Skip to main content

The Dialogues - Clifford Johnson ***

The authors of science books are always trying to find new ways to get the message across to their audiences. In Dialogues, Clifford Johnson combines a very modern technique - the graphic novel or comic strip - with an approach that goes back to Ancient Greece - using a dialogue to add life to what might seem a dry message.

We have seen the comic strip approach trying to put across quite detailed science before in Mysteries of the Quantum Universe. As with that book, Dialogues manages to cover a fair amount of actual physics, but I still feel that the medium just wastes vast acres of page to say very little at all. This is brought home here because quite a lot of the sections of Dialogues start with several pages with no text on at all, just setting up the scenario.

As for using a discussion between two people to put a message across, Johnson makes the point that, for instance, Galileo's very readable masterpiece Two New Sciences is in the form of a dialogue (more accurately a discussion between three people, as a dialogue is only two way). This is true, though what we really mean is that it's very readable compared with other books of the period. It still feels quite stiff and stilted compared to a well-written modern popular science book. 

In the end, other people's conversations are often frustrating and boring - and the actual conversational language used is hardly natural. Try this randomly selected snippet:

Scientist: The key point is that there's one thing that makes that picture all hang together - you need something that all observers agree on.
Science fan: What's that?
Scientist: The speed of light. It is simply the conversion factor that allows on person's time and space to be mixed together and re-sliced into a different space and time for another person.

Not my idea of a fun conversation in a bar. Part of the problem here is, oddly enough, that the graphic novel format doesn't allow for good use of diagrams. The discussion of spacetime would have been helped a lot by some of these.

In all fairness, the content is very variable. For example when Johnson has a physicist dressed in a superhero costume (don't ask) explain Maxwell's equations to an interested bystander it's one of the best attempts to explain them I've ever seen. But it takes Johnson many, many frames, when it all could have been done in a couple of pages of a normal book with plenty of room for lots more interesting stuff. At other times, Johnson drops in a term like 'domain' in a way that isn't used in ordinary English.

One of the problems with the graphic novel format is you don't have much text, so you have to edit ruthlessly what's included. So, for example, when a science fan says 'Einstein discovered quantum mechanics? I thought he hated it?' The reply is 'No, no, he was one of the key shapers of it.' Though the answer is strictly true, there's a huge "but" to cover his increasing dislike of quantum mechanics and repeated attempts to show it was wrong.

In reality, what we get often aren't really dialogues, they're monologues with prompts (there are a couple of exceptions where we have equals talking, but most are physicist talking to semi-ignorant enthusiast). This means, for instance, that rather than debating the merits of string theory, loop quantum gravity etc. as you might expect in a classical dialogue, we just get a strong push on string theory.

I don't want to seem too hard on this book. It's a worthy effort, which is why I've given it three stars. And with his physicist characters, Johnson certainly gets one thing spot on, which is the way they often don't understand what they're being asked, something you frequently get when a layperson asks a physicist a question. The illustrations, all by Johnson himself, are very professional - and as I mentioned, there are occasions when he has a great take on explaining an aspect of physics. It's just, for me, both a graphic novel and dialogues get in the way of good communication, rather than helping.


Hardback:  

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

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...

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 ...

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 ...