Skip to main content

Racing Green - Kit Chapman ****

It's a perfectly reasonable assumption that a book about a topic you (and most of the world) have no interest in will be uninspiring - and for me, motorsport is on a par with watching paint dry without the aesthetic content. However, David Sumpter's Soccermatics had proved to me that it was possible to take a similarly boring subject and make an enjoyable popular maths title based on it - so perhaps I shouldn't have been so surprised that I enjoyed Racing Green.

In part, this is down to Kit Chapman's skill as a storyteller. I often moan about a lack of narrative in popular science books - this book oozes with it. If anything, there's almost too much. Where Sumpter gave us quite a bit of detail on the maths of the 'beautiful game', Chapman gives fleeting glimpses of the science and technology involved in this most technical of sports, sometimes with no more science content than a shampoo commercial. Even so, I can forgive that for the range of technologies and their applications explored here.

Along the way, Chapman brings in simulation, safety design, aerodynamics, battery technology, the physics of brakes, autonomous vehicles, new materials and more. Some of it is fairly predictable - carbon fibre technology, for example - in other cases there are real eye-openers, such as the use of flax as a more environmentally friendly substitute for carbon fibres (sustainability and the environment are common threads throughout the book, hence, that 'green' bit).

As someone with an airline background, I was amazed at how late motor racing realised simulators would be useful - but as with most of the technology employed in the field, once they did, they took it very seriously. Another surprise was the sheer amount of data flowing from Formula 1 cars during a race - far more than even 5G can cope with. I knew how much CERN had to juggle data when searching for particles, but not the extent to which it now dominates motor racing.

All the way through, we get stories to put the tech into context. Not infrequently, given the risks involved in the sport, these stories involve crashes, lessons learned and the use of technology to reduce fatalities. It's a dramatic book that is likely to appeal to a good few readers who rarely dip their noses into popular science titles. 

I do need to mention two issues. The smaller one is that Chapman's storytelling drive is so strong that occasionally it warps reality a little. This comes through in the very first sentence. 'Romain Grosjean has 27 seconds to live.' Well, no, he doesn't. But I can forgive that as dramatic licence. What's less forgivable is when Chapman describes the development of graphene. There is no doubt that of the two key players, the life and work of Andre Geim makes by far the best tale. But to not even mention his co-Nobel Prize winner Konstantin Novoselov, is, to say the least, not very nice.

The bigger issue comes through in the book's subtitle 'How motorsport science can save the world.' This is that classic fallacy, justification by spin-off. NASA often does this. Yes, we've spent all these billions, but this amazing everyday technology is a spin-off from our work. Putting aside the fictional ones like Velcro and Teflon, we can allow NASA memory foam, but the claim, for example, that the need for small computers on Apollo led to the microcomputer revolution is a total misunderstanding of how economics and technology work. It was cheap microprocessors for everyday uses like controlling traffic lights that led to the PC, not bespoke multi-million pound computers.

In Racing Green, the claimed spinoffs are an attempt to launder motorsport's reputation as a money-burning, environmentally damaging waste of resources. It's true there have been some interesting spinoffs - but if the money spent on motorsport had been simply been put into R&D to deal with these problems, it would have achieved far more. Spin-offs are not a justification, unless you are already a fan. The ultimate example of the misplaced fan view in the book for me was the claim that Mercedes is a successful brand because of its motorsport successes. No it's not - the majority of Mercedes drivers couldn't care less if they have a racing team. And credulity is stretched to the limit in suggesting racing autonomous cars will iron out the issues they face on the ordinary roads - because those issues are all about the non-controlled, non-standardised environment of real roads, the very opposite of a race track.

The spin-off justification was a constant irritation throughout the book, but it just shows what a good piece of writing Racing Green is that I could overlook it and still get lots out of the experience.

Hardback: 
Bookshop.org

  

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