Skip to main content

Flatterland - Ian Stewart ***

Ian Stewart's Flatterland has been around since 2001, but I've only just come across it. It is, of course a sequel to the famous novella Flatland by Edwin Abbott Abbott dating back to 1884. The original Flatland is perhaps the archetype of a book that is based on a brilliant idea, but be distinctly dreary to read. So the key question here is whether Stewart escaped this limitation in his sequel.

We start here with the (literally, not metaphorically) two-dimensional characters familiar to anyone who has read Flatland. The original both explored the nature of existing in two dimensions (and how the inhabitants would see a three-dimensional object), and provided Victorian social commentary, with female Flatlanders both physically different to males (lines, rather than polygons) and limited in what they can do by society. Stewart only mentions the social side in passing, but instead focuses on mathematical experiences.

Guided by a space hopper (the 60s bouncy toy), the central character Victoria Line is taken out of Flatland to experience a wide range of different mathematical spaces. They start off with the conventional three-dimensional space Vicky's ancestor came across (the original book was supposedly written by A. Square, who Stewart tells us was Albert Square) but then go on to a whole range of different mathematical spaces, from fractal space to topological space, finishing off by straying into physics by bringing in Schrödinger's cat, Minkowski space and time travel via the special and general theories of relativity.

All the way through, Stewart seems to be trying to outdo Abbott's weak attempts at humour by piling on cultural references (we've seen a couple above) and resorting to often excruciating puns. This can be distinctly wearing for the reader, though there are occasional gems such as 'he was the black shape of the family'.

If you can cope with the barrage of irritating humour, some parts of the book work really well at introducing concepts such as topology - this section is based in part on the Mad Hatter's tea party in Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. In fact, Stewart clearly takes a significant lead from mathematician Lewis Carroll's approach, though unfortunately lacks Carroll's peak writing skills. This is more Sylvie and Bruno than Alice or Snark. Other parts of the book, though, fail to get the message across. We are dealing here with quite abstruse mathematical concepts and while the portrayal through various characters and their worlds make good use of those concepts in you already know them, they don't act as a useful introduction, leaving the reader potentially baffled.

Like the original Flatland, this is an interesting and innovative attempt. It has always seemed that fiction should be a good route to explain science or maths painlessly and entertainingly. But for me, the painful punning and the relentless jokiness was too much, while the exposition was often not clear enough to do the job. A for effort, though.

Paperback:  
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 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, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more