021
When you read a book whose name ends in "opedia" you expect it to be full of facts. Nothing could be further from the truth. Listed below are all of the errors that I found in the book. I do not have any particular expertise in astrophysics, astronomy, or any other space science. I am simply interested in the topic. If I found all of these errors, what were your editors doing? I cannot possibly imagine that the expert reviewer, Hakeem Oluseyi, PhD., actually read this book. There is no possible way he read the book and signed off on it for technical accuracy. My nine-year-old even caught a few of the errors based on her knowledge gained from watching the show "Ready, Jet, Go" on PBS.
I would like a full refund on the purchase price of this book. The back cover says that is $19.95. The far greater crime is all of the people who read this and have been mislead. Thank you for your time.
Spaceopedia Errors
P.7: In the introduction by Hakeem Oluseyi, PhD. the second sentence is a fragment. It reads “But it wasn’t until I was 11 years old.”
P.11: “By the Numbers” states that 100 pounds on Earth would weigh different amounts on different planets. According to multiple websites, including NASA, many of these numbers are very wrong. Spaceopedia says 100 pounds on Earth would yield the following results: Mercury would be 76 pounds (correct amount 38), 181 pounds on Venus (correct amount 91), 34 pounds on the Moon (correct amount 17), 76 pounds on Mars (correct amount 38), 473 pounds on Jupiter (correct amount 234-253), 178 pounds on Saturn (correct amount 92-106), 473 pounds on Uranus (correct amount 89-92), 224 pounds on Neptune (correct amount 112-114).
https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forkids...
http://www.onlineconversion.com/weigh...
https://www.exploratorium.edu/ronh/we...
https://www.schoolsobservatory.org/di...
https://theplanets.org/weight-on-plan...
P.12: When discussing the speed of light it says, “That’s pretty amazing, since it would take the fastest airplane 67 hours to travel around the world only once!” The fastest air-breathing airplane is the SR-71, with a reported speed of 2,193 miles per hour. The equatorial circumference of Earth is 24,901 miles. At the speed of an SR-71, you could travel around the world in 11.35 hours. That does assume mid-air refueling, which the plane would have to slow down for. However, the average commercial airliner flies at around 550 miles per hour. At this speed they can travel around the world in 45.3 hours. What this statistic may be referring to is the fastest nonstop, non-refueled circumnavigation. When the comparison is with speed though, this is highly misleading.
P. 16-17: P. 16 “By the Numbers” says you can see 20 moons with a telescope. P.17 After referring to “a very simple telescope” then says “A telescope will show you all the moons of Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune, and you may even see some asteroids.” P. 81 says Jupiter has 67 moons, P. 84 says Saturn has 62 moons, and P. 90 says Neptune has 13 moons. Obviously 20 visible moons is not all of the moons of these planets.
P. 30: Under Galactic Fact it says that it takes 24 hours for planet earth to complete one rotation on its axis. It actually takes 23 hours, 56 minutes, and four seconds to make one complete rotation (relative to distant stars). The 24 hour figure is relative to the sun.
P. 35: Under Why is the Moon So Bright? it says the Moon is the brightest object in our sky. Obviously the sun is the brightest object in our sky. It should say night sky. Also, the picture on page 35 is quite odd. I have never seen a picture of the moon with rays coming off of it.
P.45: The text only mentions the northern lights. If they occur at the North Pole someone might wonder if they occur at the South Pole. When discussing Aurora Borealis a good reference book would also mention Aurora Australis.
P.45: The scale of the picture is way off. One million miles is shown as about 40% of the distance of 92 million miles. Also, L1 is labeled on graphic but not defined. What is L1?
P.47: The second picture in the upper right is labeled as a Saturn V but it is a V2.
P.48: Under Space Shuttle Forward Control Thrusters it says they "Stabilized the altitude of the shuttle." It should say attitude. These are two very different things.
P.48: Under Space Shuttle Main Engines it says the space shuttle main engines are used for launch and landing. The main engines are not used for landing. When returning to Earth the Space Shuttle is a glider and must make an unpowered landing.
P. 56: Under At a Glance it says that terrestrial means Earth like. It actually means rocky. Terrestrial planets are Earth-like only in the sense that they are rocky. The way the wording is used you would get the impression that Mercury is Earth-like.
