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

Comments

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, ...

The Infinity Machine - Sebastian Mallaby ****

It's very quickly clear that Sebastian Mallaby is a huge Demis Hassabis fan - writing about the only child prodigy and teen genius ever who was also a nice, rounded personality. After a few chapters, though, things settle down (I'm reminded of Douglas Adams' description of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy ) and we get a good, solid trip through the journey that gave us DeepMind, their AlphaGo and AlphaFold programs, the sudden explosion of competition on the AI front and thoughts on artificial general intelligence. Although Mallaby does occasionally still go into fan mode - reading this you would think that AlphaFold had successfully perfectly predicted the structure of every protein, where it is usually not sufficiently accurate for its results to have direct practical application - we get a real feel for the way this relatively unusual company was swiftly and successfully developed away from Silicon Valley. It's readable and gives an important understanding of...

Nanotechnology - Rahul Rao ****

There was a time when nanotechnology was both going to transform the world and wipe us out - a similar position to our view of AI today. On the positive transformation side there was K. Eric Drexler's visions in the 1986 Engines of Creation. Arguably as much science fiction as engineering possibilities, it predicted the ability to use vast armies of assemblers to put objects together from individual atoms.  On the negative side was the vision of grey goo, out of control nanotechnology consuming all in its path as it made more and more copies of itself. In 2003, for instance, the then Prince Charles made the headlines  when newspapers reported ‘The prince has raised the spectre of the “grey goo” catastrophe in which sub-microscopic machines designed to share intelligence and replicate themselves take over and devour the planet.’ These days the expectations have been eased down a notch or two. Where nanotechnology has succeeded, it has been with the likes of atom-thick mat...