Skip to main content

Quantum Drama - Jim Baggott and John Heilbron ***

On a first glance of the cover you might think that Jim Baggott and John Heilbron were brilliant Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein impersonators. In fact Baggott is an excellent popular science writer and Heilbron was an esteemed historian of science, both specialising in quantum physics. There's another way the cover is misleading - you might think this was an in-depth exploration of Bohr and Einstein's relationship. The topics they argued about certainly come into it, but instead this is detailed look at how quantum theory developed.

I've read a lot of books on quantum physics, but I've never come across one that goes into such painstaking detail of every step along the way, introducing the work of a good number of physicists who rarely make it into the public eye. These range from John von Neumann - well known but usually sidelined as a quantum physicist - to the likes of Oskar Klein and Hans Kramers. Similarly, Baggott and Heilbron go into many (many) steps along the way that rarely get mentioned. And even when we're dealing with something mainstream like the uncertainty principle or Schrödinger's equation, the approach is very different from the one we usually see in a popular science title, because we are told what was thought at the time, rather than seeing the development through the prism of a modern understanding.

So far so good. But there are two problems with this book if it's seen as a title for a general audience. Firstly, there is hardly any engagement with the protagonists. Yes we get names - lots of names. But there is very little context or exploration of them as people. The focus is very much on their scientific (and philosophical) theorising. Of itself, this isn't too bad, but the other problem is that the writing is very dry. It's ironic that at one point the authors reference Lewis Carroll (oddly, in a book that is very precise, they totally mess up the title: instead of 'Alice's Adventures in Wonderland' it's referenced as 'Alice in wonderland'). Before coming across this, I was genuinely reminded by the writing style of the scene in Alice where there's an attempt by a mouse to get characters dry by reading a very dull (dry) history passage. Quantum Drama sometimes has a similar feel to that parody passage.

Apart from occasional inexplicable bursts into CAPITALS, this feels like an academic history book with obscure scientific details thrown in. If the warning Stephen Hawking was given that every equation halves the numbers of readers, I'd probably be the only one. Admittedly the only mathematical workings tend to be simple algebra, but there's an awful lot of equations in places. And the explanation of the science lacks any approachability. I did honestly wonder if the academic Heilbron wrote most of the book before his death and Baggott just finished it off.

I think it's a brilliant book for historians of science, or for physicists from undergraduate level to professors who want to find out more about how quantum theory got to where it is. For the general reader, though, this really doesn't work. 

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. Brian, thanks for the warning / challenge. It will take me until the end of time, or at least until the end of this Summer, to absorb Brian Greene's existential take on our universe. Quantum Drama sounds like the codex Librium that I'll need to wind down.

    ReplyDelete

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 ...

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...

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, ...