P. 56: Under At a Glance says that Mercury is the fastest spinning planet. It is not. Jupiter is the fastest spinning and Earth is spinning much, much faster than Mercury. Mercury does have the fastest orbital velocity, so it is travelling the fastest around the Sun, but it is actually spinning quite slowly.
P. 56: Under The Outer Solar System says these Jovian planets are gaseous, then on the next line says Saturn is made of rock and ice. Which is it: gaseous or made of rock and ice? I’m assuming the author meant to say the rings of Saturn are made of rock and ice?
P. 64: Under Stellar Stats for Mercury it says distance from Earth is 47 million miles. It should say average distance because the distance is constantly changing based on where they are in their orbits. This error is repeated in the stats for other planets. It also says that the length of day on Mercury is 176 Earth days. This depends on what you mean by day. It takes 59 Earth days for Mercury to complete one rotation around its axis.
P. 65: Under Mercury: Mariner 10 it says that “Astronauts also discovered that Mercury had even more wrinkled ridges…” Astronauts didn't discover anything. Astronauts had nothing to do with the Mariner 10 mission, and no astronauts have been to Mercury. This should read astronomers or scientists discovered.
P. 66: Says “There are 1,000 volcanoes on Venus.” There is no way that is correct. Should say about or around. Data says there are at least 1,600 major volcanoes.
P.73: Graphic says the stratosphere is “10-30 miles from Earth’s surface. Planes fly here.” The bottom of this range is 10 miles, which is 52,800 feet. Almost no planes fly at this altitude. Commercial aviation typically flies at 31,000 to 38,000 feet, while the vast majority of general aviation aircraft fly below 15,000 feet.
P.74: Galactic Fact says “Mars and Earth are the only planets that have seasons.” In fact, all planets have seasons. Some are more noticeable than others.
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news...
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news...
P.93: Under New Horizons Mission it says “It was within 7,800 miles (12,550 km) of Pluto when it photographed this planet first discovered in 1930 and previously seen as only a dot in space.” The author calls Pluto a planet, when actually it is a dwarf planet. Pluto stopped being a planet in 2006, and the copyright date on the book is 2015, so presumably it was written long after the change.
Under New Horizons Mission it says “No one could predict if New Horizons would survive its flyby, but it did!” Of course some people could predict it would survive. It had a planned mission to the Kuiper Belt after Pluto, which it fulfilled. Also, it passed 7,800 miles from Pluto, what would cause it not to survive?
P. 98: Under Helmet it says “The visor is coated with a thick layer of gold that keeps out harmful rays from the sun.” It is actually covered with an ultra-thin layer. If it was a thick layer of gold you wouldn’t be able to see through it. The gold is 0.000002 inches thick. That doesn’t meet my definition of thick.
https://www.reuschjewelers.com/blog/2...
P.100: Says “Remember, the farther you go into space, the less gravity there is.” This is not true. The further you go from Earth, the less of Earth’s gravity there will be, but going further into space there could be lots more gravity. Jupiter is a lot farther in space compared to low-Earth orbit, but there is a lot more gravity.
P.109: Says “When astronauts are working on the ISS, they are protected by the heavy shield around the ISS and can survive bumps with pieces of debris.” There is no heavy shield “around” the ISS. Are you referring to the Whipple shield coating of modules? It is certainly not heavy. Everything about spacecraft are designed to be as light as possible so we can get them into orbit. This only covers modules and not solar panels so it is not a shield around the ISS.
P. 112: Under Barringer Meteorite Crater the first sentence should read 570 feet deep and the second sentence should read 160 feet in diameter. The way it is written makes no sense.
P. 130: The definition given for interstellar is among the stars. A better definition would be between the stars. Earth is among the stars but it is not in interstellar space.
P. 134: The book claims Betelguese was discovered in 1867 by Sir John Herschel. This is silly. It is easily visible with the naked eye and was “discovered” by some cave man tens of thousands of years ago. Herschel was the first to conduct detailed observations.
P. 136: The second sentence is grammatically incorrect. Also, he definition of symmetrical is incorrect. The book states that it means both halves of an object are the same size. That is not what it means, it means they are identical.
