Skip to main content

The Hidden Half - Michael Blastland *****

Michael Blastland is co-author of one of my favourite titles on the use and misuse of numbers, The Tiger that Isn't - so I was excited to see this book and wasn't disappointed.

Blastland opens with the story of a parthenogenic crustacean that seems to demonstrate that, despite having near-identical nature and nurture, a collection of the animals vary hugely in size, length of life and practically every other measure. This is used to introduce us to the idea that our science deals effectively with the easy bit, the 'half' that is accessible, but that in many circumstances there is a hidden half that comprises a whole range of very small factors which collectively can have a huge impact, but which are pretty much impossible to predict or account for. (I put 'half' in inverted commas as it might be fairer to say 'part' - there's no suggestion that this is exactly 50:50.)

We go on to discover this hidden half turning up in all kinds of applications of science and maths from economics to healthcare, from the lives of individuals who were delinquent as children to measuring the benefit (or not) of giving a poor family a cow. Blastland picks out a number of factors that tend to mislead us - that as humans we aren't consistent in our responses, that things change with location and time, that the way research is undertaken can generate false results, that principles can mislead us and far more. As he points out, what this does is make us aware of the limitations of applied maths (particularly economics) and science. He is not saying we shouldn't use them - they are far better than the alternatives - but we have to be aware of their limitations.

At the end of the book, Blastland comes up with some suggestions for dealing with the hidden half. It isn't going to go away, and there are no easy solutions, but he does have some interesting ideas on mitigation. For example, he suggests we should experiment more (with political policies, for example), remember that we are betting on knowledge rather than making use of certainty and, for me, most importantly that scientists, journalists and politicians should do more to communicate the uncertainty involved. It's not that we want our politicians to be hesitant, but it would be far better if they made it clear that there are very few clear linkages between policies and outcomes. I was particularly struck by some data on GDP figures. The media and politicians often spend ages agonising over a GDP change of, say 0.2 per cent. The headline figures are revised over time as better data is available: Blastland points out that a typical correction might be 0.4 per cent up or down (and can be as high as 1 per cent). This makes it very clear that making pronouncements based on a 0.2 per cent change is futile and highly misleading.

My only criticism is that I felt that the book could have done with even more specific examples: in this kind of book, it's the examples that have the real bite and savour. Blastland spends a bit too long philosophising on the hidden half in a way that feels a little repetitive. It's not there aren't great examples (plenty more than the ones mentioned above), it was just for me that the ratio of examples to musings wasn't quite right. A brief mention also to the cover design - it's very clever (though I couldn't help thinking it had been put on wrong and wanting to re-position it).

We are getting more books now about the reality of applied maths (particularly economics) and science, which is an extremely good thing, provided the message is carried through to journalists and others who have to communicate these matters to the public. An excellent book.
Hardback:  

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Roger Highfield - Stephen Hawking: genius at work interview

Roger Highfield OBE is the Science Director of the Science Museum Group. Roger has visiting professorships at the Department of Chemistry, UCL, and at the Dunn School, University of Oxford, is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a member of the Medical Research Council and Longitude Committee. He has written or co-authored ten popular science books, including two bestsellers. His latest title is Stephen Hawking: genius at work . Why science? There are three answers to this question, depending on context: Apollo; Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, along with the world’s worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl; and, finally, Nullius in verba . Growing up I enjoyed the sciencey side of TV programmes like Thunderbirds and The Avengers but became completely besotted when, in short trousers, I gazed up at the moon knowing that two astronauts had paid it a visit. As the Apollo programme unfolded, I became utterly obsessed. Today, more than half a century later, the moon landings are
Post a Comment
Read more

Space Oddities - Harry Cliff *****

In this delightfully readable book, Harry Cliff takes us into the anomalies that are starting to make areas of physics seems to be nearing a paradigm shift, just as occurred in the past with relativity and quantum theory. We start with, we are introduced to some past anomalies linked to changes in viewpoint, such as the precession of Mercury (explained by general relativity, though originally blamed on an undiscovered planet near the Sun), and then move on to a few examples of apparent discoveries being wrong: the BICEP2 evidence for inflation (where the result was caused by dust, not the polarisation being studied),  the disappearance of an interesting blip in LHC results, and an apparent mistake in the manipulation of numbers that resulted in alleged discovery of dark matter particles. These are used to explain how statistics plays a part, and the significance of sigmas . We go on to explore a range of anomalies in particle physics and cosmology that may indicate either a breakdown i
Post a Comment
Read more

Splinters of Infinity - Mark Wolverton ****

Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists. Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by re
Post a Comment
Read more