Skip to main content

Genesis – Robert M. Hazen *****

Genesis is one of those titles that could have many meanings: in Robert Hazen’s book, all is made clear in the subtitle: The Scientific Quest for Life’s Origin. It’s not exactly a new quest – in fact attempts to explain our origin go even further back than the first book of the Bible, and there have been experiments trying to recreate the “primordial soup”, perhaps with a little lightning thrown in, for many years. Then there’s the idea that the basic organic molecules that would eventually lead to life arrived on the Earth in a meteor – originally posed by the great Fred Hoyle, and after much dismissal by biologists getting something of a revival in the twenty-first century.
What Hazen initially sets out to do is to test yet another theory. Now that life has been discovered around the boiling hot, high pressure vents under the sea, is it possible that life started under these sorts of conditions? It’s quite an attractive hypothesis. Getting the basic building blocks of carbon chemistry to work in a water environment is tricky without specialist catalysts – but could things be different under high temperature and pressure? Hazen, originally a geologist, is pulled in to provide an experimental test by a colleague.
Don’t be put off by the rather stodgy foreword and preface (the book would frankly have been much better without them) – jump straight to the prologue, which describes Hazen being pulled into the project, and his setting up an experimental test for the possibility in a warm narrative style. It’s very engaging, and good to hear, for example, of his struggle to seal a tiny gold pressure vessel (anyone who messed up experiments in high school or college science will feel great sympathy) and the cunning solution he resorted to.
After the prologue, things get slightly less personal as Hazen begins to expound the different ways of getting to an idea of how life was first formed, but bear with it – he’s soon back to anecdote mode. Hazen is particularly good at describing experiments. The reader gets a real and rare insight into what actually happens in a scientific experiment, as he describes using “everyday” technology ike a mass spectrometer, that’s pretty exotic to most of us. It’s impossible not to be caught up with his infectious enthusiasm as Hazen seems to skip from lab to lab, asking for a spot of assistance from different researchers, just as he himself is pulled into various pieces of work.
If this all sounds a touch idealized and lacking the less pleasant side of the scientific community, Hazen also gives us a wonderful description of a pair of scientists locking horns over conflicting interpretation of some evidence, one acting in way that verges on the scary, looming up near his rival as he gave a presentation and staring at him from beside the podium as if he were trying to put him off – it’s like a debate in the British parliament without the protective table and dispatch boxes to keep the two front benches from assaulting each other.
Although Hazen starts off with his “bottom up” attempt – start from nothing and create the elements of life, he gives plenty of coverage also to the “top down” approach of trying to work back through the fossil record to the most basic and oldest forms of life (it’s such a sample that’s under debate in the clash at the conference mentioned above). A fair amount of time is also given to emergence, the idea that complexity can develop from simplicity without guidance. The last few chapters of the book lose impetus a fraction, but are still highly readable. It’s a marvellous combination of expounding theory and leading us through the realities of experiment in a personal fashion. Highly recommended.

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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Models of the Mind - Grace Lindsay *****

This is a remarkable book. When Ernest Rutherford made his infamous remark about science being either physics or stamp collecting, it was, of course, an exaggeration. Yet it was based on a point - biology in particular was primarily about collecting information on what happened rather than explaining at a fundamental level why it happened. This book shows how biologists, in collaboration with physicists, mathematicians and computer scientists, have moved on the science of the brain to model some of its underlying mechanisms. Grace Lindsay is careful to emphasise the very real difference between physical and biological problems. Most systems studied by physics are a lot simpler than biological systems, making it easier to make effective mathematical and computational models. But despite this, huge progress has been made drawing on tools and techniques developed for physics and computing to get a better picture of the mechanisms of the brain. In the book we see this from two directions

The Ten Equations that Rule the World - David Sumpter ****

David Sumpter makes it clear in this book that a couple of handfuls of equations have a huge influence on our everyday lives. I needed an equation too to give this book a star rating - I’ve never had one where there was such a divergence of feeling about it. I wanted to give it five stars for the exposition of the power and importance of these equations and just two stars for an aspect of the way that Sumpter did it. The fact that the outcome of applying my star balancing equation was four stars emphasises how good the content is. What we have here is ten key equations from applied mathematics. (Strictly, nine, as the tenth isn’t really an equation, it’s the programmer’s favourite ‘If… then…’ - though as a programmer I was always more an ‘If… then… else…’ fan.) Those equations range from the magnificent one behind Bayesian statistics and the predictive power of logistic regression to the method of determining confidence intervals and the kind of influencer matrix so beloved of social m

How to Read Numbers - Tom Chivers and David Chivers *****

This is one of my favourite kinds of book - it takes on the way statistics are presented to us, points out flaws and pitfalls, and gives clear guidance on how to do it better. The Chivers brothers' book isn't particularly new in doing this - for example, Michael Blastland and Andrew Dilnot did something similar in the excellent 2007 title The Tiger that Isn't - but it's good to have an up-to-date take on the subject, and How to Read Numbers gives us both some excellent new examples and highlights errors that are more common now. The relatively slim title (and that's a good thing) takes the reader through a whole host of things that can go wrong. So, for example, they explore the dangers of anecdotal evidence, tell of study samples that are too small or badly selected, explore the easily misunderstood meaning of 'statistical significance', consider confounders, effect size, absolute versus relative risk, rankings, cherry picking and more. This is all done i