P. 140: Says “If a neutron star were a sugar cube, that small sugar cube would weigh as much as 20 million elephants!” The wording is very unclear. What does “If a neutron star were a sugar cube” mean? Are you saying a neutron star gets smashed in to the size of a sugar cube? That would make the density point meaningless. I’m assuming you mean a sugar cube size amount of neutron star. On page 137 you managed to be clear on the same comparison by saying a single teaspoon of white dwarf matter would weigh as much as an elephant. Also, based on the information I found, one sugar cube worth of neutron star matter is more like 182,000,000 elephants based on the weight (5.5 tones) you used on page 137.
P. 141: Says that “Some call pulsars zosmic lighthouses.” I’m assuming this should read cosmic lighthouses.
P. 149: The picture in the bottom right corner says “Gamma rays produce nuclear explosions” but I’m pretty sure it is the other way around: nuclear explosions produce gamma rays.
P. 150: Says that detectors for gamma rays, ultraviolet and x-rays must be used from space because Earth’s atmosphere prevents them from reaching the surface. There are lots of surface based cosmic ray detectors, and many cosmic rays do in fact reach the surface.
P. 167: Two pictures are labeled as being pictures of black holes but they aren’t. The first picture says “Supermassive black hole NGC 4258”. This object is a galaxy that has a black hole at its center, but it isn’t visible in the picture. The caption gives readers the impression that the image is what a black hole looks like, when the picture is obviously not a black hole.
P. 173: The Big Rip Theory: This passage just restates the expansion of the universe that was mentioned on page 170. It does not explain The Big Rip Theory at all.
I would like a full refund on the purchase price of this book. The back cover says that is $19.95. The far greater crime is all of the people who read this and have been mislead. Thank you for your time.
Spaceopedia Errors
P.7: In the introduction by Hakeem Oluseyi, PhD. the second sentence is a fragment. It reads “But it wasn’t until I was 11 years old.”
P.11: “By the Numbers” states that 100 pounds on Earth would weigh different amounts on different planets. According to multiple websites, including NASA, many of these numbers are very wrong. Spaceopedia says 100 pounds on Earth would yield the following results: Mercury would be 76 pounds (correct amount 38), 181 pounds on Venus (correct amount 91), 34 pounds on the Moon (correct amount 17), 76 pounds on Mars (correct amount 38), 473 pounds on Jupiter (correct amount 234-253), 178 pounds on Saturn (correct amount 92-106), 473 pounds on Uranus (correct amount 89-92), 224 pounds on Neptune (correct amount 112-114).
https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forkids...
http://www.onlineconversion.com/weigh...
https://www.exploratorium.edu/ronh/we...
https://www.schoolsobservatory.org/di...
https://theplanets.org/weight-on-plan...
P.12: When discussing the speed of light it says, “That’s pretty amazing, since it would take the fastest airplane 67 hours to travel around the world only once!” The fastest air-breathing airplane is the SR-71, with a reported speed of 2,193 miles per hour. The equatorial circumference of Earth is 24,901 miles. At the speed of an SR-71, you could travel around the world in 11.35 hours. That does assume mid-air refueling, which the plane would have to slow down for. However, the average commercial airliner flies at around 550 miles per hour. At this speed they can travel around the world in 45.3 hours. What this statistic may be referring to is the fastest nonstop, non-refueled circumnavigation. When the comparison is with speed though, this is highly misleading.
P. 16-17: P. 16 “By the Numbers” says you can see 20 moons with a telescope. P.17 After referring to “a very simple telescope” then says “A telescope will show you all the moons of Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune, and you may even see some asteroids.” P. 81 says Jupiter has 67 moons, P. 84 says Saturn has 62 moons, and P. 90 says Neptune has 13 moons. Obviously 20 visible moons is not all of the moons of these planets.
P. 30: Under Galactic Fact it says that it takes 24 hours for planet earth to complete one rotation on its axis. It actually takes 23 hours, 56 minutes, and four seconds to make one complete rotation (relative to distant stars). The 24 hour figure is relative to the sun.
P. 35: Under Why is the Moon So Bright? it says the Moon is the brightest object in our sky. Obviously the sun is the brightest object in our sky. It should say night sky. Also, the picture on page 35 is quite odd. I have never seen a picture of the moon with rays coming off of it.
