Science

  (out of 5 stars)

Neurologist Oliver Sacks catalogs his experiences with patients suffering unusual neurological conditions in his book The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and Other Clinical Tales. As the title suggests, the book is a collection of first-hand case studies witnessed by Sacks during his days treating these patients. I've collected several of Sacks' books, and having decided to start reading his work with this book, it may be a while before I pick up the next.

This was easily one of the more disappointing reads of the year. Sacks comes highly rated as an author, and in the few video lectures and discussions I've watched of him, I had high expectations for Mistook. However, the format is just dreadful, and the writing, while presenting interesting subjects, reads more like a dictation from a doctor to his fellow practitioners than a discourse meant for popular science readers.

Each chapter is self-contained, excepting a bare few references to similar cases across a couple of chapters, and presents Sacks' version of neurological patient exhibiting unusual behavior and/or symptoms. There is no apparent pattern to the stories, they are just thrown together as a collection of essays with no attempt to draw a narrative. Even within each chapter, the flow is simply bad as a specific detail might garner two full pages of description while an equally-deserving (and necessary) set of details are all packed into a single sentence. The balance is just wrong, and again, it feels like Sacks is writing a case study for a fellow neurologist and then, at the last minute, remembered to "dumb it down" a bit for some of his readers.

Wholly clinical in its treatment of the subjects, the book does not try hard to draw the reader in and compel him to understand and explore the subject matter. The reader is left with a few interesting stories handled in a clinical manner which a few minutes of reading Wikipedia articles would have matched in terms of pleasurable reading. While undoubtedly of interest to many, and admitting that I seem to be in the minority in being disappointed by Mistook, the book is simply a let down to this reader who is greatly interested in the neurological behaviors Sacks witnessed. Two and one-half stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Physicist Leonard Susskind weighed in on his support for string theory in 2005 with The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design. A book with high goals and, from me personally, high expectations, Landscape falls quite flat from the very beginning and only occasionally rises to a point worth mentioning.

I was familiar with the public debate between Susskind and fellow physicist Lee Smolin (author of three books on physics, including his latest: The Trouble With Physics) over the concept known as the anthropic principle. Susskind, very much in favor of anthropic solutions, favors the weak anthropic version, which holds that our universe allows life only because of the existence of a multiverse which offers an overwhelming number of opportunities to get the "details" of physics right. However, I really expected Susskind to dig deeply into the notion of Intelligent Design as it related to religious faith in a specific Creator of the cosmos. However, rather than address this far more common meaning of "Intelligent Design" directly, Susskind spends chapter after chapter meandering through physics fundamentals and pleading with the reader to see how string theory and its multiverse predictions are not just reasonable but "solidly grounded" in research.

Having read a great deal of physics books and knowing many of the arguments for and against string theory, the anthropic principle, and cosmological intelligent design, I found Susskind's treatment and defense of his stance to be disappointing and muddled. The reader is left with a great deal of missing steps in his thinking, and like many string theorists, Susskind assumes the reader will accept that string theory and a multiverse system are facts from which to explore the issues. However, Susskind never establishes just why the reader should make these assumptions, and it leaves a lot of hollow ground hindering his argument.

Combined with the lack of any real attack on the "illusion of intelligent design", this sort of writing is a let down for me. I like Susskind and have watched many of his panel discussions where he is both thoughtful and clear. However, I've also watched a few of his seminars and, unfortunately, this book reads much more like his rambling, at times incoherent lectures than it does his focused and insightful panel debates. Three stars and only recommended for curious physics readers wanting to get Susskind's arguments first hand.

  (out of 5 stars)

Matt Ridley presents his arguments for the development of sexual reproduction through a variety of insights in The Red Queen. Much like the world in which Alice met the character referred to in the title, Ridley's approach is jumbled, disjointed, and too raggedly-paced to enjoy fully.

Ridley bases his thoughts on strong evolutionary arguments, such as those for sexual selection, arms races, and symbiogenesis. For the purely biological discussion, this works quite fine. However, as Ridley moves into human sociological and cultural points, which take up most of the book, he loses the narrative and often slips in assumptions which are either unproven or have (since publication in 1994) turned out to be wrong. This, combined with a ragged flow of thoughts and chapters which only marginally relate to each other, leaves the reader with a less-than-enthusiastic support for Ridley's thesis.

