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

Comments

  1. 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

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, ...

The Infinity Machine - Sebastian Mallaby ****

It's very quickly clear that Sebastian Mallaby is a huge Demis Hassabis fan - writing about the only child prodigy and teen genius ever who was also a nice, rounded personality. After a few chapters, though, things settle down (I'm reminded of Douglas Adams' description of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy ) and we get a good, solid trip through the journey that gave us DeepMind, their AlphaGo and AlphaFold programs, the sudden explosion of competition on the AI front and thoughts on artificial general intelligence. Although Mallaby does occasionally still go into fan mode - reading this you would think that AlphaFold had successfully perfectly predicted the structure of every protein, where it is usually not sufficiently accurate for its results to have direct practical application - we get a real feel for the way this relatively unusual company was swiftly and successfully developed away from Silicon Valley. It's readable and gives an important understanding of...

Nanotechnology - Rahul Rao ****

There was a time when nanotechnology was both going to transform the world and wipe us out - a similar position to our view of AI today. On the positive transformation side there was K. Eric Drexler's visions in the 1986 Engines of Creation. Arguably as much science fiction as engineering possibilities, it predicted the ability to use vast armies of assemblers to put objects together from individual atoms.  On the negative side was the vision of grey goo, out of control nanotechnology consuming all in its path as it made more and more copies of itself. In 2003, for instance, the then Prince Charles made the headlines  when newspapers reported ‘The prince has raised the spectre of the “grey goo” catastrophe in which sub-microscopic machines designed to share intelligence and replicate themselves take over and devour the planet.’ These days the expectations have been eased down a notch or two. Where nanotechnology has succeeded, it has been with the likes of atom-thick mat...