Category Archives: Book Review

I had heard of this book some time ago. I was at a friend’s party and about half the people there had met through me. Marshall said I was what the book calls a Connector, someone who provides relationships between people (it’s a compliment although I think I’m closer to a Maven, someone who provides information and aid to others). The theory is that a few seemingly insignificant events or people cause massive changes (tipping points) in the course of events and Gladwell provides various examples (the reduction of crime in NYC and the rise of syphilis in Baltimore) of the principle in action–which he equates as “epidemic” spreads. It is very interesting and I wish the audiobook I had wasn’t abridged as I am not 100% convinced by the argument, and maybe more examples would convince me that little things can make as big an impact as having a lot of money or being lucky.

See Cej’s review here.

Briscoe, Simon and Hugh Aldersey-Williams. Panicology: Two Statisticians Explain What’s Worth Worrying About (and What’s Not) in the 21st Century. New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2009.

Tackling a panoply of modern day fears, Panicology offers a thoughtful treatise on the differential between what we are afraid of and how likely it is to affect us.

Authors Briscoe and Aldersey-Williams cover a wide range of scary subjects including population explosion, loss of languages, the dangers of cell phones, the risk of disease, whether your children are safe, and alien invasion. For each, they examine the amount of concern we have (with particular focus on the role played by the media and politicians), the amount of actual risk, and (to a much lesser degree) how much we can control the risk.

Although they have a background in statistics, the authors avoid using charts and graphs to illustrate their points, instead relying on a more approachable prose to lay out their case. While I would have appreciated seeing the numbers, I can imagine their publisher warning them against it as it might turn off readers.

As a anthology, your interest in any particular subject may vary. But the overall message of Panicology is a good one: you aren’t always getting the full story; and some of the things you do every day are much more hazardous than the things that you are told to be scared of. That’s not to say that no problem is real, but a healthy level of skepticism is required.

My main quibble with the book is that I felt a few topics weren’t covered enough in depth—or at all (shark attacks and peak oil come to mind as things that should have made the list).

At a minimum, Panicology is worth picking up even if (especially if) you only read about those things that are worrying you.

Many thanks to Mark for the loan. You can see his review here.

Krauss, Lawrence. The Physics of Star Trek. New York: HarperPerennial, 1996.

When I was younger, I watched Star Trek for the action and adventure. As I grew older, I was interested in the social commentary. I always liked the characters. But I never watched Star Trek for its grasp of science; and the more I learned, the more I tried to ignore Star Trek’s version of physical reality so that I could keep enjoying the show.

I enjoy well-written science-for-laypeople books, but I’ve largely avoided “hook” books like this one as I figured they were likely poorly researched. But when I learned that The Physics of Star Trek was written by physicist Lawrence Krauss, I decided to take the plunge. Krauss is great at taking grand concepts and making them clear. (And if you have an hour, here’s a video in which he explains the entire universe—yes, it’s an hour long, but it’s also the entire universe!)

Unfortunately, Krauss is also a huge Star Trek geek. I mentioned that I really like the series, but not to the extent that I can quote chapter and verse of each episode; nor do I remember the 5^th lieutenant’s name on that ship that the Enterprise encountered in that one episode—you know the one that I mean. Krauss can, and it’s a bit much for my tastes.

I enjoyed The Physics, but I can’t really bring myself to recommend it. It’s a bit too heavy on the geek, and while the science is good, I’m not convinced that it is the best place to start for someone who knows nothing about physics. The book is organized around Star Trek concepts (like faster than light travel and transporters) rather than scientific building blocks; and while that may make it accessible to Trekies, I can’t help wondering if it winds up leaving them a bit lost in space.

So to summarize some of Krauss’s main points: (most of) the stuff you see in Star Trek is largely impossible (yes, even in the future), and the stuff that isn’t impossible would take so much energy and effort that it might as well be impossible.

Which is basically why I watch Star Trek for the characters and the social commentary.