To Seek Out New Life : The Biology of Star Trek

Rating:
Summary: Thanks for the insights!
Review: I saw a review for this book on NASA Watch. Boy am I glad I bought it! What a gem of a book! As an ardent Trekie (all series) I have always fought to reconcile my enthusiasm for the enjoyable fantasy of Star Trek with my training as a physiologist. This book did just that. I highly recommend it to everyone!

Rating:
Summary: This book will make science fiction better.
Review: If anyone in the Hollywood solar system is listening, hire Dr. Andreadis as the next script consultant for "Star Trek". This scientist has supplied enough intelligent ideas between the covers of "To Seek Out New Life: The Biology of Star Trek" to take all of us--Trekkies and a host of newcomers alike--to compelling places we have not gone before.

The first Andreadis episode? Call it "Chirality's Conundrum". Write it vibrantly, as she does, so that we picture life forms that "have evolved a complicated chain of enzymes that handle oxygen as gingerly as World War II sappers manipulated armed bombs." Begin in the same dynamic way that Dr. Andreadis does in her opening chapter where she takes on "Star Trek" stories and the universe of current scientific thought about the origins of life on earth. Imagine Terran oceans being filled by iceballs from space. Could there be shipless spacers, life from somewhere else, in that water? In sparkling prose and swift strokes of her scythe-like pen she argues why not.

Do not be dismayed because Star Trek is taken to task. Rather, say to Dr. Andreadis, take the helm, the starwaters beckon. Good science does require hunches, a thing of the imagination and that is what Star Trek has always evoked. This book will make science fiction better.

Rating:
Summary: On-the-money science, written in lilting prose.
Review: In her selected bibliography, Athena Andreadis includes an epigraph: "...I lean toward books that combine scientific accuracy with stylistic verve."

Her book is best described in her own words. Dr. Andreadis never talks down to her readers, yet her stylistic mastery makes scientific concepts not only easy to follow, but fun to read about. She approaches her subject with gentle, often subtle, always wry humor, but takes that subject seriously, admirably illustrating Robertson Davies' oft-stated contention that "serious" is quite distinct from "solemn."

For Trekkers, there is the challenge of identifying the episodes mentioned in her examples, but even for those who have never watched the series (are there any Terrans who qualify for that designation?), the science is rock-solid and the trip is more than worth the ticket price.

Rating:
Summary: Bringing the biological sciences to the masses via Star Trek
Review: Long ago, when I was a very big fan of Star Trek in almost all its forms (I still am to a large degree, just older and more experienced in the ways of the world), I believed that almost everyone who was a Star Trek fan was also either quite versed in the astronomy and other sciences presented on the series, or at least had a very strong interest in learning about them.

I soon learned, however, that this was not the case. Many fans loved Star Trek primarily for the characters, stories, and exciting special effects. They had an interest in the science, perhaps, but only in the most elementary way. For them, Star Trek really served as a culture within a culture, where they could fit in. In many ways, Star Trek has almost become a religion. There was a lot of sad truth to the famous William Shatner (a.k.a. Captain James Tiberius Kirk) "Get a Life!" sketch on Saturday Night Live from 1986.

Now there is nothing either wrong or required that those who like Star Trek and similar science fiction must also be scientists or even into the sciences. But when I see the reviews here attacking Ms. Andreadis for cutting down all the "bad" biology and other science in Star Trek, as if they had just been personally insulted, it is apparent that the main purpose of her book is being missed by these folks, along with an opportunity to learn something both wonderful and true about the real Universe around them.

It is perhaps a sad commentary on today's educational values that a good portion of the general public has learned what little science they know from watching Star Trek. This is one reason why scientists like physicist Laurence M. Krauss and biologist Athena Andreadis have created very popular books examining Star Trek in all its television and film incarnations and exposing their many major faults in terms of science. For one thing, there should be much gratitude that these authors know their Star Trek so well, compared to some works I have seen exploring the series in past decades.

I suppose it is better than letting the public live in their ignorance, though. It can be a good first step in the right direction to learning more about the real sciences and how amazing that world really is.

