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
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