Skip to main content

Fundamentals - Frank Wilczek ****

In keeping with the trend of having seven this or ten that (Carlo Rovelli has a lot to answer for), physicist Frank Wilzek sets out to give us 'ten keys to reality'. As Wilczek explains in his introduction, the aim is to explore two themes: abundance and seeing things differently, with a childlike curiosity and lack of preconceptions. The author also points out that he aims to offer an alternative to religious fundamentalism. As he notes, many of his scientific heroes were devout Christians, and he 'aims to transcend specific dogmas, whether religious or anti-religious'.

In essence there are two things going on in this book. On the one hand, each of the ten main sections covers a fairly straightforward aspect of physics and cosmology, though not from the viewpoint of a physical theory so much as context such as space, time, natural laws and so on - in this, it will be familiar ground to anyone who has read a popular science physics primer. But the aspect that lifts Wilczek's book is that in covering the basics he both gives us a more grounded sense of place and adds in details that you rarely see elsewhere.

So, for example, we're used to Brian Cox-style popular science that echoes the classic Douglas Adams parody of saying that space is big - really big - so big you are an insignificant little dot. While Wilczek emphasises the scale of the universe compared to a human being, he also points out that, for example, we have more atoms in our bodies than there are estimated to be stars in the visible universe. And as such each of us is also impressively large - the scale works in both directions.

Another example of strikingly original way of looking at things is that in talking about physical laws, Wilczek imagines being a conscious being in the world of a computer game character such as Super Mario, in a world where the rules are unpredictable, and takes us through the implications of being in such a different universe. This is brilliant.

Some of the ten sections are rather thinner than others. I was a bit disappointed by a section on complexity and emergence - so important in reality (as opposed the often very constrained world of physical models), which only runs to eight pages. Nonetheless, each section is readable and enjoyable. There were one or two slightly odd aspects. He tells us that the visible universe is 13.8 billion years old so the 'limiting distance is... 13.8 billion light years' - which is misleading as it ignores the expansion of the universe that means that the equivalent distance is closer to 50 billion light years. He also can over simply - for example by referring to 'u' and 'd' quarks, missing out or where those letters come from and the interesting story behind quark naming, or speaking about quantum spin as if it involves spinning around like a macro object.

Inevitably an overview like this will have masses of simplification and in the end it's a matter of taste what goes and what stays. While I wouldn't agree with all the selections, I found Wilczek's approach genuinely refreshing and this book has so much more going for it that many of these overview titles. It's interesting to compare it with Jim Al-Khalili's World According to Physics. In many ways they're complementary (complementarity is another section in this book, funnily). Al-Khalili gives a far more insightful picture of the physics itself. Wilczek gives us a much more impressive philosophical context for that view of the universe. I think I would recommend reading both - perhaps Wilzeck first to get the context, then Al-Khalili to get the specifics. Together, they provide an ideal physics primer for the curious mind.

Hardback:

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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin Five Way Interview

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin (born in 1999) is a distinguished composer, concert pianist, music theorist and researcher. Three of his piano CDs have been released in Germany. He started his undergraduate degree at the age of 13 in Kazakhstan, and having completed three musical doctorates in prominent Italian music institutions at the age of 20, he has mastered advanced composition techniques. In 2024 he completed a PhD in music at the University of St Andrews / Royal Conservatoire of Scotland (researching timbre-texture co-ordinate in avant- garde music), and was awarded The Silver Medal of The Worshipful Company of Musicians, London. He has held visiting affiliations at the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and UCL, and has been lecturing and giving talks internationally since the age of 13. His latest book is Quantum Mechanics and Avant Garde Music . What links quantum physics and avant-garde music? The entire book is devoted to this question. To put it briefly, there are many different link...

Should we question science?

I was surprised recently by something Simon Singh put on X about Sabine Hossenfelder. I have huge admiration for Simon, but I also have a lot of respect for Sabine. She has written two excellent books and has been helpful to me with a number of physics queries - she also had a really interesting blog, and has now become particularly successful with her science videos. This is where I'm afraid she lost me as audience, as I find video a very unsatisfactory medium to take in information - but I know it has mass appeal. This meant I was concerned by Simon's tweet (or whatever we are supposed to call posts on X) saying 'The Problem With Sabine Hossenfelder: if you are a fan of SH... then this is worth watching.' He was referencing a video from 'Professor Dave Explains' - I'm not familiar with Professor Dave (aka Dave Farina, who apparently isn't a professor, which is perhaps a bit unfortunate for someone calling out fakes), but his videos are popular and he...

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on...