Still, there is much to glean in Red Queen, and Ridley certainly gets his facts in order when discussing biological aspects. Readers new to the subject should pick up some interesting tidbits, but should also update their knowledge with more recent works by Richard Dawkins and others. Ridley's later book Genome is much better written and presented, and is recommended to anyone who enjoys this book or wants to delve into genetics and disease. Three and one-half stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Molecular biologist Sean Carroll presents an outstanding, deeply scientifically satisfying look at the forensic evidence for evolution in The Making of the Fittest. By focusing his argument on the very smallest bits of evidence, Carroll provides an amazing look into the world of the cell and DNA which leaves the reader with little doubt that evolution and natural selection are clearly capable of developing the entities and processes we find in nature today.

Starting off with a look at bloodless cold-water fish, Carroll jumps into the nature of adaptive mutations. Moving on, he shows that, given time and large numbers, the "miracles" of evolution are practically inevitable, even if not specifically predictable in every detail. Carroll demonstrates that some genes are nearly "immortal", lasting nearly unchanged for millions of years. Further, he explores how old genes and their proteins are frequently repurposed into new uses.

From there, the book moves into fossil genes which allow researchers to trace changes in lineages, as well as the fact that evolution tends to favor the production of similar results even if the affected genomes are not related. Carroll wraps up by showing that humans and other complex entities can be produced by the power of DNA, natural selection, mutation, and drift.

A great follow up to Carroll's previous work on evolutionary development, Fittest is a fascinating glimpse into the world of microbiological detectives. Highly recommended to anyone with an interest in biology and evolution. Four and one-half stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Having found that I'm hopelessly addicted to popular science books, especially those dealing with evolution, natural selection, and other wonders of biology, I promised myself that I'd pick up this foundational classic at some point. So much of what I had known previously about Origin was from reading the works of Dawkins, Quammen, and others, and I felt it was vitally important to take up Darwin's masterpiece and see for myself what he had to say. It is quite safe to say it was an excellent decision, and Origin stands up just as well in 2009 as it did when it was published 150 years ago.

Darwin's enthusiasm for the natural world comes through strongly on every page. I can easily imagine him sitting in his workshop, encouraging me, the reader, to see what he sees, to notice the details he explains with such passion. And he does not skip the scientific data. Darwin's arguments are strongly based on observation, experimentation, and an amazing convergence of multiple disciplines. Throughout the book, the reader feels he might be sitting in a room while Darwin leads a fascinating exhibition with the help of eminent biologists, zoologists, geologists, anthropologists, naturalists, and others.

I especially loved reading Darwin's original words dealing with biogeography and the migration of life. It is stunning just how prescient he was in so many things which he admits freely are greatly educated guesses. Sure, there are places where his thoughts were later shown incomplete or erroneous, but the vast bulk of his thoughts showed keen insight that often took many decades of research to prove correct. Darwin was quite literally one of the very few fundamental thinkers to ever risk putting his thoughts into writing, and his work is even more impressive given how little was known about genetics at the time by anyone but the largely-unknown Gregor Mendel.

While the book is quite dense at times, it is well worth the reader's effort to push through and experience this book's amazing insights. Darwin's enthusiasm is infective, and I think any reader of science who is interested in reading the classics should take the time to read and enjoy this groundbreaking and fascinating work. Five big stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Paleobiologist Steven Stanley considers the impact of major ecological and environmental changes wrought by ice ages on the evolution of human beings in his book Children of the Ice Age. A fascinating subject and impressive theory, the treatment here is disappointing.

I found Stanley's writing to be a bit jarring: the narrative seemed to skip across necessary connections between thoughts. By the time the author got to the primary evidence for his thesis, I had had to reread numerous passages to attempt to understand his points. The writing is not dense or overly-complicated (I am an experienced science reader who often enjoys such dense treatments), but it left me missing the point far too often.

Still, the subject is very interesting, and while I wouldn't recommend this book to many people, those with a keen interest in paleontology, paleobiology, anthropology, evolution, and population migrations will likely find some value in reading Children. Two and one-half stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Planetary scientist David Grinspoon presents a robust presentation centered on alien life in the universe. An interesting and popular subject, this book was somewhat underwhelming overall, though it had some interesting and enjoyable passages.

While the book presumes to be a "natural philosophy" of the subject, the actual philosophy in the book is largely contained in a few sections of a few chapters. Most of the book describes historical or scientific fundamentals necessary for understanding the alien discussion, including histories of planetary science, alien philosophy, and biology. Except for the history of alien philosophy, which was the best part of the book for me, the history and science sections were good but not great. And while it is necessary to understand these basics, Grinspoon takes several hundred pages to get to his "philosophy". By that time, the decent narrative felt overly-drawn out.