I am bemused at those here who jumped on the author for not getting the point that Star Trek is science *fiction*, when that is exactly the point she is making in her book! Apparently they are the ones who are taking the Federation and its celestial neighborhood a bit too seriously. Emotions are getting in the way of the facts. Not everyone likes to have their emperors revealed as having no clothes.

And for the reviewers who griped that Ms. Andreadis showed her bias and emotional bent in the book, what else can be said but that To Seek Out New Life was written by a human being and not a post-Sarek Vulcan or a computer, especially one that could be blown up into clouds of white smoke by a few attacks of illogic from Captain Kirk. For me those personal commentaries kept the book from becoming dull and showed me that the author truly cared about her subject.

Perhaps I am asking too much of some to think, rather than that Ms. Andreadis is "attacking" Star Trek for having so many concepts which veer away from the known facts, that they should instead realize how fortunate they are that a trained biologist took the time and effort to enrich the world about real biology, a science which can hardly be ignored or denied in our daily existence.

And let's face it, even if the author were out to "destroy" your beloved Star Trek (which she is not), does anyone honestly think that Paramount would suddenly close up the franchise and crawl away in ignorant shame? Not at over $2 billion per year they won't!

So please go back and reread To Seek Out New Life. Know that Ms. Andreadis is simply sharing her wonderful gift of knowledge about the biological sciences in a way that can be enjoyed far better than some dry old textbook.

Rating:
Summary: Alluring, from cover to holographic cover
Review: Only a small fraction of what we know was learned in school. Most of what we know and hold dearly was learned through activities classifiable as entertainment. Pop culture has done more to shape our world-view than Philosophy 101. Ask any group of 10 people to shut their eyes and imagine Mankind's future, and 9 will report images from Star Trek. But are these plausible images or just Hollywood fakes? How opportune, when a self-described Star Trek junkie who is a Harvard neurobiologist comes forward and supplies the answers. And how delightfully practical, that she can entertain us while bringing us to date. Using familiar Star Trek images and stories, Dr. Andreadis reveals to us the wonders of our bodies, and of carbon-based life in general. She shows us the parallels and differences between the human brain and the silicon-based computer, addresses philosophical questions such as mind vs brain, and examines the plausibility of the sci-fi critters - the androids, cyborgs and shape-shifters. This is not a lot of windy disputation - she cites the Star Trek episodes, chapter and verse. After telling us what we need to know about DNA, genes and cloning, she has us look at the diversity of humanoid forms in the Star Trek universe. Is a Vulcan/human hybrid possible? Would a Klingon culture be stable. And is there anything remarkable about their language? Athens-to-Boston transplant Andreadis does all this with great charm, using Star Trek to hold a mirror to science, and the power of its fables to lure us into serious thought. As an adolescent, I was lured to science by the free-wheeling essays of then-young Arthur C. Clark and the popularizing pontification of biologist Julian Huxley. How pleasant, the emergence of Athena to do this for the "next generation", with the ease and grace of her namesake, the goddess of knowledge.

Rating:
Summary: Good science for the lay reader, but off the mark at times.
Review: Overall, this book explores many of the biological aspects of the Star Trek series (movies and TV) in a thoughtfull way and presents arguments for or against in a manner that gives credit to the reader's intelligence but is not overly technical. Dr. Andreadis points out the impossibility of all that interspecies breeding, the trouble with Odo (a favorite character of mine, but just not possible) and other flaws in the system. She does give credence to the possibility of the Borg, artificial intelligence, and other Trek phenomena. While the book is overall balanced, there are time you just want to say "Andrea, it's called fiction for a reason." She gives untoward dark motives to the universal translator and the Vulcan Mind Meld, and lets face it, Actors Equity is mainly populated with carbon-based bipeds. But if you are a Trek fan and you can get past the occasional rant, this book is worthwhile.

Rating:
Summary: Great Book, But Lighten Up, Doctor
Review: The Biology of Star Trek gives the lay reader an exceptionally clear and informative exposition of the principles behind the ongoing miracle of life. Dr. Andreadis is authoritative, avoids scientific jargon, and spikes her text with engaging humor. Most importantly, she ends on a note of hope, like Star Trek itself. However, the good doctor too often lets herself indulge in unnecessarily harsh commentary about Star Trek's scientific gaffes and the associated social issues. Instead of the bemused tone adopted in The Physics of Star Trek, Dr. Andreadis' book resorted too often to abrasive sarcasm. She could have made her points quite well without overdoing the biting remarks. Still, the book offers an invaluable service: making science accessible to a world that urgently needs it.

Rating:
Summary: Buy LIFE SIGNS instead
Review: The book is mean spirited and wrong headed. There were some glaring errors in this book that could have been avoided if it was proofread by a trekker or two.For instance the author continually describes Betazoids as merely empathic and not telepathic, when everyone knows they are indeed telepathic. Deanna Troi is merely empathic because she is only half betazoid and is infact telepathic with other betazoids.Also she complains about how the holodoc should not be able to leave the sick bay but is seen all around the ship and on away missions. Does she even watch the show? They talk about the mobile emmitter all the time. I can't see whether it is a pheasable piece of tech or not--but don't just leave it out because it doesn't serve your complaining. It is filled with stuff like this.This book should probably offend people with autism, mental illness, developmental disabilites, anyone with spiritaul beliefs and homosexuals.The author is accused of being a feminist by other reviews (is this a bad thing?) but i would argue that she is nothing of the sort. She provides a very strong heterosexist view when she states that Trill symbiots could not possibly be attracted to humunoids because they can't reproduce with them. This is just ugly heterosexist propaganda.The beginning of this book is playful in its view of Star Trek science but it quickly degenerates into an attack.The author uses sloopy logic to try to prove that many Star Trek concepts are impossible. For instance her reasons for why most tech is imposible (transporters, dna scans) is that it would take too much time for it to work. This seems ridiculous, like someone from the 50's refuting the possibility of the internet based on the time it took their computers to compute. When computers get faster and faster every few months--how are we to know what will be possible a few hundred years from now.Another thing that is incredible annoying and fills up much of the book is that when Star Trek doesn't specificly explain a concept the author says "I can only conclude..." and then proceeds to use her assumption as the basis of her argument against it being possible. Far from being the only conclusion possible--she picks the one of many conclusions a person can make that is most handy in her argument that Star Trek science is wrong.I cannot refute the author's science as she is much more knowledgable in that area then I am. But much of this book is oppinion and not science at all. She ignors the premise of Star Trek, ignores that it is a work of science fiction and bases her arguments on what is true on Earth now. This makes the book very limiting. Instead of explaining scientific knowledge to try to imagine what maybe possible in the future, on planets different from ours, in other timelines, this book uses science and oppinion to weave an ugly web in which everything Star Trek is wrong.This is not for Trekkers who enjoy the show. For us I would reccomend the book LIFE SIGNS: THE BIOLOGY OF STAR TREK, which is not just a book that glorifies Star Trek. It is a thoughtful account on what is possible, and gently points out what is most likely not possible as far as we know. Buy this book if you are one of those people who like to watch Star Trek in order to make fun of it, but if you are a fan of the shows and movies (an books) do yourself a favor and skip this tedious book.Most disturbing to me is the author's lack of respect for anything spiritual, if anything has the hint of religion, any thing psychic or spiritual, anything that cannot be explained away by current scientific knowledge, it is ridiculed by the author, and completly dismissed.

Rating:
Summary: Weak on biology but full of political correctness
Review: The book itself should be divided into two books. One about biology which is pretty simple stuff and the other a study of the political correctness of star trek.

Rating:
Summary: An inspiring romp through the genre of science fiction/fact
Review: There is little I can offer here that has not been said already. I am an avid Star Trek fan and a science voyeur and this project of Dr. Andreadis was well worth the read. As mentioned in other posts, her enthusiasm and wealth of knowledge inspires you to pursue the topics she broaches further. Virtually impossible to put down, it was a delightful romp through the subject on the wings of cultural, scientific, and historical topics. Reminiscent of only to top few popular science writers, I would put this on top of your reading list. I look forward to seeing more from this author...