Skip to main content

Seven Pillars of Science - John Gribbin ****

I was highly sceptical of the very short hardback science book form when Carlo Rovelli started the trend with his woffly Seven Brief Lessons, however, I've been proved wrong - the last couple of years we have seen a string of books that pack bags of science in a digestible form into a small space. John Gribbin has already proved himself a master of this approach with his Six Impossible Things, and he's done it again with Seven Pillars.

The title echoes that of T. E. Lawrence's feels-even-longer-than-it-is Seven Pillars of Wisdom, but Gribbin's book is that volume's antithesis - light, to the point and hugely informative. Strictly speaking, perhaps this book should have been titled Seven Pillars of Life, as its linking thread is seven scientific occurrences needed for life to exist. As Gribbin makes it clear, these were all ideas that when first put forward were considered unlikely contenders, but now have mostly become mainstream.

The seven ideas span the nature of atoms, what stars are and how they work, the chemical nature of life, the existence of organic molecules in abundance in the galaxy, the resonant surprise that leads to the relatively abundant formation of carbon, the genetic code and the nature of hydrogen bonding. Each of these contributes to the existence of life, and each provides a fascinating story in the history of science. Some of these stories are more widely known than others, but even where they are familiar, Gribbin brings in small and delightful insights that are less familiar to the reader of popular science. It's also the case that Gribbin provides particularly clear insights into what can be relatively technical topics, for example in describing Fred Hoyle's contribution to our understanding of the way that stars created the elements (and rightly pointing out how much Hoyle should have had a Nobel Prize for his efforts).

Gribbin bookends the story with thoughts on how relatively unique the intelligent life on Earth might be in the galaxy. In his opening prologue he introduces Giordano Bruno and his idea of multiple worlds inhabited by intelligent life, teasing us with the prospect that there may be many such planets out there... only to rein this concept in at the end of the book, in the face of the narrow squeaks life on Earth has gone through to end up with intelligent lifeforms, making it seem more of an unlikely occurrence.

That approach is fun, but does give me my only slight moan about the book, which is that Bruno is given too much credit. Gribbin does not fall into the trap of some science writers of setting Bruno up as a saint, martyred for his scientific genius. However, he does tell us that Bruno was the first to identify the stars as other suns with their own inhabited systems - but Bruno seems to have taken this from Nicholas of Cusa, who lived over 100 years earlier. Similarly, though Gribbin recognises that the main heresy charges Bruno faced were purely theological, he tells us that 'speculating about the plurality of worlds' was one of the charges, where the actual point at issue was 'a plurality of worlds and their eternity', the second part being the important bit as it challenged the idea of the creation.

This is a very minor issue though, and has no impact on the effectiveness of the book as whole. It packs in the science, tells an intriguing story and is beautifully packaged. (In fact, for the price differential, it's well worth going for the hardback as this is a lovely book to hold and read.) Deserves to do very well indeed.

Hardback:

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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Roger Highfield - Stephen Hawking: genius at work interview

Roger Highfield OBE is the Science Director of the Science Museum Group. Roger has visiting professorships at the Department of Chemistry, UCL, and at the Dunn School, University of Oxford, is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a member of the Medical Research Council and Longitude Committee. He has written or co-authored ten popular science books, including two bestsellers. His latest title is Stephen Hawking: genius at work . Why science? There are three answers to this question, depending on context: Apollo; Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, along with the world’s worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl; and, finally, Nullius in verba . Growing up I enjoyed the sciencey side of TV programmes like Thunderbirds and The Avengers but became completely besotted when, in short trousers, I gazed up at the moon knowing that two astronauts had paid it a visit. As the Apollo programme unfolded, I became utterly obsessed. Today, more than half a century later, the moon landings are

Space Oddities - Harry Cliff *****

In this delightfully readable book, Harry Cliff takes us into the anomalies that are starting to make areas of physics seems to be nearing a paradigm shift, just as occurred in the past with relativity and quantum theory. We start with, we are introduced to some past anomalies linked to changes in viewpoint, such as the precession of Mercury (explained by general relativity, though originally blamed on an undiscovered planet near the Sun), and then move on to a few examples of apparent discoveries being wrong: the BICEP2 evidence for inflation (where the result was caused by dust, not the polarisation being studied),  the disappearance of an interesting blip in LHC results, and an apparent mistake in the manipulation of numbers that resulted in alleged discovery of dark matter particles. These are used to explain how statistics plays a part, and the significance of sigmas . We go on to explore a range of anomalies in particle physics and cosmology that may indicate either a breakdown i

Splinters of Infinity - Mark Wolverton ****

Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists. Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by re