Skip to main content

Infinite Powers - Stephen Strogatz ****

I missed this one when it came out, possibly because the cover looks somewhat amateurish. Stephen Strogatz starts by exploring the prehistory of calculus - arguably the most widely applied mathematical tool in physics and engineering. We tend to think of calculus starting with Newton and Leibniz, but there was a long prehistory stretching back to the Ancient Greeks. This involved using methods that might, for instance, mentally cut something up into smaller and smaller pieces, then rearranged those pieces in order to work out, for instance, the relationship between the area of a circle and its circumference. This background is delightfully introduced.

Strogatz takes us through some, though not all, of the intervening history before the real thing bursts on the scene, but oddly then gives up on the historical context, so we don't hear about Newton and Leibniz until we have absorbed a whole host of detail, including where necessary some equations, ranging from functions to the natural logarithm and its exponential function before we get on to the basics that lie behind differentiation.

Uncovering the fundamentals of the mathematics is the kind of thing Strogatz does brilliantly. He can really dive into what makes calculus tick. Things are less effective on the history front. We do eventually get both Newton and Leibniz's side of the story, but I found the way it was mixed up with mathematical detail made it difficult to absorb the message. Again we then lose the historical structure - no Bishop Berkeley and not much on the way that limits were introduced to fix the problem of infinitesimals (though this is touched on early on in the book). Partial differential equations get an introduction but with less detail, as does Fourier analysis. Along the way, Strogatz introduces a wide range of real world applications, and finally looks at future possibilities.

I had a couple of problems with the book. Strogatz sometimes gets carried away with floridity. For example, when talking about dividing a circle into quarters and arranging them in a line: ‘It’s certainly not a rectangle, so its area is not easy to guess. We seem to be going backward. But as in any drama, the hero needs to get into trouble before triumphing. The dramatic tension is building.’ He also commits the science writer's heresy of telling us 'During the Inquisition, the renegade monk Giordano Bruno was burned alive at the stake for suggesting that God, in His infinite power, created innumerable worlds.’ Not only was Bruno a friar, he was burned for conventional religious heresy, not his (often pseudo-) scientific views.

This was a book that couldn't decide what it was supposed to be. It started off as history of maths, but that petered out to be replaced by random historical snippets mixed in with an excellent exploration of what calculus is all about. I think it would be better to have either taken the historical approach throughout, fitting in the explanation of the maths, or to have based it purely around the maths with just passing references to the historical context. Yet despite that strange hybrid approach, there is so much to like in Strogatz's ability to bring the maths alive.

Paperback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all of Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly digest for free here
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

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more