Skip to main content

Space Oddities - Harry Cliff *****

In this delightfully readable book, Harry Cliff takes us into the anomalies that are starting to make areas of physics seems to be nearing a paradigm shift, just as occurred in the past with relativity and quantum theory.

We start with, we are introduced to some past anomalies linked to changes in viewpoint, such as the precession of Mercury (explained by general relativity, though originally blamed on an undiscovered planet near the Sun), and then move on to a few examples of apparent discoveries being wrong: the BICEP2 evidence for inflation (where the result was caused by dust, not the polarisation being studied),  the disappearance of an interesting blip in LHC results, and an apparent mistake in the manipulation of numbers that resulted in alleged discovery of dark matter particles. These are used to explain how statistics plays a part, and the significance of sigmas.

We go on to explore a range of anomalies in particle physics and cosmology that may indicate either a breakdown in the standard model of particle physics or provide small moves towards understanding what's going in with big bang cosmology, dark matter or dark energy. Cliff brings these stories alive, often speaking to individuals involved - in fact, in one case (the ANITA neutrino experiment) he spends too much time on the context of both the individual and the nuts and bolts of making the experiment work, where we could do with a bit more of the science - but mostly this works very well.

All this is done in a highly conversational style. I loved the way, for instance, that experimentalist Cliff refers to theoretical physicists getting over-excited by a Large Hadron Collider result that was later eliminated by saying 'It was theoretical physicists, the overexcitable little dears, who were so desperate for signs of something new that they were prepared to jump on any bump, no matter how insubstantial.'

My only real concern about the book is that Cliff really should have read the recent title The Blind Spot, pointing out some shortcomings in the approach of many scientists, particularly physicists. As is too often the case with popular science, he sometimes states as fact theories that  are not universally accepted because there is no direct evidence to support them. This is particular obvious in talking about inflation and dark matter particles (as opposed to other explanations of the dark matter phenomenon). This is particular ironic here, where in both cases apparent anomalies he covers prove to be false dawns. 

There are also occasions (again a problem pointed out in The Blind Spot) where, despite Cliff making clear the limitations of theory, he appears to make the mistake of confusing scientific models with reality. So, for example, when introducing quantum field theory he says 'Funny as it may seem, it is these fields, not particles, that are the ultimate constituents of our universe'. Contrast this with Richard Feynman in his book QED 'I want to emphasize that light comes in this form – particles. It is very important to know that light behaves like particles, especially for those of you who have gone to school, where you were probably told about light behaving like waves. I’m telling you the way it does behave – like particles.' The reality is that quantum fields, particles and waves, as means of describing quantum entities, are all models. None of them is real or 'ultimate constituents': they are extremely useful mathematical metaphors. Note the way Feynman uses 'like particles' - a safer approach.

Nonetheless, this is an excellent book, because Cliff is bringing to the fore these anomalies that often get a brief mention and then are pushed under the carpet. This is both fascinating and exciting when we think about the new directions that science in general and physics in particular might take in the future. Recommended.

Scientists tend to include conflict of interest statements in their papers. I ought to say that I might be assumed to have a bias in favour of Harry Cliff, as I once made a major mistake when writing about him in a magazine, calling him Harry Webb. If you don't understand why I did this, ask a Cliff Richard fan.

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

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

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

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...
Post a Comment
Read more