Skip to main content

Impossible, Probable and Improbable - John Gribbin ****

This is a compendium volume, bringing together three short books by the man who Americans would probably term the dean of British science writers, John Gribbin. These were Six Impossible Things, Seven Pillars of Science and Eight Improbable Possibilities. (Seeing a theme here?)

The first of these parts is my favourite, which is odd because it focuses on the interpretation of quantum theory, a topic that can veer towards 'angels dancing on the head of a pin' territory. This is not the detail of quantum physics itself, but rather the attempts to provide theories, mostly incapable of being disproved scientifically, that will explain how the apparent probabilistic nature of quantum reality somehow translates into the apparently non-probabilistic everyday world. These are often complex ideas that are difficult to get your head around, but Gribbin's coverage is as simple as it possibly could be.

The second section effectively builds the pillars not so much of science as the science of life, starting from the origins of atoms and leading through to the genetic code and hydrogen bonding. Although these stray from Gribbin's core subjects of physics and cosmology, he still is able to give excellent insights, particularly where the two fields overlap, such as his description of Fred Hoyle's contribution to our understanding of the way that stars created the elements.

The third section takes in theories that are the best we have, but seem unlikely or surprising. Some of these really stood out for me, notably how unusual the Moon is (and how that influences the environment on Earth), Newton's bucket - which is a brilliant introduction to consider a really difficult physical conundrum, and the origins of complex life on Earth. If I'm honest, I couldn't get as excited about, say, ice age rhythms and human evolution, or dark energy - in the case of the latter because it has been so widely covered - but everything here was worth reading. I do have one significant moan (about something I didn't notice when reading the individual title). At one point, Gribbin says that 'The only possible explanation' for the way galaxies rotate is huge halos of dark matter, where there is a perfectly good explanation in modified Newtonian dynamics. Neither explanation works perfectly as yet - but it simply isn't true that dark matter is the only possible explanation.

If you don't have any of the component titles, this is a handy way to get all three in one go. Having said that, I much preferred the individual books. In part this is because they were handsome little hardbacks which were just nicer to hold and read than this big lump of a book. But it's also because there's almost an element of the whole being less than the sum of the parts. The 21 topics (as Gribbin points out, half of Douglas Adams' 42 number, providing presumably half the answer to the ultimate question) might feel a little heavy going by the end because there are just too many different components, where reading each of the individual books was a delight. If you go for this compendium, I'd consider reading something else between each of the three sections.

Hardback:   
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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Are Eating the Earth - Michael Grunwald *****

If I'm honest, I assumed this would be another 'oh dear, we're horrible people who are terrible to the environment', worthily dull title - so I was surprised to be gripped from early on. The subject of the first chunk of the book is one man, Tim Searchinger's fight to take on the bizarrely unscientific assumption that held sway that making ethanol from corn, or burning wood chips instead of coal, was good for the environment. The problem with this fallacy, which seemed to have taken in the US governments, the EU, the UK and more was the assumption that (apart from carbon emitted in production) using these 'grown' fuels was carbon neutral, because the carbon came out of the air. The trouble is, this totally ignores that using land to grow fuel means either displacing land used to grow food, or displacing land that had trees, grass or other growing stuff on it. The outcome is that when we use 'E10' petrol (with 10% ethanol), or electricity produced by ...

Battle of the Big Bang - Niayesh Afshordi and Phil Harper *****

It's popular science Jim, but not as we know it. There have been plenty of popular science books about the big bang and the origins of the universe (including my own Before the Big Bang ) but this is unique. In part this is because it's bang up to date (so to speak), but more so because rather than present the theories in an approachable fashion, the book dives into the (sometimes extremely heated) disputed debates between theoreticians. It's still popular science as there's no maths, but it gives a real insight into the alternative viewpoints and depth of feeling. We begin with a rapid dash through the history of cosmological ideas, passing rapidly through the steady state/big bang debate (though not covering Hoyle's modified steady state that dealt with the 'early universe' issues), then slow down as we get into the various possibilities that would emerge once inflation arrived on the scene (including, of course, the theories that do away with inflation). ...

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 â€˜Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...