Book Review: On Fact and Fraud

Usually books come from the library looking a lot bigger and proving a lot harder to read than I had hoped. On Fact and Fraud: Cautionary Tales from the Front Lines of Science by David Goodstein is the exact opposite: it clocks in at just over 100 pages of widely spaced text but covers as much ground as books several times as large. This book is adapted from a course about scientific fraud, and the real value of it is the personal, working connection with the field that Goodstein brings as a physics prof at Caltech. The first section of the book is the expected epistemology, but clearly done pragmatically by a working scientist. One of Goodstein's main points is that Karl Popper's ideal of the disinterested scientist is in practice unachievable because some bias is inherent in the practice of doing science. After the intro chapter, Goodstein runs through several cases of fraud or not-fraud in science: he digs into science history of 100 years ago with Millikan's oil-drop experiment (not guilty); he details two cases of biological science fraud from a couple of decades ago (guilty), mentions cold fusion (guilty (of self-delusion), but with an added scientist whom he knows and respects who just might be seeing something), high-temp superconductivity (not guilty), and semiconductor research (guilty). The superconductivity discussion is especially helpful because it's a case of an unbelievable claim that turned out to be true. The only thing I wish it could have included is pictures of more data, such as the cold fusion "neutron" peak and other bits I've seen. There's a few cases of that but not enough; I think you need to see the fraud with your own eyes. But that's a quibble and probably a restriction of copyright or something. So, accurate, iconoclastic (at least in the case of Popper), efficient and interesting writing on a subject we talk about in class -- my only question is if I should make the students buy this book or if I should just tell them about it. It's a great find, and this is a topic that really gets the students interested and thinking.

Book Review: Fearfully and Wonderfully Made

This book has been recommended to me for at least a decade now. I finally read it because of an invited book chapter (more on that later), and I am impressed. I'd like to do something like what Brand and Yancey do here, just on a different level. One of the interesting things is to watch closely how and where Brand specifically contradicts naturalism (not science, and not technology or scientific explanation, but reductionism and methodological naturalism). I find that he picks his battles and in general doesn't overstep, so he provides a good model for how to do that. In short, it was everything I had been told to expect -- and I sense a need for more like this. We'll see.

Soda Temperance!

It's funny to think about it, but if root beer came about in part from the prohibition on real beer, then now we may need a temperance on root beer, due to its sticky, corn syrupy, calorie-adding mass. I don't trust soda every day, it's one of the reasons I switched to green tea for lunch, and I'm not regretting it. (In this case, a Lent giving up of soda turned into a longer-term temperance of soda!)

The quote that reminded me of this was in an article on how soda fountains are coming back:

“Soda should be special,” Mr. Nocito said. “Coke and Pepsi killed it for everyone, in my opinion.”* It seems that if you use fresh fruits and not mass-produced sludge to flavor sodas, you can make unique and even slightly healthy combinations. The problem is you have to go to a counter, you can't just grab a bottle off the shelf. Let me tell you, though, this is a good problem to have. It should be special, and there are benefits from having less of it!

Here is the article about the new-fangled (or should it be old-fangled?) soda shops and some of the flavors. I have a hankering for an egg cream and I've never even had one.


* However, I can attest to the power of a cold Coke on a hot summer day in the South. So we'll just say Pepsi killed it for everyone, OK?

Book Review: Graphic Novel Round-Up

Read a bunch of graphic novels over the past few months and, well, since I'm trying to put a review of every book I read on here may as well include these! But I'll try to keep these to a few short sentences.

1. Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader? by Neil Gaiman. Starts better than it ends. Sets up a bunch of creative, conflicting stories. The resolution, unfortunately, mimicks a particular car commercial. But seeing the characters interact is great, and the idea -- Batman's funeral -- is definitely intriguing.
2. Rasl by Jeff Smith. The same magic as Smith's Bone series in a totally different realm: bleak but inventive present-day sci-fi for adults, rather than semi-fairy tales for children. Does one of the best jobs of talking about Tesla of anyone, and lots of people have tried. You're left with a nice, clear set of mysteries as you wait for the next book.
3. The Eternal Smile: Three Stories by Gene Yang. I like to see more by Yang, and these stories were good examples but not that deep. Maybe if you think about them together. Each has a nice twist.
4. Castle Waiting by Linda Medley. Feminist Chaucer in a comic book. In a good way. One of my favorite things about graphic novels is an artist who can capture a good expression and Medley is excellent at that. Celebrates some quiet, ordinary moments along with the traditional "this is a story" moments. Very, very good, just not a personal favorite.
5. Stumptown Investigations, Portland, Oregon by Greg Rucka. Successfully captures Portland and uses it as a setting for a competent and well-told crime story. I love the first scene and the way it's explained. So much better spending an hour reading this than TV!
6. Life with Mr. Dangerous by Paul Hornschemeier. Story of a young woman making her way through life. Very good at capturing the alienation and distancing of modern life without wallowing in it. I never quite got the TV show angle -- it's always hard to replicate the feeling of a hit TV show if said hit TV show doesn't exist. The inner motivations of the protagonist should be stronger I think, because I didn't quite understand what took her so long or what really changed in her by the end of the book.

Of all these, #2 was best, but #4 and #5 were very very good for their genres, and #1 and #3 were always-enjoyable expressions of their always-enjoyable authors' voices. All were worth the time to read (especially from the library!).

Book Review: Splintered Light

This is the first edition of Splintered Light by Verlyn Flieger, not the 2002 second edition. The astonishing fact is that I want to read the second edition, even now. This was that much of a revelation. In short, in this book Flieger digs up bits of Tolkien's overall philosophy and shows how that shaped the Silmarillion (and, in one chapter, how The Lord of the Rings fits into the big picture). For an innovative, big-picture analysis type of book Flieger writes well, with pithy comments, well-chosen examples and even a sense of pacing. If all academic books were like this, more people would be academics. Especially in the second half I take issue with some of her points but as a foundation for understanding what Tolkien was up to, this is a fantastic book and I think it's right on. For the first time, I feel like I understand how the different parts of Tolkien's life -- philologist, father, Christian, author, sub-creator of languages -- all relate and feed into each other. I feel fortunate to have a library in which I can find a book like this in its hard-to-find first edition -- but, like I said, I know that some day I'll read it again, and that's rare for a book or even a movie.

Book Review: Real Scientists, Real Faith

Real Scientists, Real Faith is a collection of essays by Monarch Books that each contain a short personal essay from a scientists who are Christians talking about their science and their faith. The broad spectrum of disciplines is inspiring, and there is a good international mix too, although if anything it's tilted toward British scientists I personally don't get to see that often, so much the better. (Many spoke in the Faraday lectures I listened to recently.) It's actually a bit much to read all at once and I took it in smaller bits. The Simon Conway Morris essay alone is worth the price of admission; I really need to read one of his full-length books one of these days. Another standout to my eyes is Wilson Poon, a physicist from the University of Edinburgh whose essay is titled "The Laboratory of the Cross." Most essays are substantially autobiographical, and if you take that as your expectation, you'll be pleasantly surprised by the deep debates that get touched upon from time to time. But this is more summer reading than deep reading (with the possible exception of the two essays I mention above). I guarantee that any reader going through it will be struck by how prevalent the science-faith so-called dichotomy is in just in the air in the common media. This book shows there's no such dichotomy, sometimes directly, but more effectively indirectly, showing how lives can be lived reading from both "Books" of knowledge with joy. It's just in the air for this book, quite the opposite of what's "in the air" for the way science is usually described. Breathe deep.

Book Review: Academically Adrift

At least for professors, this book was big news. Once I read it I realized all the media summaries were a bit off, so I'll hold off on summarizing it myself. OK, I have to give you this summary: There's a lot of sociological data here that suggests that colleges aren't doing their job to produce "critical thinkers." By that, they mean people who can sort through lots of info, compare it, and then write about it. On the one hand, my institution took part in the preliminary part of this exact study and scored consistently in the top quartile, so that feels pretty good (though, as a teacher of juniors and seniors, I personally can't take much credit for a sophomore-year test!). On the other hand, there is a problem here, extending into the past (high school) and future (after graduation), and although I can quibble with certain aspects of this work (especially the claim that critical thinking doesn't change after the sophomore year?!), at the heart this is about a cultural problem with a moral aspect. In fact, in their final chapter the authors say basically the same thing. So new-fangled analytical tools suggest a moral change. How about that.