Skip to main content

What's Gotten Into You - Dan Levitt *****

Tracing your atoms from the Big Bang to their role in sustaining your life, this book is very much of the 'Gee whiz wow!' school of popular science writing... and I really enjoyed it. While I couldn't cope reading too many books like this in a row, occasionally they are fun - and the great thing that Dan Levitt does is to dig a little deeper along the way. Not into the science itself, which is presented at a fairly summary level, but instead into the stories of those involved in the discoveries behind the science, including several that are not particularly familiar.

So, for example, in the early stages of the story we get the inevitable names such as Georges Lemaître, Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin (Levitt sticks with her pre-marital surname) and Fred Hoyle, but also the likes of Marietta Blau, Allesandro Morbidelli and Victor Safronov who are far less familiar, but deserving of introduction to the general public.

What makes the sequence of narratives that fill in the gaps between the Big Bang and complex cellular life particularly interesting is the number of times theories have changed. Although Levitt says that Hoyle always rejected the Big Bang, he doesn't mention the Steady State theory, which at one point (certainly in the UK) had far more support than Big Bang, but with various other stages in the book, such as the formation of the Earth, where Earth's water came from and the structure of cells, it's fascinating to see how the different views competed before coming to the current best theories - in some cases still not 100 per cent settled. 

Levitt does a great job of putting across the difficulties of reaching a solid outcome that get hidden when we present modern understanding as simply 'what's known'. This comes across particularly well when he explores the structures of cells, how these tiny features were discovered and the complexity of the molecular machinery that enables them to operate.

My only real concern is that because the science (and its history) has very little detail, it can sometimes involve statements that aren't entirely accurate. For example, we are told that in 1922 Edwin Hubble shocked the astronomical community by discovery that the universe 'contained an incredible number of other galaxies', where in fact Hubble only had data on a handful of galaxies, and did not go public until later than 1922. I was also a little thrown by the wording 'negatively charged sodium and positively charged potassium' when describing the sodium-potassium pump - negative sodium ions would be a distinct novelty.

There are lots of different ways to look at what makes us what we are, as demonstrated in What Do You Think You Are? - and it is great to have a much more expansive look at how the atoms that we are made from came into being, ended up in us and function in the body. What captivated me about What's Gotten Into You was not so much the science, as those stories of the people behind the theories and how those theories were disputed and specific ones came to dominate. Enjoyable stuff.

Hardback:   
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
Labels:

Comments

  1. Akshat5 July 2023 at 13:03

    Picked it up on a whim at the library turned out to be absolutely fantastic , the title dosent do it justice though it ties the narrative together it is a wonderful book worthy of a re-read

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

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