Skip to main content

Once upon and Algorithm - Martin Erwig ***

I've been itching to start reading this book for some time, as the premise was so intriguing - to inform the reader about computer science and algorithms using stories as analogies to understand the process.

This is exactly what Martin Erwig does, starting (as the cover suggests) with Hansel and Gretel, and then bringing in Sherlock Holmes (and particularly The Hound of the Baskervilles), Indiana Jones, the song 'Over the Rainbow' (more on that in a moment), Groundhog Day, Back to the Future and Harry Potter.

The idea is to show how some aspect of the story - in the case of Hansel and Gretel, laying a trail of stones/breadcrumbs, then attempting to follow them home - can be seen as a kind of algorithm or computation and gradually adding in computing standards, such as searching, queues and lists, loops, recursion and more.

This really would have been a brilliant book if Erwig had got himself a co-author who knew how to write for the public, but sadly the style is mostly heavy academic, so the cleverness is rather wasted. Sometimes this comes across in labouring points and at others in spending a lot of effort on what is little more than defining labels for things, rather than providing useful information and context for the reader. It's not that there's not a lot of good material in there, just that it's hard work to dig it out, where I'm sure the whole idea of using the stories was to make it more approachable.

Part of the problem is that the stories themselves don't always work very well as an analogy for what's happening in the computation. So, for example, in the section dealing with sorting he comes up with the task of sorting the tasks and places that Indiana Jones needs to deal with to find the Lost Ark. The unsorted list includes the likes of: disc, sunbeam, Marion and Nepal. The algorithm used involves finding the 'smallest' element... which somehow we are supposed to instantly see is Nepal. Using numbers would not have been so well-linked to the story, but at least it would have made some sense to the reader.

Perhaps the low point is the section that uses a part of the song 'Over the Rainbow' (giving us a tenuous story connection to The Wizard of Oz) to examine language and meaning. If you aren't familiar with musical notation, I'm not sure it's a very helpful analogy... and if you are, some of the ways it's used (particular the assertion of what bars are for) doesn't entirely make sense.

I was a professional programmer for a number of years, but without a computer science background. So I was very familiar with how to do this stuff, but knew nothing of the theory behind it. As such, I found the content of the book really interesting - and the story idea should have made it doubly brilliant - but the execution meant that it didn't deliver anywhere near as well as it could have. Even so, there's a lot to savour, and it's definitely worth persevering to get a feel for why computer programs involve far more than just 'cutting code.'


Hardback:  

Kindle:  



Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond Weird - Philip Ball *****

It would be easy to think 'Surely we don't need another book on quantum physics.' There are loads of them. Anyone should be happy with The Quantum Age on applications and the basics, Cracking Quantum Physics for an illustrated introduction or In Search of Schrödinger's Cat for classic history of science coverage. Don't be fooled, though - because in Beyond Weird, Philip Ball has done something rare in my experience until Quantum Sense and Nonsense came along. It makes an attempt not to describe quantum physics, but to explain why it is the way it is.

Historically this has rarely happened. It's true that physicists have come up with various interpretations of quantum physics, but these are designed as technical mechanisms to bridge the gap between theory and the world as we see it, rather than explanations that would make sense to the ordinary reader.

Ball does not ignore the interpretations, though he clearly isn't happy with any of them. He seems to come clo…

Jim Baggott - Four Way Interview

Jim Baggott is a freelance science writer. He trained as a scientist, completing a doctorate in physical chemistry at Oxford in the early 80s, before embarking on post-doctoral research studies at Oxford and at Stanford University in California. He gave up a tenured lectureship at the University of Reading after five years in order to gain experience in the commercial world. He worked for Shell International Petroleum for 11 years before leaving to establish his own business consultancy and training practice. He writes about science, science history and philosophy in what spare time he can find. His books include Atomic: The First War of Physics and the Secret History of the Atom Bomb (2009), Higgs: The Invention and Discovery of the ‘God Particle’ (2012), Mass: The Quest to Understand Matter from Greek Atoms to Quantum Fields (2017), and, most recently, Quantum Space: Loop Quantum Gravity and the Search for the Structure of Space, Time, and the Universe (2018). For more info see: www…

Quantum Space: Jim Baggott *****

There's no doubt that Jim Baggott is one of the best popular science writers currently active. He specialises in taking really difficult topics and giving a more in-depth look at them than most of his peers. The majority of the time he achieves with a fluid writing style that remains easily readable, though inevitably there are some aspects that are difficult for the readers to get their heads around - and this is certainly true of his latest title Quantum Space, which takes on loop quantum gravity.

As Baggott points out, you could easily think that string theory was the only game in town when it comes to the ultimate challenge in physics, finding a way to unify the currently incompatible general theory of relativity and quantum theory. Between them, these two behemoths of twentieth century physics underlie the vast bulk of physics very well - but they simply can't be put together. String theory (and its big brother M-theory, which as Baggott points out, is not actually a the…