<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating, entertaining and provocative
Review: Einstein's Luck (or 'Fabulous Science' in the UK) is a fascinating and provocative book that will have you re-examining your ideas of the 'scientific greats', and introduce a healthy skepticism into your opinion of science research generally.Remember learning in school how Eddington proved Einstein's theory of relatively by comparing the position of stars during and after an eclipse? Actually his images were so poor they proved precisely nothing except that Eddington was a dab hand at faking results. Remember how Millikan demonstrated that an electron had a discrete charge? Well, look at his notebook and you'll see how he threw away all of his results which proved exactly the opposite! The book catalogues a series of famous scientists whose passion and belief in a theory blinded them to contrary evidence. In fascinating detail the book describes the circumstances surrounding the experiments both in the laboratory and in the wider social context. What links these scientists is that, as it turns out, the theories they were expounding happened to be right - just not for the reasons they gave. This compelling book should be compulsory reading for all students of science and is delightful food for thought for anyone interested in science.
Rating:
Summary: illuminating historical insights
Review: If this is science history, it's a pity so few professors can write it. This thought-provoking and enjoyable book reads like a series of detective stories while challenging any simplistic assumptions of the past. We learn that some accepted "proofs" proved nothing at all and that we mistakenly label as revolutionaries men who were truly typical of their time.
Dr. Joseph Lister, for examples, whose name is eponymous with antiseptic, managed to exceed the death toll of his colleagues because of his own lack of sanitary standards. Gregor Mendel made important contributions to knowledge but by his own beliefs and theories he was no Mendelian. Charles Darwin followed the tradition of his age in believing in the inheritability of acquired characteristics. And we have pioneers like Robert Millikan and Arthur Eddington who made data fit a chosen theory, rather than the other way around.
Yet, far from belittling such men, this book shows them in a new and more human light that transforms our understanding of scientific discovery. John Waller's book is an entertaining read for the layman and an essential read for the scientist or historian.
Rating: 
Summary: Essentially a history book
Review: There's nothing really revisionist about this book, it's essentially a history book. If you ever do science, you know that the data are messy, and sometimes you have to smooth over the results to fit the theory. Disclaimer: I've not read the book yet, but have ordered it and will update this review if the facts do not support the above thesis. Further, this is a 300 page book, not an 800 page book (the description is a typo)
Rating:
Summary: Critical academic analysis of science history
Review: This book contains surprising research that is very interesting to read. From the authors massive vocabulary, I was able to surmise that the author was well educated and also very critical of historical scientists. For example, when discussing the history of Frederick Taylor's Scientific Management, the author points out the factual information that Frederick Taylor's work was not a rigerous scientifically proven work. I agreed with the author and enjoyed reading about the differences between legend and true history. However, the author interjects opinion with fact to state the value of Taylor's work is of little value because Taylor's studies do not stand up to scientific scrutiny. This book is a good academic piece if you enjoy breaking down the work of great thinkers. It focuses on the negative aspects of these great thinkers and not on the positive influence of their "unscientific" work. I would like to warn non-academic readers that this book is written at a higher academic level that I am used to. I have two college degrees, but I found myself looking up words frequently to follow the author. I felt like the author's choice of vocabulary was more appropriate to flaunt his educational background than to target a casual scientific history reader. This book was a great way for me to improve my vocabulary after I looked up many of the words that challenged me. This book is for some, but I'm afraid it was not for me. I quit reading the book at page 110 (halfway through).
Rating:
Summary: Critical academic analysis of science history
Review: This book contains surprising research that is very interesting to read. From the authors massive vocabulary, I was able to surmise that the author was well educated and also very critical of historical scientists. For example, when discussing the history of Frederick Taylor's Scientific Management, the author points out the factual information that Frederick Taylor's work was not a rigerous scientifically proven work. I agreed with the author and enjoyed reading about the differences between legend and true history. However, the author interjects opinion with fact to state the value of Taylor's work is of little value because Taylor's studies do not stand up to scientific scrutiny. This book is a good academic piece if you enjoy breaking down the work of great thinkers. It focuses on the negative aspects of these great thinkers and not on the positive influence of their "unscientific" work. I would like to warn non-academic readers that this book is written at a higher academic level that I am used to. I have two college degrees, but I found myself looking up words frequently to follow the author. I felt like the author's choice of vocabulary was more appropriate to flaunt his educational background than to target a casual scientific history reader. This book was a great way for me to improve my vocabulary after I looked up many of the words that challenged me. This book is for some, but I'm afraid it was not for me. I quit reading the book at page 110 (halfway through).
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting and mostly good
Review: This book is a refreshing egalitarian change from the kind of history that implies that a handful of geniuses are responsible for most scientific progress. It shows that many famous people were less innovative than is commonly thought, and that science is more incremental than revolutionary (but in spite of the title, it says little about Einstein).
But I can't help wondering whether the book exaggerates to make the misleading histories sound more scandalous than they really were. However, I only see one sentence that seems to justify this suspicion. On page 94 (regarding the effects of the great depression on the Hawthorne studies) he says "the desperation in these words seems to leap from the page". I don't see any clear signs of desperation in those words he quotes. It wouldn't surprise me if the workers were desperate, but the book fails to convince me about this.
Rating:
Summary: My discovery
Review: What I like about this book, is that not only is it engaging and a good read, but it actually makes me feel clever!
With interesting stories written in highly accessible language, the author doesn't condescend to his reader nor talk over his head. A true teacher, he reveals, explains and encourages, enticing you to read on first, and then continue to make more discoveries of your own by thinking about the implications of what he says.
Wish we had more authors and teachers out there like this!
<< 1 >>
| 