P.45: The text only mentions the northern lights. If they occur at the North Pole someone might wonder if they occur at the South Pole. When discussing Aurora Borealis a good reference book would also mention Aurora Australis.
P.45: The scale of the picture is way off. One million miles is shown as about 40% of the distance of 92 million miles. Also, L1 is labeled on graphic but not defined. What is L1?
P.47: The second picture in the upper right is labeled as a Saturn V but it is a V2.
P.48: Under Space Shuttle Forward Control Thrusters it says they "Stabilized the altitude of the shuttle." It should say attitude. These are two very different things.
P.48: Under Space Shuttle Main Engines it says the space shuttle main engines are used for launch and landing. The main engines are not used for landing. When returning to Earth the Space Shuttle is a glider and must make an unpowered landing.
P. 56: Under At a Glance it says that terrestrial means Earth like. It actually means rocky. Terrestrial planets are Earth-like only in the sense that they are rocky. The way the wording is used you would get the impression that Mercury is Earth-like.
P. 56: Under At a Glance says that Mercury is the fastest spinning planet. It is not. Jupiter is the fastest spinning and Earth is spinning much, much faster than Mercury. Mercury does have the fastest orbital velocity, so it is travelling the fastest around the Sun, but it is actually spinning quite slowly.
P. 56: Under The Outer Solar System says these Jovian planets are gaseous, then on the next line says Saturn is made of rock and ice. Which is it: gaseous or made of rock and ice? I’m assuming the author meant to say the rings of Saturn are made of rock and ice?
P. 64: Under Stellar Stats for Mercury it says distance from Earth is 47 million miles. It should say average distance because the distance is constantly changing based on where they are in their orbits. This error is repeated in the stats for other planets. It also says that the length of day on Mercury is 176 Earth days. This depends on what you mean by day. It takes 59 Earth days for Mercury to complete one rotation around its axis.
P. 65: Under Mercury: Mariner 10 it says that “Astronauts also discovered that Mercury had even more wrinkled ridges…” Astronauts didn't discover anything. Astronauts had nothing to do with the Mariner 10 mission, and no astronauts have been to Mercury. This should read astronomers or scientists discovered.
P. 66: Says “There are 1,000 volcanoes on Venus.” There is no way that is correct. Should say about or around. Data says there are at least 1,600 major volcanoes.
P.73: Graphic says the stratosphere is “10-30 miles from Earth’s surface. Planes fly here.” The bottom of this range is 10 miles, which is 52,800 feet. Almost no planes fly at this altitude. Commercial aviation typically flies at 31,000 to 38,000 feet, while the vast majority of general aviation aircraft fly below 15,000 feet.
P.74: Galactic Fact says “Mars and Earth are the only planets that have seasons.” In fact, all planets have seasons. Some are more noticeable than others.
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news...
https://science.nasa.gov/science-news...
P.93: Under New Horizons Mission it says “It was within 7,800 miles (12,550 km) of Pluto when it photographed this planet first discovered in 1930 and previously seen as only a dot in space.” The author calls Pluto a planet, when actually it is a dwarf planet. Pluto stopped being a planet in 2006, and the copyright date on the book is 2015, so presumably it was written long after the change.
Under New Horizons Mission it says “No one could predict if New Horizons would survive its flyby, but it did!” Of course some people could predict it would survive. It had a planned mission to the Kuiper Belt after Pluto, which it fulfilled. Also, it passed 7,800 miles from Pluto, what would cause it not to survive?
P. 98: Under Helmet it says “The visor is coated with a thick layer of gold that keeps out harmful rays from the sun.” It is actually covered with an ultra-thin layer. If it was a thick layer of gold you wouldn’t be able to see through it. The gold is 0.000002 inches thick. That doesn’t meet my definition of thick.
https://www.reuschjewelers.com/blog/2...
P.100: Says “Remember, the farther you go into space, the less gravity there is.” This is not true. The further you go from Earth, the less of Earth’s gravity there will be, but going further into space there could be lots more gravity. Jupiter is a lot farther in space compared to low-Earth orbit, but there is a lot more gravity.
