Skip to main content

A Crack in Everything - Marcus Chown *****

This is a book about black holes - and there are two ways to look at these amazing phenomena. One is to meander about in endless speculation concerning firewalls and holographic universes and the like, where there is no basis in observation, only mathematical magic. This, for me, is often closer to science fiction than science fact. The alternative, which is what Marcus Chown does so well here (apart from a single chapter), is to explore the aspects of theory that have observational evidence to back them up - and he does it wonderfully.

I'm reminded in a way of the play The Audience which was the predecessor to The Crown. In the play, we see a series of moments in history when Queen Elizabeth II is meeting with her prime ministers, giving a view of what was happening in life and politics at that point in time. Here, Chown takes us to visit various breakthroughs over the last 100 or so years when a step was made in the understanding of black holes. 

The first few are around the basic theory - for example Schwarzschild's remarkable first solution of Einstein's equations of general relativity from his First World War hospital bed, and the gradual realisation of the implications of a large star losing the energy to keep itself fluffed up. Then come the shocking discoveries - quasars which turned out to be active supermassive black holes, the detection of the real things, black hole collisions detected using gravitational waves and more. As mentioned, there is one summary chapter on the speculative stuff, for me by far the least interesting bit of the whole thing, but that didn't spoil the enjoyment of the whole.

I'm really struggling to find anything to moan about. There is the occasional touch of hyperbole - at one point Chown says of Kerr's rotating black hole solution 'Arguably it would turn out to be the most important solution to any equation in physics' - I tend to think there are plenty with more practical applications (from Newton's equations of motion to some in quantum physics) that perhaps could be considered more important. And I think he could have made more of a throwaway comment in a footnote that Kerr had written a paper questioning whether black holes have to be singularities - the biggest problem the theoretical side faces - but these are trivial points.

What was so engaging in reading this book apart from the subject matter, much of which is passed over in other books on black holes in the rush to get to the speculation, and the personal touch from the interviews and biographical detail that Chown incorporates, is his writing style. I can honest say I don't know another science writer who is as good a storyteller as Chown. His writing is not fancy and full of literary tweaks and unnecessary technical terms. Chown is to popular science writing what Isaac Asimov was to science fiction. Not necessarily the most elegant writer, but a superb craftsman who really understands how to put across a narrative. Usually this skill is focused on the science, but here Chown applies it particularly to biography and history where it works even better: I'd say it makes this his best book yet.

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

Popular posts from this blog

Vector - Robyn Arianrhod ****

This is a remarkable book for the right audience (more on that in a moment), but one that's hard to classify. It's part history of science/maths, part popular maths and even has a smidgen of textbook about it, as it has more full-on mathematical content that a typical title for the general public usually has. What Robyn Arianrhod does in painstaking detail is to record the development of the concept of vectors, vector calculus and their big cousin tensors. These are mathematical tools that would become crucial for physics, not to mention more recently, for example, in the more exotic aspects of computing. Let's get the audience thing out of the way. Early on in the book we get a sentence beginning ‘You likely first learned integral calculus by…’ The assumption is very much that the reader already knows the basics of maths at least to A-level (level to start an undergraduate degree in a 'hard' science or maths) and has no problem with practical use of calculus. Altho

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on

The Art of Uncertainty - David Spiegelhalter *****

There's something odd about this chunky book on probability - the title doesn't mention the P word at all. This is because David Spiegelhalter (Professor Sir David to give him his full title) has what some mathematicians would consider a controversial viewpoint. As he puts it 'all probabilities are judgements expressing personal uncertainty.' He strongly (and convincingly) argues that while the mathematical approach to probability is about concrete, factual values, outside of the 'natural' probabilities behind quantum effects, almost all real world probability is a subjective experience, better described by more subjective terms like uncertainty, chance and luck. A classic way to distinguish between those taking the frequentist approach to probability and the Bayesian approach is their attitude to what the probability is of a fair coin coming up heads or tails after the coin has been tossed but before we have looked at it. The frequentist would say it's def