Skip to main content

Discordance - Jim Baggott ****

Jim Baggott is one of the most reliable hands in the business when it comes to exploring complex physics and cosmology issues in an approachable but never over-simplified fashion, so a new Baggott on the shelves is always a treat. For reasons I'll go into in a moment, while the explanation here is as lucid and interesting as possible, I found the topic a little underwhelming.

The topic Discordance covers is the Hubble tension - the reality that there are two ways of measuring the Hubble constant that describes the rate of expansion of the universe, both of which are based on solid science, but which don't agree. Admittedly, the distinction is only seven per cent, but in theory they should converge, and as Baggott makes clear, although both of the measurement methods have potential issues, if the tension proves genuine, it puts the most widely accepted version of the Big Bang theory in jeopardy. 

The book starts with historical material on how we measure distances in space, the theory behind and discovery of the expanding universe, and the various errors and disagreements between scientists along the way, going right back to whether the Milky Way was just one of many galaxies, or the whole universe. As things develop, we also get introduced to the cosmic microwave background radiation, which provides the second way of measuring the Hubble constant after the red-shifting of galaxies at known distances (where 'known' always has a degree of uncertainty). There's also coverage of the dark energy thought to be causing the acceleration of expansion, and even dark matter that has a more indirect involvement. Finally, we look to the future of where we go from here and the potential for new physics to explain what is happening.

My agent always used to say 'Is it a book or is it a magazine article?' This topic is definitely more than an article, but I felt it might have been better as a couple of chapters of a book. The elements are interesting and the ongoing split between different ways of measuring the constant is intriguing. But too much of what was involved was getting more or less accurate measurements for absolute stellar magnitude, establishing safe standard candles, reaching accurate numbers on expansion rate/acceleration and the like. It's true that lots of scientific work is, frankly, boring repetitive slog. And we perhaps don't see enough of this in popular science. But despite all of Baggott's skill, it's hard to make this too engaging.

Don't get me wrong, this is a really good book - far better than much of the popular science I read. I'm glad I read it and while the historical material and that on dark matter/energy was very familiar, some of the more recent attempts to explain away the Hubble tension and its implications for the canonic Big Bang theory was new in the detail and of genuine interest. But the overall subject, for me, simply wasn't ideal for book-length treatment. 

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 or taking out a membership:
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

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

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more