>“Bode’s law,” formulated in the 18th century, which holds that planets and moons orbit their hosts at predictable mathematical ratios. I think this is a very

>“Bode’s law,” formulated in the 18th century, which holds that planets and moons orbit their hosts at predictable mathematical ratios. I think this is a very unclear description of the "Bode's law" hypothesis. How does an object orbit another at a ratio? Thankfully Wikipedia provides a much more sensible explanation. (Also, is "host" really a term used by astronomers for orbited celestial bodies? With respect to the Sun, is Earth a "guest," or maybe a "parasite?") Perhaps I'm just picky, but this piece strikes me as rather "fluffy." Murch shares very little in the way of concrete or actionable thinking. There's a lot of praise and little justification for it. Generally speaking I dislike interviews of this sort: even James Lipton doesn't stroke the ego quite so much while requiring so little of his guests. There also seems to be a certain desperation here to arrive at the conclusion that the humanities have a meaningful contribution to make toward a scientific or objective understanding of the universe.