Rating: 
Summary: Standing on the Shoulders of Giants
Review: As an engineer, this book explained the history of discovery of most of the topics that were brushed upon during my engineering undergraduate degree.
The author gives a detailed history of the key discoveries that scientists have made (including those not often recognized) and the key discoveries that were passed from scientist to scientist to allow them to stand upon each others shoulders to find the next discovery.
This is not a detailed science book, but it is an excellent history book that goes into enough technical detail for this engineer without getting into equations and derivations.
I recommend this book for those truly interested in the story of how the laws of science were discovered and how past scientists have helped us to get where we are today.
Rating: 
Summary: Not a "science" book...
Review: Having just consumed works by the likes of Greene and Lederman, I wanted to delve deeper into the theories, experiments and lives of the great scientists referenced. Gribbin met my 'lives' requirement, although I would only recommend this book to those who have already established a few solid historical reference points - the book is quite dense with non-science info about the respective political, socio-economic and religious orders that existed & shaped these scientists' lives (as it should, I suppose, given the title). It came up quite short on the scientific theory and experiments requirement, but I admit the fault lies with my expectations rather than Gribbon's content. I would mention that his writing style is somewhat distracting, with too many factoids bracketed midsentence (every sentence, sentence after sentence - perhaps foot-noting would provide better flow?), and an overabundance of juvenile cliches and dead metaphors. Once I put aside my dissappointment with the lack of "science" and with the general style, I enjoyed it.
Rating:
Summary: Science is done by men who can be very human
Review: I do want to point out that this is a very good book. I did give it five stars after all. It is a great book for getting a good view of several scientists and their contributions to the sciences and engineering from the late renaissance period to modern times. The topic our kind author, John Gribbin, is tackling is very large and no one book can hope to cover the entire topic. Even, as is the case here, in a book of almost 700 pages. Gribbin has chosen to focus on the interplay among the scientists, mainly when he wants to segway from one scientist to another, and the social implications of their discoveries... including much on the political realties of the time. Especially in the case of Galileo Galilei, where the political issues can be as important as his scientific discoveries. I would say that the great weakness to this approach is that he focus's a lot of those who invented things, and less on those who developed new ways of thinking about the world. He claims to be doing the later, and does do a good job of it at times, but he appears to ignore the implications of a quote from Galileo he likes to use a lot: "science is written in the language of mathematics". Gribbin almost totally ignores the contributions the people he covers made to mathematics, and pure mathematicians have trouble even getting a mention from him. For example, in discussing Newton he could have discussed Gottfried Leibnitz a little, but instead just mentions that Newton and him argued about who discovered Calculus as leaves it at that. The second great weakness of this book is there is no quick introduction to the best of the Greek and Roman philosophers who did a lot of science. Aristotle was thought highly of for a lot of good reasons by people in the middle-ages, and he was right about a lot of things. It is easy, especially now-a-days, to think that the ancient Greeks sure missed the boat on a lot things. Aristotle gets mentioned, now and again, is passing, but I haven't even run across a mention of Archimedes (when discussing Newton and Calculus it would have been nice to point out that Archimedes came close to discovering it almost 2000 years before. Some think the only reason he missed was the faulting numeral system he had to work with), Pythagorus, or Euclid. Hindsight is 20/20, and the Greeks and other ancients got most of the things correct, especially when you consider that they didn't have many of the tools that the later true scientists had access too. Then there are the two great oversights among great scientists that I think would have site well into the mold he was using: Pasteur and Goddard. Not minor folks in the history of science. Because he couldn't cover everything, I overlook these problems and still give it a high rating. People should know that their is a lot of ground to cover in science and the history of science and seek out more information on the topic. Especially since an informed populace is the requirement and basis for a democracy. People need to understand how science and true scientists work in order to have informed opinions about many of the issues facing society today. Still a fine work and worthy of anybody library.