P.109: Says “When astronauts are working on the ISS, they are protected by the heavy shield around the ISS and can survive bumps with pieces of debris.” There is no heavy shield “around” the ISS. Are you referring to the Whipple shield coating of modules? It is certainly not heavy. Everything about spacecraft are designed to be as light as possible so we can get them into orbit. This only covers modules and not solar panels so it is not a shield around the ISS.
P. 112: Under Barringer Meteorite Crater the first sentence should read 570 feet deep and the second sentence should read 160 feet in diameter. The way it is written makes no sense.
P. 130: The definition given for interstellar is among the stars. A better definition would be between the stars. Earth is among the stars but it is not in interstellar space.
P. 134: The book claims Betelguese was discovered in 1867 by Sir John Herschel. This is silly. It is easily visible with the naked eye and was “discovered” by some cave man tens of thousands of years ago. Herschel was the first to conduct detailed observations.
P. 136: The second sentence is grammatically incorrect. Also, he definition of symmetrical is incorrect. The book states that it means both halves of an object are the same size. That is not what it means, it means they are identical.
P. 140: Says “If a neutron star were a sugar cube, that small sugar cube would weigh as much as 20 million elephants!” The wording is very unclear. What does “If a neutron star were a sugar cube” mean? Are you saying a neutron star gets smashed in to the size of a sugar cube? That would make the density point meaningless. I’m assuming you mean a sugar cube size amount of neutron star. On page 137 you managed to be clear on the same comparison by saying a single teaspoon of white dwarf matter would weigh as much as an elephant. Also, based on the information I found, one sugar cube worth of neutron star matter is more like 182,000,000 elephants based on the weight (5.5 tones) you used on page 137.
P. 141: Says that “Some call pulsars zosmic lighthouses.” I’m assuming this should read cosmic lighthouses.
P. 149: The picture in the bottom right corner says “Gamma rays produce nuclear explosions” but I’m pretty sure it is the other way around: nuclear explosions produce gamma rays.
P. 150: Says that detectors for gamma rays, ultraviolet and x-rays must be used from space because Earth’s atmosphere prevents them from reaching the surface. There are lots of surface based cosmic ray detectors, and many cosmic rays do in fact reach the surface.
P. 167: Two pictures are labeled as being pictures of black holes but they aren’t. The first picture says “Supermassive black hole NGC 4258”. This object is a galaxy that has a black hole at its center, but it isn’t visible in the picture. The caption gives readers the impression that the image is what a black hole looks like, when the picture is obviously not a black hole.
P. 173: The Big Rip Theory: This passage just restates the expansion of the universe that was mentioned on page 170. It does not explain The Big Rip Theory at all.
February 18, 2016
This is a great book for space-lovers of all ages! It is filled with fantastic pictures, information, and facts. It would be a great addition to a home or school library!
Thank you to NetGalley and Discovery for providing me with an ARC in exchange for an honest review!
Thank you to NetGalley and Discovery for providing me with an ARC in exchange for an honest review!
October 21, 2015
A Mile Wide and an Inch Deep
It seems that the best way to approach this book is as a sort of "taster" for introducing younger readers to some basic space facts. It's not a "Dummies" type book and it's not at a simple chapter book level. Rather, it's a glossy, beautifully illustrated coffee table book, assuming your third or fourth grade class has a coffee table.
There is no authorial voice that establishes any particular narrative thread. This is not a guided trip through the universe. Rather, each page or two-page spread pretty much stands alone with bullet points and factoids and captions spread about. The book is organized in a traditional fashion, in that we start with the planets of our solar system and then gradually work our way out until we get to exo-planets and Big Bang cosmology.
There are some interesting chapters about telescopes, rockets, and space exploration, and the author does a very good job of mixing up theoretical points, (references to curved space time and dark matter zip by), and more mundane but perhaps relateable topics, (living on the International Space Station).
The upshot is that this has a little bit of everything, and is almost like an illustrated encyclopedia or dictionary with very brief entries organized by topic rather than alphabetically. It is very browseable, but I'm not sure how much you would get from it unless you already knew a fair bit about the subject. That's why I think of this as a sort of appetizer course, intended to provide passing familiarity with a lot of space and astronomy topics. (Indeed, a lot of the photos are famous or at least well known depictions of the planets, nebulae, and the like, and being exposed to them can't possibly be a bad thing. The same goes for the famous astronomers, scientists and astronauts who are briefly profiled.)
