...
Show More
This is not a bad read, but it has some major flaws.
For one, this book is aimed at kindergartners.
Fay Weldon, in an ebullient blurb, claims that by reading this book she achieved an understanding of Einstein’s theory of relativity “by osmosis”. I’m afraid my brain does not work that way. For me, insight is based on facts, concepts and reasoning. And some concepts are not easy, and some sophisticated reasoning is sometimes necessary to "get" a difficult theory. In principle, even very hard concepts can be explained in simple terms, but it takes a very talented and patient author to do this well.
Mr Bodanis does not rise to the challenge. He aims his book squarely at readers who have no mathematics, no physics and no chemistry whatsoever, and who are not expecting to pick up any here. For instance, he patiently explains the concept of squaring: four squared is not eight but, don't be surprised, sixteen. Any concept more difficult than this he is afraid to tackle, so most of what we get are broad generalizations, egregious simplifications, rough approximations, not-very-apt similes and repetitions.
On page 50, the author suddenly asserts “That’s why it’s speed can be an upper limit” [he’s talking about the speed of light here] and a few pages further on “That’s what explains ‘c’ in the equation” [light again]. Alas, nothing in the preceding paragraphs or pages warrants these bold statements: we know the speed of light IS an upper limit, but WHY that is so not even the most intelligent and dedicated reader will have fathomed, there simply not being enough explanatory power applied here.
Another thing I find grating in a science book is that Bodanis loves to talk about God whenever given half a chance.
He comes up with a highly original take on Michael Farraday’s work on magnetism : it was inspired by his Sandemanian religious beliefs. Scientists are used to think in straight lines, Bodanis posits, but in church the circle is more important: “I will help you, and you will help the next person, and that person will help another, and so on until the circle is complete”. So that’s why Michael went looking for circular lines around his magnets, duh! Somehow I am not surprised no historian of science ever thought of this before.
And while Bodanis does not discuss Einstein’s religious beliefs explicitly, he disingenuously suggests that the latter was a believer. Twice he mentions that The Wild Haired One referred to God as “The Old One”, and he ends his book with a sentence strongly suggesting Einstein was a theist (…the divine library that he was convinced awaited…). In fact, though he disliked the label “atheist” and on occasion flirted with pantheism, Einstein called a belief in a personal god “childlike” and often defined himself as an agnostic.
If you made it this far down my review, you earned this confession: I only scored this book two stars to mark my displeasure with the overblown blurb on the cover, and the overly generous score on Goodreads. In fairness, this merits three stars.
There are some good stories here, competently told. The author gives pride of place to female scientists whose contributions were at one time underappreciated, which is laudable of course. And the voluminous notes at the end of the book partly offset my criticism about egregious simplification.
So if you find this in a yard sale, go ahead, spend a few cents, it is worth a read. But it has some major flaws. (Da capo)