Skip to main content

Eight Improbable Possibilities - John Gribbin ****

There are broadly two types of short, stylish-looking little hardback science books. Some are all froth and very little content, where others manage to pack in a remarkable amount of information in a readable fashion. The latest from veteran British science writer John Gribbin is very much in the second category.

In this book he presents us with aspects of science (mostly around astronomy and physics) which seem improbable yet appear in our current best theories. These are: 'the mystery of the Moon', 'the universe has a beginning and we know what it was', 'the expansion of the universe is speeding up', 'we can detect ripples in space made by colliding black holes', 'Newton, the bishop, the bucket and the universe', 'simple laws make complicated things, or little things mean a lot', 'all complex life on Earth today is descended from a single cell' and 'ice age rhythms and human evolution'.

These are all interesting topics, but for me some were a lot more engaging than others, in part because some subjects (such as coverage of the big bang, cosmic microwave background radiation and gravitational waves) have been discussed in many other books. However, three of the topics really grabbed my attention. One was that opener about the Moon (an influence that comes back up again in the final chapter) - Gribbin points out just how unusual our moon is in being far bigger than you would otherwise expect, and shows how its formation and gravitational influence have a huge influence on what the Earth is like and how suitable it was for life to develop. We simply wouldn't be here without the Moon.

The second topic, for which I would buy this book alone (I wish, if anything, the whole thing had been on this subject as it deserves a dedicated book) was the one with Newton, the bucket et al. As Gribbin points out, it sounds like the opening of a joke, but in reality it's a crucially important observation that feeds into relativity - the oddity of how something 'knows' that it is rotating. This is the idea that led to Mach's principle -  that this 'awareness' comes from the interaction of the spinning object and the rest of the universe. This concept and what this implied for Einstein's development of the general theory of relativity are beautifully explored. It's both intriguing and philosophically mind-boggling stuff that is usually brushed over without diving into the detail as happens here.

The final topic I want to pick out is the origin of complex life on Earth. It might be well-known, but this exploration of the roots of life is still something that feels remarkably counter-intuitive. It's a useful counter to the petty discoveries of genealogy to realise that we are all related to every living thing (so who cares if you can find royalty in your family tree?) There was one issue here: the assertion that the two most basic types of organisms, archaea and bacteria did not arise from a common ancestor. Gribbin tells us that 'the two forms of life must have arisen separately, but out of the same chemical soup, which explains their similarities.' The biological consensus is that there was a single universal common ancestor, but that archaea and bacteria most likely evolved separately from that same common ancestor, not just a soup.

I do wish there had been more of the less familiar material, but even so, this is a very good addition to the short but beautifully formed genus of popular science book, and would make a great gift or addition to the bookshelf.

Hardback: 
Bookshop.org

  

Kindle:  
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 Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...
Post a Comment
Read more

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...
Post a Comment
Read more