Few pleasures in life are greater than that of reading a graphic novel about physics. So when I found the enticing "Mysteries of the Quantum Universe" on a bookshop shelf, I couldn't resist but buy it. The cover ticks all the right boxes: a number of easily recognisable physicists on a barge with a round-faced Tintin look-a-like and, of course, his dog. The contents, however, were disappointing.
When the story starts, we are invited to follow the adventures of detectives Bob (human) and Rick (dog) who are exploring the moon. Tragically, Rick gets hit by a meteorite and dies. In his despair over Rick's passing, Bob is invited to attend a conference on quantum mechanics. There, among attendees that seemingly can only speak in equations (!), Rick is transported to a different universe where the letter h (without a bar) introduces him to some of the physicists that made the greatest contributions to quantum mechanics.
There are some nice metaphors in the explanations Rick is given about quantum mechanics (quanta are like sugar cubes, for example), but in general the authors shy away from explaining the most complex concepts, showing instead beautiful illustrations or introducing twists to the Rick's story that do not contribute to understanding the underlying physics... The Schroedinger equation, for example, is introduced as in a recipe "I start with the Planck-Einstein equation...", "I replace E with H (representing the system's total energy, expressed in terms of the variables p and q...)". Sadly, the overall feeling is that if you already knew the basics of quantum mechanics, you won't learn much here, and if you don't, the shortened version of the story that is presented will not help you much.
The illustrations are beautiful and the use of colour is clever, but my overall feeling when finishing the book was one of disappointment. Rick and Bob's story is only tenuously linked to quantum mechanics (the last physicist Rick encounters, Hugh Everett, joins the two story threads in a somewhat predictable manner) and the explanations of quantum mechanics neither gain much from the graphic novel format, nor have many refreshing elements to it. In a different universe, opening a book with a similar cover could have yielded a much more interesting content...
In the Heart of Physics
Sunday, 30 July 2017
Thursday, 13 August 2015
Being the best scientist you can be
After the excellent interview with Stephanie Shirley, I have just listened to another mind-blowing episode of The Life Scientific. This time the interviewee was Geoff Palmer, a Jamaican-born Professor of... beer brewing!
In the uneducated-boy-turned-Professor story, what struck me the most was the willingness of a Scottish Professor to take Geoff on as a PhD student because of his background (that she had taken the trouble to thoroughly research). Having overcome so many difficulties and persevered in the face of so many rejections, she thought he had the right psychological make-up to be a good PhD student. In keeping with the fairytale nature of the story, her gamble, of course, payed off immensely! I don't know any personal examples of this kind of judgement, although I can think of many where the opposite call was made. (Think of all the great-quality beers that have not been produced as a consequence!)
I am more and more faced with the realisation that being a good scientist is much, much more than being good at science. It is, like Geoff Parker, being able to shrug or even laugh at stupid comments made towards you; it is not attaching too much importance to poor judgements of yourself made by people who you expect should know better; it is persevering when all university doors seem shut to you.
I googled him afterwards and found that he has the most beautiful, peaceful smile. Maybe that is the reward of working hard not only at the science, but also at the translational skills that enable you to be the best scientist (and person) you can be. There are clearly some lessons to be learned here...
In the uneducated-boy-turned-Professor story, what struck me the most was the willingness of a Scottish Professor to take Geoff on as a PhD student because of his background (that she had taken the trouble to thoroughly research). Having overcome so many difficulties and persevered in the face of so many rejections, she thought he had the right psychological make-up to be a good PhD student. In keeping with the fairytale nature of the story, her gamble, of course, payed off immensely! I don't know any personal examples of this kind of judgement, although I can think of many where the opposite call was made. (Think of all the great-quality beers that have not been produced as a consequence!)
I am more and more faced with the realisation that being a good scientist is much, much more than being good at science. It is, like Geoff Parker, being able to shrug or even laugh at stupid comments made towards you; it is not attaching too much importance to poor judgements of yourself made by people who you expect should know better; it is persevering when all university doors seem shut to you.
I googled him afterwards and found that he has the most beautiful, peaceful smile. Maybe that is the reward of working hard not only at the science, but also at the translational skills that enable you to be the best scientist (and person) you can be. There are clearly some lessons to be learned here...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)