The publisher recommends this for ages 6 and up, and that strikes me as a bit unrealistic, although if you have a 6 year old with an interest in "angular momentum", well, start the college fund right now. On the other hand, there's no reason to underestimate what will grab even the littlest kid's interest, and even just using this as an elegant picture book wouldn't be a bad idea.
So, this is cutting edge current, (latest Pluto images; short explanation of why Pluto isn't a planet anymore), it's got an upbeat energy to it, it covers a lot ground, and it treats kids with respect, (not even one dopey or patronizing joke). Well worth considering for any young reader.
Please note that I received a free advance will-self-destruct-in-x-days Adobe ecopy of this book in exchange for a candid review. Apart from that I have no connection at all to either the author or the publisher of this book.
It seems that the best way to approach this book is as a sort of "taster" for introducing younger readers to some basic space facts. It's not a "Dummies" type book and it's not at a simple chapter book level. Rather, it's a glossy, beautifully illustrated coffee table book, assuming your third or fourth grade class has a coffee table.
There is no authorial voice that establishes any particular narrative thread. This is not a guided trip through the universe. Rather, each page or two-page spread pretty much stands alone with bullet points and factoids and captions spread about. The book is organized in a traditional fashion, in that we start with the planets of our solar system and then gradually work our way out until we get to exo-planets and Big Bang cosmology.
There are some interesting chapters about telescopes, rockets, and space exploration, and the author does a very good job of mixing up theoretical points, (references to curved space time and dark matter zip by), and more mundane but perhaps relateable topics, (living on the International Space Station).
The upshot is that this has a little bit of everything, and is almost like an illustrated encyclopedia or dictionary with very brief entries organized by topic rather than alphabetically. It is very browseable, but I'm not sure how much you would get from it unless you already knew a fair bit about the subject. That's why I think of this as a sort of appetizer course, intended to provide passing familiarity with a lot of space and astronomy topics. (Indeed, a lot of the photos are famous or at least well known depictions of the planets, nebulae, and the like, and being exposed to them can't possibly be a bad thing. The same goes for the famous astronomers, scientists and astronauts who are briefly profiled.)
The publisher recommends this for ages 6 and up, and that strikes me as a bit unrealistic, although if you have a 6 year old with an interest in "angular momentum", well, start the college fund right now. On the other hand, there's no reason to underestimate what will grab even the littlest kid's interest, and even just using this as an elegant picture book wouldn't be a bad idea.
So, this is cutting edge current, (latest Pluto images; short explanation of why Pluto isn't a planet anymore), it's got an upbeat energy to it, it covers a lot ground, and it treats kids with respect, (not even one dopey or patronizing joke). Well worth considering for any young reader.
Please note that I received a free advance will-self-destruct-in-x-days Adobe ecopy of this book in exchange for a candid review. Apart from that I have no connection at all to either the author or the publisher of this book.
October 29, 2015
Packed with excellent photos and facts, the Discovery Spaceopedia covers everything from the life cycle of stars to NASA technology that is now used on Earth. The organization makes it easy to find specific topics by using the table of contents or the "At a Glance" page that begins each section. There are plenty of helpful charts, diagrams, captions, and sidebars. Definitions of unfamiliar words appear in a small text box shaped like an open book. The back matter includes suggestions of science centers to visit and activities to try.
One of the features that I thought was very helpful was the way comparisons were made. For example, the heat of the sun is compared to a hot summer day, a barbecue grill, and a volcano to illustrate the difference in the intensity of the heat. In another section, the rotation of planets is compared to things that spin such as tops or merry-go-rounds. The use of familiar objects as a basis for the comparisons makes them easier to grasp.
There will be something to catch the interest of almost any reader among the topics that are covered. Constellations, stars, planets, asteroids, rockets, space missions, astronauts, telescopes, the space station...it really does cover nearly everything related to space. If a reader is most interested in black holes and supernovae, they are pictured and explained. or, if a reader prefers to learn about astronaut training and things like the "Vomit Comet" and coping with microgravity, that is covered, too.
Whether you read straight through from cover to cover, or sample here and there as something catches your eye - it will be an enjoyable experience either way. It is a great book for introducing concepts that will be studied in more depth, either by an individual or a class. I plan to add a copy of this title to my school's library.