Still, the book is a decent read for anyone with an interest in this sort of subject matter. But don't expect too much if you are an experienced reader, Grinspoon doesn't cover a great deal of original ground here, and except for the history of alien theories, I've read much better treatments of the history and science matters. Additionally, SETI dominates much of the discussion in a way which I found a bit off-putting, though I honestly can't say why. I like Grinspoon and love his enthusiasm, but I came away from Lonely Planets with a sense that it needed to be condensed and reorganized significantly. Three stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

The bacteria E. coli is among the most important living things in modern science, and as Carl Zimmer shows in this outstanding treatment, many huge discoveries owe a great deal to this very tiny "bug".

Zimmer packs a ton of information into these pages, highlighting a natural history of E. coli as well as discussing its physiology and evolutionary aspects. While I knew beforehand that this bacteria was very useful, I was still surprised and delighted to find out so much about something so little.

The best parts of the book for me were those which discussed key research utilizing the bacteria, including that of Richard Lenski's long-term evolutionary study, which was included in Richard Dawkins's book The Greatest Show on Earth. Zimmer brings the science to life and while this reads like a popular science book, it is densely packed with wonderful and enlightening science. Highly recommended to anyone with an interest in biology, microbiology, evolution, or just a great love of current science. Four and one-half stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Microbiologist Lynn Margulis presents an argument on behalf of symbiogenesis and Gaia Hypothesis in her book Symbiotic Planet. I had high expectations given Margulis's role in the establishment of the origins of mitochondria in cells. I was profoundly disappointed by the muddled, moody, and downright terrible treatment of her field of work found here.

Margulis starts the book with discussion of the nature of symbiosis and her own personal involvement in microbiological research. A few chapters in, it is difficult to determine if Margulis was trying to present a popular science book or an opinionated memoir. Neither was successfully presented.

Throughout the book, the author makes assertions about the nature of biology and symbiosis which are often described with 'my view' or 'in my opinion'. I'm not asking her to claim such hypothesis are indeed proven fact (although, at times, she does make such assertions), but the presentation, which only rarely includes descriptions of how such theories were validated through research, left me questioning whether Margulis had enough coffee on the morning she wrote the passage. Sometimes she just seems to lose interest in her current subject and changes course in mid-paragraph.

One telling moment in the book is when she is discussing Mendel's work. One sentence sums up the lack of professional presentation and effort that seems to have ruled her production of this book:

According to a brilliant unpublished manuscript by an amateur historian of science whose name I can't remember from Nassau Island in the Bahamas, Mendel saw no evidence at all that species change and evolve (20).

Seriously?!? Margulis is a widely-respected professional biologist who has contributed enormously to cutting-edge science, and she's quoting an unnamed amateur unpublished source to support her point? This appeared on page 20, at which point I was already questioning Margulis' ability to argue and present evidence. The rest of the book was not much better.

Highly disappointing treatment of a highly interesting subject by a well-respected key participant in 20th Century biology. I am really very suprised that this book was this bad. Maybe I just caught this read on a bad day (not likely), but I cannot recommend this book to anyone except the rare reader who has a personal interest in Margulis's theories and mindset. Two very generous stars.

  (out of 5 stars)

Thomas Kuhn's foundational work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions lays out the concept of paradigm shifts as fundamental to the history of science. While the book is dense at times, and certainly scholarly-technical in many places, Structure still contains an enjoyable read for anyone with an interest in the ways in which significant changes occur in scientific theories.

Kuhn's argument concentrates on shifts in fundamental concepts in the fields of astronomy and physics, as well as a few other areas. He describes how the prevaling paradigm provides a set of facts and instruments which enable further progress in the field while still leaving holes in need of work. Demonstrating that paradigm shifts occur only after a crisis in the field, Kuhn argues that such crises predict a fundament shift in the underlying tenats of the paradigm. While these paradigm shifts can certainly be tremendously important and change many of the basic assumptions, Kuhn makes clear that these changes are not immediate and take place, typically, over decades of work and debate, and at times, are hindered by popular adherents to the old paradigm.

Structure is probably not a book for most popular science readers, but for anyone who is enthusiastic about the history of science, there are few books which offer the sort of discussion available here. Kuhn's look at the nature of paradigm shifts, despite being decades old, still offers a profound and engaging argument for the processes behind the shifting descriptions of the natural world. Four stars, but recommended only to those who really enjoy history of science and epistemological arguments.