Rating:
Summary: Science is done by men who can be very human
Review: I do want to point out that this is a very good book. I did give it five stars after all. It is a great book for getting a good view of several scientists and their contributions to the sciences and engineering from the late renaissance period to modern times. The topic our kind author, John Gribbin, is tackling is very large and no one book can hope to cover the entire topic. Even, as is the case here, in a book of almost 700 pages. Gribbin has chosen to focus on the interplay among the scientists, mainly when he wants to segway from one scientist to another, and the social implications of their discoveries... including much on the political realties of the time. Especially in the case of Galileo Galilei, where the political issues can be as important as his scientific discoveries. I would say that the great weakness to this approach is that he focus's a lot of those who invented things, and less on those who developed new ways of thinking about the world. He claims to be doing the later, and does do a good job of it at times, but he appears to ignore the implications of a quote from Galileo he likes to use a lot: "science is written in the language of mathematics". Gribbin almost totally ignores the contributions the people he covers made to mathematics, and pure mathematicians have trouble even getting a mention from him. For example, in discussing Newton he could have discussed Gottfried Leibnitz a little, but instead just mentions that Newton and him argued about who discovered Calculus as leaves it at that. The second great weakness of this book is there is no quick introduction to the best of the Greek and Roman philosophers who did a lot of science. Aristotle was thought highly of for a lot of good reasons by people in the middle-ages, and he was right about a lot of things. It is easy, especially now-a-days, to think that the ancient Greeks sure missed the boat on a lot things. Aristotle gets mentioned, now and again, is passing, but I haven't even run across a mention of Archimedes (when discussing Newton and Calculus it would have been nice to point out that Archimedes came close to discovering it almost 2000 years before. Some think the only reason he missed was the faulting numeral system he had to work with), Pythagorus, or Euclid. Hindsight is 20/20, and the Greeks and other ancients got most of the things correct, especially when you consider that they didn't have many of the tools that the later true scientists had access too. Then there are the two great oversights among great scientists that I think would have site well into the mold he was using: Pasteur and Goddard. Not minor folks in the history of science. Because he couldn't cover everything, I overlook these problems and still give it a high rating. People should know that their is a lot of ground to cover in science and the history of science and seek out more information on the topic. Especially since an informed populace is the requirement and basis for a democracy. People need to understand how science and true scientists work in order to have informed opinions about many of the issues facing society today. Still a fine work and worthy of anybody library.
Rating: 
Summary: A very good read spoilt by some idiosyncracies
Review: I enjoyed reading this marathon 600-page tome, and I learned a lot from it.
However, I'm always disappointed when I see errors in these works, because it makes me ponder what other things are described wrongly that I now believe to be truths?
It must be difficult to know what to include and leave out, but given the title, I'm surprised not see to see any reference whatsoever to
* Pasteur, Koch, Ehrlich, Salk or Fleming
* Onnes (Superconductivity), Goddard (Spaceflight), Libby (Radioactive Dating), Oppenheimer, Teller or Hawking
* Shockley (Transistors) or Neumann (Information Technology)
The errors & anomalies are myriad; here are a few (the page numbers refer to the UK edition, so might differ slightly from the US edition):
Ch.1 p.20 "Constantinople wasn't founded until 330AD" - true - but it was called Byzantium for 400 years before that.
Ch.5 p.191-192 the bequests of money to Newton's Housekeeper from other Halifax occupy 25 lines (no science content there); yet the last 17 years of Newton's life aren't described, just the date he died and how much was in his estate.
Ch.6 p.220 "plants are mainly made of carbon dioxide" - no - via photosynthesis they take carbon dioxide from the air, fix the carbon, and give back the oxygen - for us animals to breathe!
Ch.7 p.248 the detailed explanation of specific heat is expressed in units of 'Pounds" and "Fahrenheit" - it doesn't pretend to be a quotation from Black, so why not use grams and Celsius as appear elsewhere on the same page?
Ch.9 p.326 there's an engraving of Santorini, but on p.324 the text only mentions Lyell going to Etna in Sicily, so no mention of his ever going the extra 1,000 km to visit Santorini or the significance of what he observed there?
Ch.10 p.387 despite all the attention to detail elsewhere in quoting many decimal places, Absolute Zero gets defined as exactly -273C, not -273.15
Ch.11 p.426 Clerk Maxwell's home at Dalbeattie (nr Dumfries) is described (for some unknown reason) as "a few score km from Birmingham" - well on modern roads its 400km from Birmingham, and its 150km from Glasgow, so I don't know what place they had in mind?
Anyway, still very worthwhile and a good read; I read it in 3 days, not wanting to put it down.
Rating:
Summary: Not a "science" book...
