No comments about So Away I Went! (Flight : Its First Seventy-Five Years).

No comments about Wilbur Wright's Flights in France : Leon Bollee's Photographic Record 1908-1909.

1 comments about Thomas Edison and Modern America: An Introduction with Documents.

1. "... The collection's strength is in the broad diversity of primary sources offered and the issues that Collins and Gitelman raise for student discussion. This is no mere biography of Edison the "Great Inventor." The sources include selections from Edison's memoirs, diaries, notebooks, and letters, as well as accounts of Edison and his inventions as presented by the popular media. We thus witness Edison fashioning his own self image-sometimes in contradictory ways-just as the press was turning him into a media hero. Laboratory records by Edison and his assistants chart the development of the phonograph and the use of electricity, while newspaper and magazine articles bear witness to the intense speculation surrounding the social effects Edison's inventions would create."

   David A. Reid, University of North Florida

1 comments about Botanical Companions: A Memoir of Plants and Place (American Land & Life).

1. The trunk of this book is the unlikely marriage of two botanists, one in his 70s and the wife in her 30s. This raises the question of what binds people together. The answer is plants. Aven Nelson was one of the most distinguished botanists of the American West, doing major exploring at the end of the 19th century when the romantic Humboldtian natural history explorer tradition was still alive. But the relationship of Aven and Ruth is only the starting point for a book of ruminations on questions of larger bindings, most importantly what binds people to a place or to the Earth as a whole. The Nelsons were on the fringe of the academic world, but they had a much richer natural realm than the botanists headquartered in botanical capitals like Columbia University in New York City. Aven Nelson expressed his priorities as "the lives of men and women shall be fuller and richer because they have touched hands as it were wih a few of the lovable creations and creatures of the great uiverse." The author, Frieda Knobloch, a westerner herself, interweaves the Nelson's story with her own experiences and reflections on what binds her to the Nelsons and to the land. This book portrays science as very much an affair of the heart, of people obsessed with things they love, of imperfect people and institutions, but finally as something that has crucial things to teach the human race about living on Earth. The form of the book is very unusual, blending sections of letters, journals, biographical links, theory, and personal meditations. It's all great food for the imagination.

No comments about The Life Of James Clerk Maxwell: With A Selection From His Correspondence And Occasional Writings And A Sketch Of His Contributions To Science.

1 comments about Field Adventures in Paleontology.

1. Field Adventures in Paleontology is one of the most riveting books on paleontology I have ever read. It is well-written and could be understood by anyone from a high school student to a seasoned scientist. For once, someone has written a book about what it is like to do paleontological excavation work that doesn't require you to have a PhD. and university funding! The digs in this book are accessible to everyone, even amateurs like me. Besides having lots of good photos and science, it opened my eyes to how to go about joining a fossil dig--something I've always wanted to do. Every student and amateur should read this book!

5 comments about The Evolution of an Independent Home: The Story of a Solar Electric Pioneer.

1. As a Biologist, I have been looking for a book that would give a clear and concise introduction to solar energy and photovoltaics. Paul Fowler's book does just that. It is written for the person who has an interest in solar power, but who does not have the technical background to immediately delve into more detailed texts. It's story format is engaging, yet also very informative. I highly recommend this book.



2. This fun book taught me how to think in terms of independent living. One of the best on my shelf.



3. In my quest to utilize this techology, I was delighted to encounter a volume that felt like it emerged from personal experience and not simply a rote tech survey. While I am not a particularly technical person, I found the information and presentation clear and direct. There is an undercurrent of personal charm I found engaging and added to my a sence of confidence in being able to do this. My wife and I are delighted with the results of what we learned and applied based on Mr Fowlers' book. Our second home in the woods was enhanced for it.



4. Found this book very interesting and easy to read. The book shows the 'human' side of this technology and the enduring spirit of a man who wanted to live independant of the utilities. A man who dared to live the simplier life and enjoyed the hard work to get there.

   If only there were 240+ million more like him.




5. An excellent book for anyone interested in using solar power. It's especially useful for anyone planning to build a new house. But anyone wanting the basics of solar (passive) heating and solar electricity will benefit.
   
   Paul gives an honest step-by-step account of his own building experiences, including the mistakes and what it took to correct them. I found the entire story very worthwhile and useful.
   
   If you want a solid overview of how to prep any house for alternative electrical power, you should read this book. If you're looking for practical info in the best use of passive solar heating, you can't beat this book.
   
   Jim, Montana
   [...]

5 comments about Einstein and Religion.

1. I think Jammer does us a fine service by writing a book about a subject that is too often neglected. Not that Einstein's religious views were ever unknown, but it is surprising that this seems to be the first book devoted to this subject.
   
   The exchanges between Einstein and Rabbi Geller are for me an important new piece of information (see pp. 85-86), as is Einstein's denial of free will in his letter to Besso (p. 87). But interestingly, Jammer neglects to mention Einstein's letter to Otto Juliusburger, who in 1946 tried to assess Hitler's responsibility for the Holocaust. Einstein's reply would not now be considered politically correct (at least in Jammer's Israel): "You take a definite stance on Hitler's responsibility... Objectively, there is after all no free will. What need is there for a criterion for responsibility?" Einstein was of course a sworn enemy of Hitler (and so should he be). But this statement is so amazing that I think Jammer was wrong to omit it. He should have quoted this statement, while emphasizing that Einstein blamed Hitler and the Germans for their evil deeds and he never forgave them. (Most of these quotes, especially if from private letters, are kept in the multi-volume "Collected Papers of Albert Einstein" published by Princeton UP and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.)
   
