Skip to main content

The Man from the Future - Ananyo Bhattacharya *****

There are very few individuals who have made such wide contributions to mathematical and scientific topics as did John von Neumann. In this splendid scientific biography, Ananyo Bhattacharya introduces to many for the first time both von Neumann's work and life.

It's easy to get the balance between the life and the science wrong with this kind of biography - Bhattacharya keeps it just right, filling in all the biographical details we need, without falling into the trap of giving us endless boring detail of the von Neumann family's background. Similarly, with a couple of small exceptions I'll mention later, the description of his work is at a level that remains approachable with a bit of effort from the reader, yet we are given enough information to see just how important and novel von Neumann's contribution was.

The significantly more famous Richard Feynman is probably the only twentieth century scientist I can think of with the breadth of interests and originality of von Neumann, though approaching things from the viewpoint of a physicist rather than a mathematician. Feynman was a much better communicator, and probably seemed more approachable to someone who wasn't a world class mind than von Neumann - but it's impossible not to be bowled over by von Neumann's breadth of application.

We start off with his work on set theory in pure mathematics, but where von Neumann really triumphed was in applied mathematics. He starts by making a significant contribution to the development of quantum physics and its mathematical basis. He pretty much devises game theory and makes major contributions to its application in various fields. He is a big player in the Manhattan Project, devising mathematical methods to model nuclear reactions and bomb structures. He is instrumental in the development of electronic computers. And he makes large contributions to the concept of self-replicating automata - devices that can produce copies of themselves and hence, effectively, reproduce like living organisms.

One small issue with the book is that Battacharya gets a bit carried away with the automata, spending far too much time on something that still hasn't achieved anything practical, and telling us far too much about others such as Conway and Wolfram who were inspired by von Neumann, but aren't part of his story. The other negative I'd say is that some of the explanations of the mathematics need a bit more detail to be accessible - as stated it's hard to really get your head around what's being described (and that's even in topics I know a reasonable amount about).

However, these small concerns don't get in the way of this being a very readable and enjoyable scientific biography of someone who, outside those working in related fields such as computer science or game theory, has not had the public awareness that he deserves. It's a great addition to the popular science bookshelf.

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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

David Spiegelhalter Five Way interview

Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter FRS OBE is Emeritus Professor of Statistics in the Centre for Mathematical Sciences at the University of Cambridge. He was previously Chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication and has presented the BBC4 documentaries Tails you Win: the Science of Chance, the award-winning Climate Change by Numbers. His bestselling book, The Art of Statistics , was published in March 2019. He was knighted in 2014 for services to medical statistics, was President of the Royal Statistical Society (2017-2018), and became a Non-Executive Director of the UK Statistics Authority in 2020. His latest book is The Art of Uncertainty . Why probability? because I have been fascinated by the idea of probability, and what it might be, for over 50 years. Why is the ‘P’ word missing from the title? That's a good question.  Partly so as not to make it sound like a technical book, but also because I did not want to give the impression that it was yet another book

The Genetic Book of the Dead: Richard Dawkins ****

When someone came up with the title for this book they were probably thinking deep cultural echoes - I suspect I'm not the only Robert Rankin fan in whom it raised a smile instead, thinking of The Suburban Book of the Dead . That aside, this is a glossy and engaging book showing how physical makeup (phenotype), behaviour and more tell us about the past, with the messenger being (inevitably, this being Richard Dawkins) the genes. Worthy of comment straight away are the illustrations - this is one of the best illustrated science books I've ever come across. Generally illustrations are either an afterthought, or the book is heavily illustrated and the text is really just an accompaniment to the pictures. Here the full colour images tie in directly to the text. They are not asides, but are 'read' with the text by placing them strategically so the picture is directly with the text that refers to it. Many are photographs, though some are effective paintings by Jana Lenzová. T

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on