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 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...