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
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nanotechnology - Rahul Rao ****

There was a time when nanotechnology was both going to transform the world and wipe us out - a similar position to our view of AI today. On the positive transformation side there was K. Eric Drexler's visions in the 1986 Engines of Creation. Arguably as much science fiction as engineering possibilities, it predicted the ability to use vast armies of assemblers to put objects together from individual atoms.  On the negative side was the vision of grey goo, out of control nanotechnology consuming all in its path as it made more and more copies of itself. In 2003, for instance, the then Prince Charles made the headlines  when newspapers reported ‘The prince has raised the spectre of the “grey goo” catastrophe in which sub-microscopic machines designed to share intelligence and replicate themselves take over and devour the planet.’ These days the expectations have been eased down a notch or two. Where nanotechnology has succeeded, it has been with the likes of atom-thick mat...
Post a Comment
Read more