Those of you who enjoy spotting the science errors in Dan Brown's books will be pleased to know that I've read his latest, The Lost Symbol so you don't have to (see at amazon.co.uk: The Lost Symbol /amazon.com: The Lost Symbol) . If you aren't familiar with this sport, Dan Brown's books regularly depend on science for their plots - but often get it entertainingly wrong. My all time favourite is Digital Fortress (see at amazon.co.uk: Digital Fortress /amazon.com: Digital Fortress ). The entire plot of this book depends on something that Brown has his characters repeat over and over - it is impossible to create an unbreakable cipher. Unfortunately, not only is it possible, they have been around for nearly 100 years, so poor research there, Dan. Angels and Demons is also replete with poor science (see at amazon.co.uk: Angels and Demons /amazon.com: Angels & Demons ). What makes this book (and successors) particularly entertaining is that Brown starts the bo