Skip to main content

The Multiverse - Brian Clegg ****

‘When One Universe Isn’t Enough’, it says on the undeniably eye-catching cover of this book. But why should anyone feel short-changed by the universe we happen to live in? The most obvious answer is if they’re fans or creators of science fiction, who may be distinctly unimpressed by the un-SF-like reality we’re lumbered with. As Brian Clegg points out early in the book, even now  – almost 70 years after the invention of the space rocket – only a tiny fraction of astronauts have ever travelled more than 300 miles from the Earth’s surface. If we’re looking for all those ‘strange new worlds’ that Star Trek promised us, we’re not going to find them that way. What we need is a portal to a parallel universe – or, preferably, a whole collection of them.

Since this is a non-fiction book, I hope I’m not spoiling any surprises by saying that we never actually get to this point, or anywhere near it. Like so many other science-fictional ideas that are claimed to have parallels in modern physics, it turns out the reality is highly abstract and totally lacking in the practical applications of its sci-fi counterpart. Even so, the book is a fascinating and enjoyable read, as Clegg takes us through a whole series of theoretical arguments in favour of a multiverse. Or perhaps that should be ‘multiverses’, plural, since the arguments are largely self-contained – dreamed up by experts in their own particular field – and not always compatible with each other. The one thing that most of them have in common is that they are basically ‘meta-theories’ – i.e. high-level, overarching theories that sit above a much more practical, but often unsatisfyingly arbitrary-looking, theory and give it greater cohesion and sense of completeness. Whether that’s something physicists should be spending any time doing, or whether it should really be left to the philosophers, is a debatable point (and one that Clegg discusses in his final chapter) – but it’s still interesting to sit on the sidelines and watch them at it.

Essentially, each chapter – after a few introductory ideas are out of the way – deals with a different theoretical argument for the multiverse. The first three of these aren’t really physics at all, but pure mathematics, dealing with concepts like dimensions, probability and infinity. Then we move on to real physics, in a sequence of chapters that, to me at least, seemed to get increasingly sophisticated and abstract – almost to the point of merging back into pure mathematics at the end. We start on relatively familiar ground with the Big Bang and quantum theory, before moving forward in time to string theory, black holes and – perhaps surprisingly, in this context – quantum computing and information theory. As a rough estimate, I’d say around half of each chapter is background on the field in question rather than being about the multiverse as such, but that’s not a bad thing. I’m an unabashed supporter of ‘bait-and-switch’ tactics in popular science writing – appearing to talk about some exciting sci-fi-like topic while actually explaining really quite serious and difficult physics. It’s the best way to communicate material like this, and Clegg is a master at it.

If there’s anything negative to say about this book – or about its subject matter, rather – then Brian Clegg says it himself in his final chapter, when he dismisses a lot of the arguments he’s been discussing as ‘pointless debate’. The thing that distinguishes a scientific theory from mere speculation is that there should be something in it that has an observable consequence in the real world – for example, it predicts how a machine or electronic circuit will work, or how an experimental measurement will turn out. Arguably, not one of these multiverse theories falls in this category – which puts us right back where we started, in the realm of science fiction.

Paperback:   
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 Andrew May - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
Please note, this title is written by the editor of the Popular Science website. 
Our review is still an honest opinion – and we could hardly omit the book 
– but do want to make the connection clear.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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 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...

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...