Skip to main content

The Universal History of Us - Tim Coulson ****

When I first saw the title of this book I assumed it was yet another attempt to take us from the earliest life to humans, but, as the subtitle suggests, the target is much broader - getting to us all the way from the Big Bang. This makes it sound like it's going to be a chronological approach, but it's rather more fragmented - while it does sort of follow a timeline, we get, for example, a chapter that introduces the relevant key parts of physics and another primarily on molecules, with the timeline more of a background than the main content.

Taking this long span and wide sciences approach means there is a huge amount to cram in, even though it's a somewhat over-long book. Covering so much is a daunting endeavour for which I have to admire Tim Coulson's bravery. One potential problem is that it means having to be very summary in parts. Almost inevitably it's more summary about areas outside Coulson's own field of biology and this can be detrimental - in can be an exercise in giving things labels rather than giving the reader any understanding. Here's a brief extract to demonstrate:

'Hydrogen atoms always have one proton and one electron. However, in nature, hydrogen nuclei can have zero, one or two neutrons. These different types of hydrogen are called protium, which has no neutrons, deuterium, which has one, and tritium, which has two. These three types of hydrogen are known as isotopes of hydrogen.' Gripping it is not.

Once we get onto life (which is not until page 170), things go a lot more smoothly and the remaining 250 or so pages would have been a strong book, either alone or with a better first section. Coulson paints an effective picture and doesn't shy away from giving his own opinion when an area is disputed (and makes it clear he is doing so). As well as the biology there's an effective chapter on consciousness, a part of what makes us human that is not always given good coverage in a book like this.

I do have two big concerns, though. One is a lack of notes. I know many people ignore them, but especially because Coulson often tells us that 'scientists' believe something without telling us who they are and why, it's very difficult to find out more. On the second page, for example, he tells us that 'some physicists' have argued that the universe is totally deterministic and 'with hard work and a huge amount of computing power we could perfectly predict the future of any universe from its birth until its end'. I'd like to know who those physicists are, as such a view totally ignores the random nature of quantum outcomes - so important in the early universe - and the chaotic nature of many systems, which admittedly are deterministic, but result in huge changes in outcome after random influences vary earlier conditions.

The other problem, particularly around the physics parts, is that the compression of information can mean a lack of explanation - or even incorrect statements. To give a few quick examples, we are told 'The force carrier particles for the strong and weak nuclear forces are respectively referred to as gluons and bosons' as if a boson were a specific particle. Soon after we are told 'Force carrier particles are sometimes referred to as virtual particles' as if the two terms were equivalent. (They are very different.) We are told about beta particles ':very high-energy particles and this makes them radioactive', without being told they are electrons (which, of course, aren't radioactive). And some of the attempt at explaining quantum physics is painful.

One final moan is that Coulson had clearly been told it's good to include personal experiences in the story. In some parts of the book this works, but on other occasions, such as his description of how he decided to write a popular science book and got it published, are rather painful. Most bizarrely, we are given a couple of pages on how difficult it was to get his work computer replaced because of the Oxford University bureaucracy under the guise of identifying such administrative delay as one of the unique aspects of the human species.

It's not a bad book - but my four stars reflect a very low rating for the first parts and a much better one for the rest: it could have been significantly better.

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

We Are Eating the Earth - Michael Grunwald *****

If I'm honest, I assumed this would be another 'oh dear, we're horrible people who are terrible to the environment', worthily dull title - so I was surprised to be gripped from early on. The subject of the first chunk of the book is one man, Tim Searchinger's fight to take on the bizarrely unscientific assumption that held sway that making ethanol from corn, or burning wood chips instead of coal, was good for the environment. The problem with this fallacy, which seemed to have taken in the US governments, the EU, the UK and more was the assumption that (apart from carbon emitted in production) using these 'grown' fuels was carbon neutral, because the carbon came out of the air. The trouble is, this totally ignores that using land to grow fuel means either displacing land used to grow food, or displacing land that had trees, grass or other growing stuff on it. The outcome is that when we use 'E10' petrol (with 10% ethanol), or electricity produced by ...

Battle of the Big Bang - Niayesh Afshordi and Phil Harper *****

It's popular science Jim, but not as we know it. There have been plenty of popular science books about the big bang and the origins of the universe (including my own Before the Big Bang ) but this is unique. In part this is because it's bang up to date (so to speak), but more so because rather than present the theories in an approachable fashion, the book dives into the (sometimes extremely heated) disputed debates between theoreticians. It's still popular science as there's no maths, but it gives a real insight into the alternative viewpoints and depth of feeling. We begin with a rapid dash through the history of cosmological ideas, passing rapidly through the steady state/big bang debate (though not covering Hoyle's modified steady state that dealt with the 'early universe' issues), then slow down as we get into the various possibilities that would emerge once inflation arrived on the scene (including, of course, the theories that do away with inflation). ...

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that â€˜Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...