Skip to main content

Critical Mass: How one thing leads to another – Philip Ball ***

Even though this would be a hard book to pin down to a specific category, the “overview” categorization we’ve given it is no cop-out as it pulls together everything from sociology and political economy to physics, biology and maths.

 It’s fascinating to learn early on in the book that those who in the 20th century worried about the application of a mathematical technique like statistics to the human populace had got things entirely back-to-front. Statistics originated as a collection of information on people, a crude form of census and developed into a mathematical discipline, rather than the other way round.

 It’s a big book and it’s necessary to bear with Philip Ball through the rather (aptly?) ponderous chapter on Hobbes’ Leviathan up front, but once he gets into statistical physics he takes off.

 There’s a lot on economics, on political power, globalization and even the Internet. Again and again the book comes back to the way that mass human action has some resemblances to the physics of large quantities of interacting objects. In physics this has produced a lot of theory based on statistics that does very well at predicting what will actually happen. When it comes to the human world, not entirely surprisingly, things are more complicated. Not only are most human masses not closed systems – so you have to take into account the impact of external forces – but a single individual can have a huge impact. When you are looking at gas molecules you aren’t going to have a Jesus or a Hitler – we, on the other hand, can expect that.

 Because of this disparity, there are always problems with using the methods of statistical physics to make predictions. Ball spends ages describing how different models can be built, but often then has to come to the conclusion that while they can explain a lot that has happened, they aren’t much use at predicting the future – which is what we really want them to do. (One scientist Ball quotes did dare to make a prediction based on his model, that the UK housing price bubble would burst by the end of 2003 – while it will inevitably come, we’ve reached June 2004 without it happening.)

 This gives us one of the two big problems with this book, and the reason it doesn’t score more than three stars. It is a great idea for a book, but everything’s really a work in progress. There are few conclusions it just goes on. And there’s the other problem. It goes on, and on, and on. There seems to be a bit of a Harry Potter phenomenon occurring with popular science books (it’s probably following a good statistical pattern) – the incidence of over-long books is on the rise. At around 640 pages, this book was twice the length the content deserved and in the end it was hard not to start skimming the material.

 There is also one striking omission. Ball several times refers to fiction and speculative writing in considering the application of maths to mass human behaviour, but strangely never mentions Isaac Asimov’s remarkable 1950s Foundation trilogy, which features “psychohistory” a concept relying on a vast mathematical model of human space. While Asimov’s idea is not practically possible, neither are many of the others that Ball mentions, and nothing else has quite the magnificent sweep of Asimov’s confection.

 Despite all this, it’s a fascinating subject and often Ball makes his points well, it’s just a shame he’s made it such a slog. If you’d like an easier time of it, try the overlapping and much better Sync.
Paperback:  

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

The Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...
Post a Comment
Read more

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...
Post a Comment
Read more

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more