Skip to main content

Solving Chemistry - Bernard Bulkin ***

This is an odd one - it's a memoir highlighting the chemistry in the career of Bernard Bulkin, who has been a significant figure in both academic and industrial chemistry (the latter primarily at BP). It's interesting that Bulkin does not really define what chemistry is - something we rarely attempt to do (the Royal Society of Chemistry's website doesn't say what it is either). Instead, Bulkin places chemistry with respect to the other sciences, filling the gap between physics and biology.

By far the most fascinating content here is Bulkin's assertion that chemistry is finished - that unlike any other significant field of science, it's pretty much complete in the academic sense. There are plenty of new applications to be worked out - but the fundamentals are pretty much there: perhaps this isn't a great time to be a theoretical chemist (as opposed to an applied one), though Bulkin certainly gives the impression that he enjoyed his time in academia (even if, to be honest, he seems to have enjoyed business more).

There is also interesting material on what it means to be a scientist - the fundamentals a scientist should have (but that aren't necessarily taught) and on Bulkin's experience in business. However, there are two significant problems with the rest of the content. Although this isn't in any sense a personal memoir (we learn hardly anything of Bulkin's private life), it is framed as a scientific memoir - and the memoir form really only works with someone famous, someone who has gone through a dramatic life experience or someone who is a brilliant writer - and none of these applies. There's one section where we're introduced to Bob and Stan and Jim and Mary and Henry and Laura in just two paragraphs, and I found it hard to care.

The other troublesome area is that there is far too much technical material on the chemistry and methodology Bulkin was involved with during his academic phase, which, I'm afraid, only a chemist could love. Although (having done chemistry for two years at undergraduate level) there were some aspects I enjoyed in a reminiscent sense, I found it hard to become engaged.

Just occasionally a bright spark of interest comes through - for example when Bulkin discusses the mechanism by which bread becomes stale, and cookies can be made with crispy outsides and soft insides (the same chemical basis), but there wasn't enough of this kind of content.

For a limited audience, then, this is a fascinating read (and I will be passing the book on to my chemist brother-in-law, who I think will be particularly interested in this 'chemistry is finished' thesis), but it doesn't have the right approach to keep the attention of a general audience throughout.

Paperback 

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

Comments

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, ...

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 ...

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...