Graham Lappin sets out to give us a comprehensive introduction to isotopes, followed by an exploration of how we make use of them. We start with age of the planet Earth, and various estimates of it before radioactive decay became an effective dating mechanism, bringing in along the way both what isotopes are and a touch of statistics to be able to handle the concept of half lives. We then move on to medicine and biology; plants, animals, life and death; and the beginning of the universe coupled with nuclear bombs.
Because it's covered less elsewhere, I particularly liked the middle sections. It helps that there's a bit more of a personal feel in places, for example where Lappin says 'Allow me to tell you the story of how I found this out' when launching into the idea that different parts of you have different ages. There are great little excursions, for example into getting radioactive tracers into DNA, or in drugs such as paracetamol to trace its path through the human system. Obviously we can't avoid more covered areas, such as the impact of radioactivity on humans and the use of radioactive isotopes in imaging and medicine, but then we get into more novel topics, from radioactive discharges into the oceans to the role of isotopes in environmental issues and crime detection. Really interesting stuff.
In terms of content, then, this is a solid four star book, and it's for this that I thoroughly recommend it. I can only give it three stars for writing, though. Lappin does suffer more than a little from fact statementitis - 'this does this; that is that' and so on and on. Strings of facts don't make for good writing: the book is particularly short of the kind of writing flow that gives readability.
A lesser point is that there's too much unnecessary pedantry, which sometimes misfires. For example, we are told that a luminous watch should be called phosphorescent, as luminous only applies to something that spontaneously and consistently emits light. Even if this were true it is certainly pedantic, but the OED, which I generally consider definitive on what words mean, does not specify this restriction. Similarly, Lappin complains about the term 'precision bombing' saying 'A single bomb hitting a target can be accurate, but it isn't precise', requiring there to be multiple hits to be able to statistically determine precision - yet the dictionary definitions of 'precision' include 'The fact, condition, or quality of being precise; exactness, accuracy' - nothing there about multiple instances being required.
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free hereShort
Comments
Post a Comment