Blowfish's Oceanopaedia

Blowfish's Oceanopaedia - Tom Hird ***

There's always the worry with books that could be classified as 'nature' that they don't really contain any science - they end up more like tourist guides of the natural world. This is fine if that's what you're looking for, but not doing the popular science job. Thankfully, Tom Hird's Blowfish's Oceanopedia is significantly more than a 'isn't nature wonderful?' book - though Hird's boundless enthusiasm for his topic does occasionally take us into 'gee whizz, wow' mode.

Unless you are already a marine biologist (which I certainly am not), you will indubitably learn a lot reading through Hird's collection of bite-sized oceanic and fishy facts. We begin with some information on the sea itself, the nature of waves and the like, then move on to the main course of the assorted denizens of the deep. I certainly had plenty of 'Oh, really? I didn't know that,' moments.

Unfortunately, though, there is a big drawback from the format that Hird has chosen. I read the first few pages thinking 'Okay, these are introductory bits - he'll start writing properly soon,' but it never happens. It should have been obvious from that Oceanopedia title - this isn't a continuous book, it's an encyclopaedia, though arranged by topic rather than alphabetically. Apart from a very few articles that lead on one to another, each, roughly page-long piece, is standalone. Now, encyclopaedias are all very well - and some people do claim to enjoy reading them end to end. But for most of us, a collection of short articles with no connection and no flow, makes for limited reading pleasure. (And because it's not alphabetic, you can't even look something up easily.)

As I've mentioned, there's plenty of content, though I did find Hird's regular remarks along the lines of 'this involves maths, which is too boring to talk about' irritating. While we're on the topic of irritation, I do slightly worry about a grown man who calls himself Blowfish - single word pseudonyms are silly in rock stars and downright bizarre in science writers. As far as I can tell, the biology stuff is all spot on. The physics might be a little less sound - Hird tells us that the Sun and the Moon exert a similar control of the tides. If he believes this I'll happily swap him the Sun's pull in pounds sterling for the Moon's pull, as the Moon's effect is about 2.1 times as strong.

So it's an absolutely fine book as a collection of short, fact-based articles - a tasty smörgåsbord if you enjoy that approach. But if you want any kind of narrative flow - something you would expect from Hird's exuberant storytelling in media appearances - you will be a little disappointed.

Hardback:

Kindle:

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Roger Highfield - Stephen Hawking: genius at work interview

Roger Highfield OBE is the Science Director of the Science Museum Group. Roger has visiting professorships at the Department of Chemistry, UCL, and at the Dunn School, University of Oxford, is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a member of the Medical Research Council and Longitude Committee. He has written or co-authored ten popular science books, including two bestsellers. His latest title is Stephen Hawking: genius at work . Why science? There are three answers to this question, depending on context: Apollo; Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, along with the world’s worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl; and, finally, Nullius in verba . Growing up I enjoyed the sciencey side of TV programmes like Thunderbirds and The Avengers but became completely besotted when, in short trousers, I gazed up at the moon knowing that two astronauts had paid it a visit. As the Apollo programme unfolded, I became utterly obsessed. Today, more than half a century later, the moon landings are

Space Oddities - Harry Cliff *****

In this delightfully readable book, Harry Cliff takes us into the anomalies that are starting to make areas of physics seems to be nearing a paradigm shift, just as occurred in the past with relativity and quantum theory. We start with, we are introduced to some past anomalies linked to changes in viewpoint, such as the precession of Mercury (explained by general relativity, though originally blamed on an undiscovered planet near the Sun), and then move on to a few examples of apparent discoveries being wrong: the BICEP2 evidence for inflation (where the result was caused by dust, not the polarisation being studied), the disappearance of an interesting blip in LHC results, and an apparent mistake in the manipulation of numbers that resulted in alleged discovery of dark matter particles. These are used to explain how statistics plays a part, and the significance of sigmas . We go on to explore a range of anomalies in particle physics and cosmology that may indicate either a breakdown i

Splinters of Infinity - Mark Wolverton ****

Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists. Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by re

Search This Blog