This is an oddity. I heard about this book on the excellent Science Fictions podcast, where I was told that anyone with an interest in popular science had probably read this 2017 book - I hadn't, and after hearing their podcast I wouldn't want to, but felt it worth highlighting some key points. As the Science Fictions podcast notes, the book 'said, among other things, that we are living through an epidemic of sleeplessness, that the less we sleep the sooner we die, and that sleeping less than six hours a night doubles your risk of cancer.' No surprise it was a big seller. But it appears that the book is riven with errors and its underlying thesis seems to have little or no scientific basis. A lot of the podcast was inspired by a fact-check by Alex Guzey that only covered the first chapter, yet uncovers a whole host of issues. I'd suggest taking a look at that fact check and, if you want more, listening to the podcast. But if, like me, you haven't read the book...

There have been some excellent books on the origins of life, notably Philip Ball's How Life Works and Henry Gee's A Very Short History of Life on Earth , taking distinctive approaches. The field might feel overcrowded - except Christophe Galfard managed to come along with a whole new, highly entertaining take on the project with a physicist's-eye-view. We begin with evolution. An excellent example of Galfard's sideways take on the topic is the short chapter entitled 'Why alien fish don't fly'. This starts with the reader picturing themselves lying by a river in a forest clearing. A fish jumps out of the river... but doesn't swim towards the clouds, it drops back in. We then pivot to Aristotle dividing the universe into the bit with the Earth and the bit outside the Moon's orbit - and giving us the concept of natural laws (including that a jumping fish will drop back). Then Newton breaks Aristotle's barrier between Earthly things and the heavens,...

As Vivienne Ming makes apparent, there seem largely to be two views of AI's pros and cons, both of which are almost certainly wrong. It's either doom-saying 'It'll destroy life as we know it' or Pollyanna-ish 'It'll do all the boring work and we can all be wonderfully creative and live lives of leisure.' Instead, Ming gives us a clear analysis of the likely trajectory for the workplace, particularly for the IT industry. She describes three 'equally flawed, intellectually lazy strategies' to deal with the impact of AI. The first is substitution and deprofessionalisation, using AI to allow cheaper 'AI-augmented technicians' to replace more expensive professionals, producing more low wage jobs and fewer mid-range. This does save money but leaves a company at risk of being easily outcompeted. The second is what Ming describes as the '"A-Player" Hunger Games', the approach favoured by Silicon Valley. This sees the growing rif...

Until recently there was a huge geeky talking point based on establishing a colony on Mars. Several billionaires took an interest, notably SpaceX's boss, while there was even the suggestion that a Mars colony could be run as a TV show, like an extraterrestrial Big Brother. The wilder speculation has now died down, but the idea of living on Mars still has a strong niche following.  In Becoming Martian , Scott Solomon gives us an in-depth and engaging look at the difficulties faced in moving to our nearest semi-inhabitable planet, which are considerable. As Solomon points out, the idea of terraforming Mars, giving it a breathable atmosphere and enough greenhouse gasses to warm it up a bit, is simply impractical - even if such a massive effort could be achieved, the combination of relatively low gravity, limited nitrogen and no magnetic field would mean the new atmosphere would be quickly lost again. This means that would-be Martians will have to protect themselves permanently from ra...

If I'm honest, I was disappointed by David Miles' definition of a cold. He tells us 'Within these covers, a cold is an illness caused by a virus that infects the upper respiratory tract and, in most cases, clears up within a matter of days or possibly weeks without requiring medical intervention. This definition is the reason I included the influenza viruses and the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19 as cold viruses.' To me, this doesn't seem fair. As far as I'm concerned, the term 'common cold' refers to exactly what I'm suffering from as I write this: a subset of such viruses that definitely does not include either of those killers. I've read far too much about COVID and generally avoid books covering it like the plague (sorry). Miles argues that 'some infections with every type of cold virus lead to some sort of serious illness.' But the reason I was more interested in this book, was I wanted to read about the relatively harmless bu...

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...

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, ...

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...

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...

I'm always a little wary of popular science books that start with a personal story, but I'll make an exception for Madeleine Beekman's excellent book, which sets out a possible explanation of our ability to speak, because the approach fits in with a well-balanced combination of storytelling and scientific information.  There have been a good number of books that either set out to explain some of our species' physical oddities or abilities that seem to set us apart from other animals. Twenty years ago I was impressed by Clive Bromhall's The Eternal Child , which suggested retaining infantile features (neoteny) enabled us to exist more effectively in large groups, while  many authors have attempted to highlight aspects of being human that set us apart (as was the case with storytelling in Brainjacking ). Here Beekman first takes us through what palaeontology can tell us about the development our biological form, then explores the function of speech and language. In ma...

In his introduction, James Kimmel tells an attention-grabbing story that surely could only have originated in America. After years of bullying, when he was 17 the local kids thought it would be funny to come over in their pickup one night and shoot his dog. A couple of weeks later, they blew up his mailbox. In Kimmel's words 'I grabbed a loaded revolver from my father's nightstand, jumped in my mother's car and tore off [after them] into the night.' He corners the evil kids, grabs the gun and is about to get out of the car to kill them when the realisation of what he's about to do and its implications hit him. He might have suppressed his immediate urge for revenge, but he claims it then grew in a general driving force of his life, the reason he became a lawyer. 'Within a decade, my revenge addiction had nearly destroyed me and my family.' It wasn't just his work but 'I threatened retribution against just about anyone for the slightest offense - ...