Skip to main content

Fundamentals - Frank Wilczek ****

In keeping with the trend of having seven this or ten that (Carlo Rovelli has a lot to answer for), physicist Frank Wilzek sets out to give us 'ten keys to reality'. As Wilczek explains in his introduction, the aim is to explore two themes: abundance and seeing things differently, with a childlike curiosity and lack of preconceptions. The author also points out that he aims to offer an alternative to religious fundamentalism. As he notes, many of his scientific heroes were devout Christians, and he 'aims to transcend specific dogmas, whether religious or anti-religious'.

In essence there are two things going on in this book. On the one hand, each of the ten main sections covers a fairly straightforward aspect of physics and cosmology, though not from the viewpoint of a physical theory so much as context such as space, time, natural laws and so on - in this, it will be familiar ground to anyone who has read a popular science physics primer. But the aspect that lifts Wilczek's book is that in covering the basics he both gives us a more grounded sense of place and adds in details that you rarely see elsewhere.

So, for example, we're used to Brian Cox-style popular science that echoes the classic Douglas Adams parody of saying that space is big - really big - so big you are an insignificant little dot. While Wilczek emphasises the scale of the universe compared to a human being, he also points out that, for example, we have more atoms in our bodies than there are estimated to be stars in the visible universe. And as such each of us is also impressively large - the scale works in both directions.

Another example of strikingly original way of looking at things is that in talking about physical laws, Wilczek imagines being a conscious being in the world of a computer game character such as Super Mario, in a world where the rules are unpredictable, and takes us through the implications of being in such a different universe. This is brilliant.

Some of the ten sections are rather thinner than others. I was a bit disappointed by a section on complexity and emergence - so important in reality (as opposed the often very constrained world of physical models), which only runs to eight pages. Nonetheless, each section is readable and enjoyable. There were one or two slightly odd aspects. He tells us that the visible universe is 13.8 billion years old so the 'limiting distance is... 13.8 billion light years' - which is misleading as it ignores the expansion of the universe that means that the equivalent distance is closer to 50 billion light years. He also can over simply - for example by referring to 'u' and 'd' quarks, missing out or where those letters come from and the interesting story behind quark naming, or speaking about quantum spin as if it involves spinning around like a macro object.

Inevitably an overview like this will have masses of simplification and in the end it's a matter of taste what goes and what stays. While I wouldn't agree with all the selections, I found Wilczek's approach genuinely refreshing and this book has so much more going for it that many of these overview titles. It's interesting to compare it with Jim Al-Khalili's World According to Physics. In many ways they're complementary (complementarity is another section in this book, funnily). Al-Khalili gives a far more insightful picture of the physics itself. Wilczek gives us a much more impressive philosophical context for that view of the universe. I think I would recommend reading both - perhaps Wilzeck first to get the context, then Al-Khalili to get the specifics. Together, they provide an ideal physics primer for the curious mind.

Hardback:

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

Comments

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

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

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