Skip to main content

Exploring tangled roots

I recently read Tangled Roots by Sue Guiney. (See at Amazon.co.uk.) This book falls into the interesting category of lab lit - books that feature science or scientists at work, but aren't science fiction.

The novel interwines the life of a theoretical physicist and (in earlier years) his mother. I liked it very much for its sense of place. The key locations in the book - New York and Boston, and particularly London, Moscow and two country retreats are almost characters in their own right, and strongly influence characters and plot.

It's a people piece, about the relationships in a family and between friends, and how catastrophes in one life can influence another. I found it engrossing and a really worthwhile read.

Two small things niggled me a touch. One was a longish section on baseball. I've nothing against grown men playing rounders in funny clothes, but I just have zero interest in sport of any kind, so this dragged a little. The other was particularly poor proofing - although this was produced by a professional (small) press, it had really basic errors, like italics rendered as underlines and big gaps in the text where it wasn't properly laid out. This doesn't have any influence on the quality of the writing, but does affect the reading experience.

Don't expect to learn a lot about the holographic universe theory that is the science the physicist is working on - there's rarely much detail, and certainly not enough to scare off those who have the same reaction to science as I do to sport. Instead expect to get inside the heads of some interesting, three-dimensional characters.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's recent gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some ex

Mirror, mirror

A little while ago I had the pleasure of giving a talk at the Royal Institution in London - arguably the greatest location for science communication in the UK. At one point in the talk, I put this photograph on the screen, which for some reason caused some amusement in the audience. But the photo was illustrating a serious point: the odd nature of mirror reflections. I remember back at school being puzzled by a challenge from one of our teachers - why does a mirror swap left and right, but not top and bottom? Clearly there's nothing special about the mirror itself in that direction - if there were, rotating the mirror would change the image. The most immediately obvious 'special' thing about the horizontal direction is that the observer has two eyes oriented in that direction - but it's not as if things change if you close one eye. In reality, the distinction is much more interesting - we fool ourselves into thinking that the image behind the mirror is what's on ou