Skip to main content

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. Although the historical aspects do bring in, for example, the concept of vectors through early and basic forms, we are soon soaring into mathematics that will be outside of the experience of many readers.

For me, when I used the operators of vector calculus in physics at university it seemed as if they had sprung from nowhere - I would have loved a book like this to put them into context. And I think someone like me at the time - a physics undergraduate with an interest in the history as well as the physics itself - would be an ideal audience. As Charles Seife notes on the back of the book, there is plenty of history of science/popular science on the development of physics from Newton to Einstein, but little that really fills in how the necessary mathematics was developed in parallel. While it's true the early days of calculus have been widely covered, there has been far less on the aspects that Arianrhod gives us, making this a classic find for the right readership.

There are some niggles that take it down from a potential five stars. It's very slow paced, sometimes getting a little bogged down in the detail of the historical development of the mathematical tools. (When I read Arianrhod's Seduced by Logic, I had a very similar problem with too much detail.) And the print is poor - it's both small and light weight, making it almost impossible, for example, to distinguish bold and normal fonts on the page, something that is used as a convention in this branch of mathematics.

Clearly not for everyone. But if you fit into the book's target audience, it's a must-have for your shelves.

Hardback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee:
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 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

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