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
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