I read an e-book provided by the publisher through NetGalley.
One of the features that I thought was very helpful was the way comparisons were made. For example, the heat of the sun is compared to a hot summer day, a barbecue grill, and a volcano to illustrate the difference in the intensity of the heat. In another section, the rotation of planets is compared to things that spin such as tops or merry-go-rounds. The use of familiar objects as a basis for the comparisons makes them easier to grasp.
There will be something to catch the interest of almost any reader among the topics that are covered. Constellations, stars, planets, asteroids, rockets, space missions, astronauts, telescopes, the space station...it really does cover nearly everything related to space. If a reader is most interested in black holes and supernovae, they are pictured and explained. or, if a reader prefers to learn about astronaut training and things like the "Vomit Comet" and coping with microgravity, that is covered, too.
Whether you read straight through from cover to cover, or sample here and there as something catches your eye - it will be an enjoyable experience either way. It is a great book for introducing concepts that will be studied in more depth, either by an individual or a class. I plan to add a copy of this title to my school's library.
I read an e-book provided by the publisher through NetGalley.
December 17, 2015
Discovery Spaceopedia: The Complete Guide to Everything Space by Discovery. This book was created with Discovery Channel's leading space expert, Hakeem Oluseyi, and is filled with incredible facts, more than 400 full color NASA photos, and profiles of groundbreaking astronauts and scientists including Neil Armstrong, Edwin Hubble, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Readers will learn all about black holes, orbits, constellations and more with special features on the Curiosity and Rosetta Comet landings, and the current number of earth-like planets in the universe that may have intelligent life!
Discovery Spaceopedia is a comprehensive introduction to everything about our solar system, space travel, and all branches of science that relate to outer space. The illustrations, photographs, and facts are all well organized and presented in a way that is understandable and interesting. I found that it was not necessarily new information, at least to me. I think older readers that have already explored other books about space and related sciences will have a similar reaction. It would make a good resources with all of the information in a single volume, or comprehensive starting point for interested readers. It is a well organized and informative text with pictures and tips that capture the interest and the imagination of readers.
Discovery Spaceopedia is a comprehensive and interesting read. I think it will hold little new information for fans of the subject that have already done their research, but collects all the relevant information for reference in a single book. I think this would be a great resource for new fans to the subject matter, or for long time space fanatics that have been looking for a single book to cover their interest.
Discovery Spaceopedia is a comprehensive introduction to everything about our solar system, space travel, and all branches of science that relate to outer space. The illustrations, photographs, and facts are all well organized and presented in a way that is understandable and interesting. I found that it was not necessarily new information, at least to me. I think older readers that have already explored other books about space and related sciences will have a similar reaction. It would make a good resources with all of the information in a single volume, or comprehensive starting point for interested readers. It is a well organized and informative text with pictures and tips that capture the interest and the imagination of readers.
Discovery Spaceopedia is a comprehensive and interesting read. I think it will hold little new information for fans of the subject that have already done their research, but collects all the relevant information for reference in a single book. I think this would be a great resource for new fans to the subject matter, or for long time space fanatics that have been looking for a single book to cover their interest.
December 25, 2015
Not only was this a lot of fun for the kids, but it was fun for me too! If you have a child in your life that you are trying to teach science to, this will be a great tool that will help keep them interested. There are a ton of fun facts here with supporting pictures. Even I, as and adult, learned a lot of things that I didn't know.
This would be a great book to share with the school-aged child in your life or for a teacher's classroom. If you haven't checked out this book yet, I encourage you to do so. It really is a great learning tool and a lot of fun!
This review is based on a complimentary copy from the publisher, provided through Netgalley. All opinions are my own.
This would be a great book to share with the school-aged child in your life or for a teacher's classroom. If you haven't checked out this book yet, I encourage you to do so. It really is a great learning tool and a lot of fun!
This review is based on a complimentary copy from the publisher, provided through Netgalley. All opinions are my own.
February 2, 2016
This is a great book for kids who want to learn all about space. It's jam packed full of information and has lots of images to help keep them engaged.
February 2, 2016
I love this book, it is awesome, I never knew that there were so many constellations in space.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews