Have you seen any UFOs?
Q: Do you believe in extra terrestrial life?
Q: So, you're an astronomer! Cool, I'm also very much into astrology.
Q: Do you plan to go into space?
Q: What's your research field?
Q: What is an astronomer doing, anyway? Surely all stars must have been discovered by now?
Q: Where can I buy a star?
Q: I heard you discovered and named an asteroid Saltis. Why didn't you name it after yourself or your wife?
Is the universe infinite? If not, what is beyond?
Q: What are your favourite deep thoughts?
Q: With all diseases and poverty in the world, how can it be justified to study astronomy?
Q: Do you believe in God?
Q: What is science?
Have you seen any UFOs?
A: UFO literally means Unidentified Flying Object, and it has happened plenty of times that I've seen flying things in the sky without having immediately identified them. That doesn't mean these objects were flying saucers or alien space craft, though. I don't think there are any reliable evidence for us having been visited by extra terrestrials. In fact, I find the idea rather silly. First of all, it's very difficult to traverse the distances of interstellar space. Just to give you an idea, our fastest space craft would take 50 000 years to reach the Sun's nearest star neighbour. The nearest star! This means that any potential visitors would have to be much more technologically developed than us. So what do these very advanced visitors do after the major effort of getting here? They hide. Not only do they hide, they miserably fail to do so for a very small fraction of the humanity, the UFO-enthusiasts. Despite being that advanced, that is. Does this sound like a very likely scenario? I think not.
To round up, my firm belief is that UFO-sights belong to the same category as
sights of brownies and fairies. If we'll ever be visited by extra terrestrials,
I think everyone
Do you believe in extra terrestrial life?
A: I don't know if there are extra terrestrials, and I don't find it meaningful to believe either way since I have nothing to support my belief.
Q: But surely you must believe something, you're just being "politically correct" when you say you don't know about alien life?
A: No! I honestly don't believe either way. In an attempt to make you understand my point of view, I offer you this simile: Imagine I have a box full of sand. I then ask you if there is an odd or even number of sand grains in the box. Naturally, you don't know. But what if I insist and ask you what you believe? Would your answer be meaningful, or of any use to me? I think not. On the contrary, I think an answer would be misleading, since that might make me think you had some substance for your belief when in reality you had no.
That said, I do hope there are extra terrestrials. But that's an entirely
different matter from presuming there are. In fact, my computers and I are involved
in a huge programme that searches for extra terrestrials, and you can too: check
So, you're an astronomer! Cool, I'm also very much into astrology.
A: While spelt similarly, astronomy and astrology mean very different things. Astronomy ultimately tries to understand the universe around us as it is. Astrology uses basic astronomy and then adds some wishful thinking. Astronomers explore the universe by the scientific method; astrologers write horoscopes. I would say modern astrology is more related to religion and psychology than astronomy.
And no; I'm not interested in astrology, not at all.
Do you plan to go into space?
A: Why, we're already there! Just think of the Earth as a giant space ship, rambling through space in company of the Moon and the Sun. We are all astronauts.
Q: Right... but you know what I mean.
A: I'm not very anxious about leaving the surface of the Earth, despite being an astronomer. In fact, an astronomer and an astronaut have about as much in common as a meteorologist and an aircraft pilot. Part of my indifference to space travel is that the astronauts of today hardly leave the atmosphere of the Earth, much less travel to the stars ("astronaut" literally means "star traveller"). If there was a way to truly travel to the stars, like they do in e.g. Star Trek, I would be much more interested. But as it is for now, I'm very content with studying the universe from the ground. (Though I sometimes dream about what it would be to travel through outer space; one result of my fantasies is StarStrider, a windows space simulator I wrote with a friend).
What's your research field?
A: I'm studying solar systems in the making. Yes, solar systems are being formed in this very moment. You may have thought that all stars that exist formed shortly after the Big Bang, and that they will continue to shine forever, but that's not the case. Stars are born and die all the time, it's just that the time-scales are so much longer than a human life-time, that we normally don't notice. It's difficult to explain what I do in detail without going on at great length, but if you're interested you may have a look at my thesis page.
What is an astronomer doing, anyway? Surely all stars must have
been discovered by now?
A: Astronomers do many different things, but a typical astronomer spends about 90% of her (mostly his) time in front of a computer. Even observational astronomers, who travel to telescopes located at distant and hard-to-get places, most often observe from the basement of the telescope building, in front of a computer (in fact, several computers) controlling the telescope. Typically, a very small fraction of an astronomer's time is devoted to actual observing, most of the time she spends analysing the data (with computers) and writing applications (on word processors) for new research grants/telescope time.
There are more stars in the universe than there are sand grains on every
beach in the entire world. Less than 1% of the 200 000 000 000
stars in our own galaxy have been catalogued. And there are about as many
galaxies in the visible universe as there are stars in our galaxy... So no,
not all stars have been discovered. But discovering all stars is not
what astronomy is all about. Astronomy is about understanding the universe,
and hopefully that can be done without knowing of every single star. For
recent astronomical discoveries, I recommend the
news service of the
Sky & Telescope magazine.
Where can I buy a star?
A: You mean, who is the current owner of the stars? No one, really. Of course, there are plenty of people that would be more than happy to take your money. If you insist and really don't know what to do with your money, I may be able to help you. I can even sell you a whole galaxy, containing billions of stars, with an amazing discount on the price per star. More seriously, if you're really interested you should first read what the International Astronomical Union has to say about selling stars (and naming them).
I heard you discovered and named an asteroid Saltis. Why
didn't you name it after yourself or your wife?
A: It's not custom to name asteroids after yourself. Comets are named after their discoverers, but not asteroids. As for the name of my wife, there already is an asteroid named Erika. Besides, I think the name Saltis (after the nickname for Saltsj÷baden where the Stockholm Observatory was located 1931-2001) was a quite good choice, don't you agree? Read more about Saltis on my Saltis page (in Swedish).
Is the universe infinite? If not, what is beyond?
A: It depends on what we mean by "the universe". If we define the universe to be all that has been, all that is, and all that is going to be, that is, everything, then the universe is infinitely large, since the universe is expanding and the current paradigm says it will continue to expand forever. On the other hand, if we define the universe to be all that is now, at this very instant, then the universe may well have a finite volume. This doesn't necessarily imply the existence of a limiting boundary, as I will show by a simily: Imagine the surface of a sphere. The surface has no boundary; going along the surface you will never reach "the end of the surface". Still, its area is finite (you only need a finite amount of paint to paint it). Granted, the surface of a sphere has a curved geometry, but so has the universe on large scales. Also, the surface of a sphere is two-dimensional while the volume of the universe is three-dimensional, but it's much more difficult to imagine a curved three-dimensional geometry, and the difference is of no principal significance.
Seen another way, if you travelled forward in a
straight line you would not reach the end of the universe but merely come back
to where you started. There's nothing "beyond", as there are no borders. (In
reality you cannot do this experiment even in principle since the universe expands
so fast that you will never be able to catch up).
What are your favourite deep thoughts?
A: These are mainly two and remain a complete mystery to me. The first has puzzled me since early childhood (infact, it's one of my earliest memories), and the second has fascinated me ever since I started to study physics.
With all diseases and poverty in the world, how can
it be justified to study astronomy?
A: Astronomical research, like other research in the natural sciences, is an investment in the future. We strive to increase our knowledge of the universe. The universe is ruled by the physical/natural laws, and by gaining knowledge of the universe we gain knowledge of the physical laws governing it. With a better understanding comes the power to influence our environment and extend our possibilities; knowledge is power. The technological progress of humans is a firm attestment to the power of knowledge.
The real question is how we should weight immediate needs against possible future improvements. That, I cannot answer. Also, there is the question on how to distribute resources among the natural sciences.
Thus, to briefly answer the question, if we spend for instance 95% of our total resources on improving our current situation, I think it may be justified to invest the remaining 5% in improving our knowledge for future benefits. (these figures are taken from thin air and shouldn't be interpreted literally)
In the long run, we have to improve our technology, it is essential for our
long-time survival as a species. Otherwise natural disasters (like a collision with
an asteroid, a nearby supernova explosion or the death of our Sun) will inevitable
wipe humans out of history. We need to spread to other planets, even other solar
systems, to increase our survival likelihood. Even if we can avoid natural disasters
we are a threat to ourselves and therefore need to spread. Note, however, that I'm
talking of time-scales of at least tens of thousands of years, so there's no immediate
need to hurry with space-travel technologies.
Do you believe in God?
A: I'm not convinced there is a God. I don't say there is no; I just say I'm not convinced. I do respect people who think there is one, but by the very nature of religion there is no way they can give me a convincing argument. I think there are two ways to become a believer: You either have been born into the belief and never had reasons to doubt it, or you've had a 'vision' or been 'enlightened' by some other means. No arguments alone can convince me of God's existence. The argument is symmetric. Thus, there is no way anyone can convince me that God does not exist. I'm sorry if you find this confusing. To me it's crystal clear.
Since there is no way of proving or disproving the God hypothesis, I feel it's pointless
to discuss it at too much length. It's just a matter of belief. This goes for other
meta-physical beliefs and religions as well, as long as they have no observable
What is science?
A: To quote the physicist Feynman, Science is a way of trying to not fool yourself. In science we collect observations about nature and search for patterns; whenever we think we find a pattern we call it a theory and test this theory against all available and future observations. By respecting the observations we ensure that theories that do not match the reality of nature are recognised as such. Thus science is self-correcting, a very important property.
The scientific method is the only way I know of that is able
to produce knowledge. In fact, I think the scientific method is
the only way of acquiring knowledge.
Why did you become an astronomer?
A: I've always been obsessed with space and astronomy, since childhood. Carl Sagan's TV-series Cosmos, broadcasted on Swedish television in 1982, did a lot to fuel my interest. I remember I couldn't read the subtitles fast enough, so my father read them out aloud for me (I didn't understand any English at that age). I have never regretted my choice of profession, I find it a great privilege to be paid to unravel the mysteries of the universe and contribute to our understanding.
"Alexis", isn't that a female name?
A: In most countries, the name Alexis is given to males. The big exceptions are the USA and Canada, where Alexis is a quite popular name on females. As for myself, I'm most certainly a male.
"Alexis Brandeker" doesn't sound very Swedish!
A: No, it's not a typical Swedish name; it's not typical at all. In fact, I think it's unique among the 6 milliards of humans (I know it is on the internet). Alexis stems from Alexius which in turn is related to Alexander, derived from the words meaning "to defend, help" in Greek. My mother is Greek, but Alexis is a quite unusual name even in Greece. The name is only common in America, and then mostly on females.
My surname has roots from Austria since my grandfather was Austrian. He spelt the name Brandecker originally, but a c disappeared at the authorities when he moved to Sweden and was left with Brandeker.