Skip to main content

Atomic Fingerprints - Graham Lappin ***(*)

Isotopes - variants of chemical elements with differing numbers of neutrons in the atomic nucleus - play a major role in our understanding of matter and radioactive decay, as well as being powerful tools for science and medicine. As often seems the case with anything that has some degree of a chemistry focus, it's a topic that isn't heavily covered in the popular science literature, except in passing reference when dealing with the periodic table or radioactivity.

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.

Overall, Atomic Fingerprints is a useful and informative book, but it's a shame that it does not have more of the writing flair that would make it a better popular science read.
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 hereShort
Labels:

Comments

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, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more