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

The Infinite Alphabet - Cesar Hidalgo ****

Although taking a very new approach, this book by a physicist working in economics made me nostalgic for the business books of the 1980s. More on why in a moment, but Cesar Hidalgo sets out to explain how it is knowledge - how it is developed, how it is managed and forgotten - that makes the difference between success and failure. When I worked for a corporate in the 1980s I was very taken with Tom Peters' business books such of In Search of Excellence (with Robert Waterman), which described what made it possible for some companies to thrive and become huge while others failed. (It's interesting to look back to see a balance amongst the companies Peters thought were excellent, with successes such as Walmart and Intel, and failures such as Wang and Kodak.) In a similar way, Hidalgo uses case studies of successes and failures for both businesses and countries in making effective use of knowledge to drive economic success. When I read a Tom Peters book I was inspired and fired up...

God: the Science, the Evidence - Michel-Yves Bolloré and Olivier Bonnassies ***

This is, to say the least, an oddity, but a fascinating one. A translation of a French bestseller, it aims to put forward an examination of the scientific evidence for the existence of a deity… and various other things, as this is a very oddly structured book (more on that in a moment). In The God Delusion , Richard Dawkins suggested that we should treat the existence of God as a scientific claim, which is exactly what the authors do reasonably well in the main part of the book. They argue that three pieces of scientific evidence in particular are supportive of the existence of a (generic) creator of the universe. These are that the universe had a beginning, the fine tuning of natural constants and the unlikeliness of life.  To support their evidence, Bolloré and Bonnassies give a reasonable introduction to thermodynamics and cosmology. They suggest that the expected heat death of the universe implies a beginning (for good thermodynamic reasons), and rightly give the impression tha...

The War on Science - Lawrence Krauss (Ed.) ****

At first glance this might appear to be yet another book on how to deal with climate change deniers and the like, such as How to Talk to a Science Denier.   It is, however, a much more significant book because it addresses the way that universities, government and pressure groups have attempted to undermine the scientific process. Conceptually I would give it five stars, but it's quite heavy going because it's a collection of around 18 essays by different academics, with many going over the same ground, so there is a lot of repetition. Even so, it's an important book. There are a few well-known names here - editor Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker - but also a range of scientists (with a few philosophers) explaining how science is being damaged in academia by unscientific ideas. Many of the issues apply to other disciplines as well, but this is specifically about the impact on science, and particularly important there because of the damage it has been doing...