Review: It is very difficult for me to dislike a book like this. I am a big fan of scientific histories and this is a very good one. Gribbin takes us through the development of Western science from its roots in the Renaissance through modern threads of research. His prose is very readable and well organized even as he takes us through the major topics of physics, chemistry and biology. One of the things that makes his book so readable is that he focuses a lot of his energy on the lives and personalities of the great scientists. Though we get a grounding in the theories, we get more about science as a human pursuit which is often forgotten in our technologically-swamped age. It is a nice approach through which we not only get to hear about the ones everybody knows--Galileo, Newton, Darwin, Einstein, etc.--but a number of names with which even a science teacher like myself is less familiar. My main problem with this book is that Gribbin's prejudices show through loud and clear. He is clearly not a supporter of Thomas Kuhn's ideas of scientific revolution which I think have a certain validity and usefulness though Gribbin is correct in that science would progress even without revolutions; however, it would not likely have progressed in the way that Gribbin himself outlines so well. Gribbin also clearly has some problems with the really famous scientists like Einstein and, in particular, Newton. I'm not quite clear why Gribbin is so anti-Newton but his assertions that everything discovered by Newton and Einstein would have eventually been discovered by other scientists, while likely true, dismisses the fact that these genius certainly accelerated our understanding. In addition, in my view, men like Newton, Darwin and Einstein had a capability to see the big picture far beyond that of any of their contemporaries. They deserve the credit they usually receive and Gribbin's complaints often come off sounding like sour grapes from a less successful scientist. Still, Gribbin makes no secret of his views and no apologies and I can appreciate that. He has done a great service with this book. Obviously, with all the ground he has to cover, even at 600+ pages he cannot go into much depth; however, he presents a fascinating story of the men and women who have done so much to shape our modern world. It is worth reading for any educated person.
Rating:
Summary: The History of Science and the Scientists
Review: It is very difficult for me to dislike a book like this. I am a big fan of scientific histories and this is a very good one. Gribbin takes us through the development of Western science from its roots in the Renaissance through modern threads of research. His prose is very readable and well organized even as he takes us through the major topics of physics, chemistry and biology. One of the things that makes his book so readable is that he focuses a lot of his energy on the lives and personalities of the great scientists. Though we get a grounding in the theories, we get more about science as a human pursuit which is often forgotten in our technologically-swamped age. It is a nice approach through which we not only get to hear about the ones everybody knows--Galileo, Newton, Darwin, Einstein, etc.--but a number of names with which even a science teacher like myself is less familiar. My main problem with this book is that Gribbin's prejudices show through loud and clear. He is clearly not a supporter of Thomas Kuhn's ideas of scientific revolution which I think have a certain validity and usefulness though Gribbin is correct in that science would progress even without revolutions; however, it would not likely have progressed in the way that Gribbin himself outlines so well. Gribbin also clearly has some problems with the really famous scientists like Einstein and, in particular, Newton. I'm not quite clear why Gribbin is so anti-Newton but his assertions that everything discovered by Newton and Einstein would have eventually been discovered by other scientists, while likely true, dismisses the fact that these genius certainly accelerated our understanding. In addition, in my view, men like Newton, Darwin and Einstein had a capability to see the big picture far beyond that of any of their contemporaries. They deserve the credit they usually receive and Gribbin's complaints often come off sounding like sour grapes from a less successful scientist. Still, Gribbin makes no secret of his views and no apologies and I can appreciate that. He has done a great service with this book. Obviously, with all the ground he has to cover, even at 600+ pages he cannot go into much depth; however, he presents a fascinating story of the men and women who have done so much to shape our modern world. It is worth reading for any educated person.
Rating:
Summary: Previous reviewer seems picky and a bit wrong
Review: The complaint regarding chapter 6, page 220, is not correct. All of CO2 is used by the plant in the "dark" reaction of photosynthesis. The oxygen comes from water-the oxygen is released (which is also used by plants and any other cell with mitochondria, not just animals) and the hydrogen is incorporated into glucose. I have ordered, but not read, the book.
Rating:
Summary: Previous reviewer seems picky and a bit wrong
Review: The complaint regarding chapter 6, page 220, is not correct. All of CO2 is used by the plant in the "dark" reaction of photosynthesis. The oxygen comes from water-the oxygen is released (which is also used by plants and any other cell with mitochondria, not just animals) and the hydrogen is incorporated into glucose. I have ordered, but not read, the book.
Rating:
Summary: Time travel.... you will love it !!!
Review: This is a great book, it has a great story, lots of contents, great characters and you will have the opportunity to learn a lot!!!!
Mr. Gribbin has been capable of puting a very coherent story. It is well balanced, we get enough information about the major scientific findings to understand what it was about, we get a perspective of the environment in which things happened and finally we have the personalities and stories of some of the major scientists that have ever lived.
It is just human, that Mr Gribbin is not perfect, so I would say that there is more emphasis in British Scientists throughout the book, they get a more detailed description of their lives and contributions.
My second comment is that while reading the last chapters, the ones related to the most recent story of science, I missed the discussion of the impact in science of several major technological advancements, in special computers.
| 
