Skip to main content

Accidental - Tim James ***

Tim James' writing style is a bit like going to see a comedian who only tells one-liners. Initially it's amazing and highly entertaining, but eventually it can get a touch wearing. Having said that, thanks to the sheer variety of the content, James manages to keep the reader interested, and the short entries (not one liners, but mostly two to three pages), which feel as if they are coming at you at breakneck speed, make it decidedly moreish.

James is writing about unintentional scientific breakthroughs, which he divides into clumsiness; misfortunes - where things went wrong for the desired outcome, but then achieved something different (a fair number of these are medical); surprises, where results are unexpected; and eurekas, where a major breakthrough is caused by an apparently insignificant observation or comment.

The topics are wide ranging - everything from guncotton to the telephone, Super Soakers (oddly in the 'major breakthrough' Eureka section) to superglue. It's not all inventions, either (though somehow these feel the most appealing) - there are longer pieces, for example, on electromagnetic waves, from Newton's rainbow to gamma rays, and on the Belyayev silver fox experiment with its significance for views on adaption and genetics. And the icing on the cake is that most of the pieces include entertaining stories that bring the accidental discovery alive.

I did genuinely enjoy reading this book, but it has two flaws, the bigger of which pulled it down from 4 to 3 stars for me. The smaller one is that in his mad rush, James can give insufficient detail. For example, he tells of a student called George Dantzig who arrived late at a maths lecture, copied down what he thought was the homework from the blackboard and duly solved the problem, only to discover that it was 'one of the most difficult unsolved mathematical problems in history'. Only we're never told anything about the problem itself. In reality there were two problems, both in statistics, neither of which were key unsolved mathematical problems - and it would have been nice to have had a little detail. (James doesn't mention the obvious inspiration here for Good Will Hunting either.)

The bigger issue is that there's quite a lot that is inaccurate (to be fair to James, the exaggeration mentioned above came from Dantzig's obituary, but there are better sources). A couple of examples. In the story of penicillin - an essential for a book like this - we are told that Fleming made use of Penicillium rubrum, while a few years later a better alternative was discover in the US: 'the bacteria Penicillium rubrum'. Leaving aside the obvious fact that a bacterium is not a mould, neither mould was actually Penicillium rubrum (admittedly Fleming's was initially mistaken for this) - and they obviously weren't the same species or there wouldn't be much point. 

Later on we learn about the Eadweard Muybridge's development of moving pictures - this story is littered with errors. James connects everything from Muybridge changing his name (originally Edward Muggeridge) to his development of moving pictures to a disastrous accident where he suffered a head injury. In fact, Muybridge started changing his name long before the accident and his ideas were not based on 'time slowing down in the accident' but a combination of existing toys like the zoetrope, and his blossoming career as a photographer. He was also not acquitted on a murder charge, as James says, on the grounds of brain damage - this approach was tried and failed. His defence lawyer changed tack, and Muybridge was acquitted because his actions were considered the correct response to adultery by a jury. Finally we are told that moving pictures work by persistence of vision, a Victorian explanation that has long proved incorrect. (Perhaps James should have read this book.)

These and other errors are unfortunate, because this is a genuinely fun book that keeps up the interest in its frantic pace. If you can live with not everything being exactly accurate, though, it's well worth the read.

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

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