Skip to main content

Schrödinger's Cat and 49 other experiments - Adam Hart-Davis ***

Dealing with a massive subject like physics as a ‘straight’ end to end book and making it approachable is quite a challenge. Publishers often look for some kind of hook to do this - and combined with the popularity (I can only assume primarily as gift books) of graphically interesting books with 50 or so bite-sized articles, we get to the idea of telling the story of physics through 50 experiments - and that's what turns up in Adam Hart-Davis's new title Schrödinger's Cat and 49 Other Experiments that Revolutionised Physics.

The problem is, of course, that while experiments are important, so is theory. Which gives us a problem. Do you represent Maxwell’s remarkable theoretical work on electromagnetism using Hertz’s comparatively trivial experiments? What about Einstein’s work or that of the quantum theory gang? Even the title 'experiment' of the book is a thought experiment.

The answer here is to cheat - but strangely only sometimes. Within the book, Hart-Davis refers not to experiments, as in the title, but studies, which makes theory more open to consideration. So some of the ‘experiments’ in the book are actually nothing more than the development of theories. Yet sometimes, puzzlingly, he does hide the important bit behind a lesser experiment - so, for example Bohr’s quantum atom is just a section inside the article on a largely forgotten experiment by Frank and Hertz (remember that one? And no, it's not the 'real' Hertz, who was dead by then, it's his nephew).

What I find impressive about this book is the way that Hart-Davis packs so much into the typically three page articles. From Galileo (thankfully consigning the Leaning Tower drop to legend) to the LHC he often manages to avoid over-simplifying significantly and does not just cover the key experiment (or theory) the article is headlined with, but brings in associated material. Sometimes the articles do feel a little dull - but the good thing about this format is there’s always something new over the next page.

Sometimes the illustrations are useful too - there are some quite clear diagrams - though all too often what we have is a Monty Python style image that doesn’t even give you a useful idea of what’s being illustrated. So, to pick an example at random, Marie Curie is pictured - fine - but with half her face covered with a radioactivity symbol and what may be a diagram of an atom. A triumph of style over substance.

Inevitably with any list of key experiments (and theories) there will be gaps and unnecessary inclusions to quibble about. Is it really necessary to include Schrodinger’s sad old cat as ‘an experiment that revolutionised physics’? It might be iconic, but it didn’t change anything. By contrast, for example, we don’t get Aspect’s quantum entanglement experiment or, horrendously, anything about Maxwell. We jump straight from 1850 to 1887. Admittedly, though Maxwell carried out plenty of experiments, he didn’t so on electromagnetism, but as we’ve seen there are plenty of theory-based articles here, so the omission of what the likes of Einstein and Feynman regarded as one of the most essential pieces of work in the history of physics is baffling.

Overall, Hart-Davis, a veteran science communicator, does surprisingly well given the challenge he faced. Because of the book’s style, I can’t give it more than three stars, but he does far better than it should be possible in this format.

Paperback:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you



Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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 ...

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...

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, ...