Black Holes

               Black Holes was an effective essay in that it made an obscure and complex topic simple enough so that an average person could read it. The essay could have provided many equations with random variables and factors that are considered, but instead the author chose to use description rather than math to explain his points. This helps the author maintain ethos and the reader’s attention throughout the essay. I feel that when writing about science you have two choices: to write like Michael Finkel with Black Holes and use simpler examples and astounding numbers to hold the interest of a more general public or to write using the most elevated knowledge to accurately convey points to the smarter scientific community. Both of these styles have advantages and drawbacks associated with them. Finkel utilizes this style so that more people can understand his points, but the drawback is that he cannot go too in depth or his audience will lose interest. The converse is true for elevated science writing where many people outside of the science community will not take interest in the writing, but all of the facts are on the table and the knowledge is being spread most effectively. Greater significance that can be taken from this essay includes the expansion of interest in space. Perhaps this author is advocating the controversial expansion of the NASA budget and thinks that if more of the general public takes interest in the topic of black holes, then they will vote to get more money into the space budget. He leaves a lot of open questions to the readers that would definitely spark a thought in an engaged reader. Finkel effectively uses this technique and evokes thought from his readers that will maintain their interest throughout his writing.