   In one of the more interesting quotes in this book, Einstein believed quantum mechanics has no practically relevant impact on his deterministic view of life-events. But in this connection Jammer fails to mention how Bohr's complementarity could be applied to Einstein's determinism with satisfactory results - even though Jammer has a third of the book devoted to speculation about how science now affects philosophical and religious matters. (Despite this, there are some important Einstein quotes in this chapter as well.)
   
   It is obvious that Einstein rejected the notion that quantum uncertainty undermines his denial of free will because he rejected quantum mechanics itself. Jammer points out that Einstein was wrong about locality, which was one of his main objections to quantum mechanics. Jammer cites Bell's theorem (p. 226) and the Aspect experiments as proving nonlocality, and claims that Einstein's belief in locality and his determinism are two basic tenets of his philosophy, as they indeed appear to be. But Jammer's implication seems to be that if Einstein got locality wrong, perhaps he was completely wrong about quantum mechanics, hence about quantum uncertainty, thus about determinism, thus about...his denial of free will? In other words, if Einstein was wrong about locality, he might have been wrong about determinism too. If Einstein was mistaken about one basic tenet of his philosophy, what makes us think he was right about the other? What Jammer fails to realize is that it was John Bell himself who said that strict determinism could well be the only way to make nonlocality compatible with all those horrible paradoxes like faster-than-light signals which contradict Special Relativity. In Bell's opinion, Einstein might have been wrong about nature being local, but strict determinism of which Einstein was always convinced might not be wrong after all. This is such an important point that I think Jammer should have discussed it, especially in Chapter 3, where he discusses his (Jammer's) own views on Einstein's philosophy.
   
   On a more trivial note, Jammer is wrong that Einstein picked up his denial of the freedom of the will from Spinoza. The fact is, Einstein got this idea first from Schopenhauer, then from Hume, and only later from Spinoza. I was disappointed how Jammer has throughout this book neglected the importance of Schopenhauer and Hume in Einstein's philosophical and religious development. I would agree though that Einstein's "cosmic religion" came from Spinoza.
   
   Jammer is at pains to emphasize that he doesn't proselytize or paddle any religious or sectarian viewpoints. He succeeds in this regard, in my opinion. What he does clearly try to convey, though, is the impression that religion in general and science are not in conflict, and he quotes Einstein's facetiously ambiguous statement "Science without religion is blind; religion with science is lame" (or something to this effect) to prove this point, almost ad nauseum. I'm not sure Jammer has convinced me. But Einstein's statements about religion are often ambiguous and confusing enough to provide plenty of material for someone with a secret ax to grind to quote from. On the other hand, Einstein was quite adamant and clear in (1) his determinism, (2) his denial of the immortality of the soul (which Einstein did not believe exist apart from the brain), and (3) his denial of a personal God. Jammer does a good job of faithfully reporting these views. This is not as easy a task as it seems, because (1) clearly conflicts with the deeply held beliefs of most people and the basic dogmas of Christian, Catholic, and Jewish religions; because (3) conflicts with all major religions excepting Buddhism; and because (2) conflicts with ALL religions, past and present. So I think Jammer has shown his competence here.
   
   A "B-" effort. I hope someday someone will come up with an even better one. Right now this is the best we have.



2. I think Jammer has not done a thorough enough job on Einstein's denial of free will. I have many books on and about Einstein and I know of many instances in which he made his strict determinism clear. Here is room for improvement.
   
   Jammer is wrong to imply that Einstein's initial belief in a static universe was the result of reading Spinoza. The fact is, many scientists at the time believed in a static universe, and probably most of them had never read Spinoza. Indeed, when Hubble showed that our universe was (and still is) expanding, the scientifc community was taken by surprise. I don't think Spinoza had anything to do with this.
   
   Jammer has said little about the importance of Hume and Schopenhauer to Einstein's philosophical and scientific views. This is a mistake. Hume and Schopenhauer were at least as important to Einstein as Spinoza. The neglect of Schopenhauer may have something to do with the philosopher's antisemitism. But Schopenhauer remained Einstein's favorite philosopher. In his study Einstein had pictures of Newton, Maxwell, Faraday, and Schopenhauer - the sole philosopher of the lot. Einstein quoted from him often on a wide range of subjects. If Schopenhauer was an antisemite, that's because he was such a misanthrope. In fact, he disliked Germans even more (and he was one of them).
   
   I agree that locality and determinism were two of Einstein's fundamental beliefs. Jammer reports with glee that locality has been proven wrong. So therefore determinism may also be wrong, he seems to imply. But according to John Bell, nonlocality may actually prove strict determinism to be right! (I don't believe Einstein was wrong about determinism as an objective fact, even though his interpretation of quantum mechanics may be wrong. The fact is, Heisenberg uncertainty shows up only during measurements; isolated systems are strictly deterministic. Of course, no one knows where this uncertainty comes from - hence the mystery.)
   
   I think that on the whole this book is good. But Jammer places far too much emphasis on Einstein's "Religion without science is blind; science without religion is lame" as though this remark, probably made tongue in cheek, summarized Einstein's religious views. I doubt it. Even if it does, this by no means imply this is an unassailable truth. Steven Weinberg believes that science and religion are antagonistic, one representing knowledge, the other representing ignorance. I agree with Weinberg.



3. Do not be deceived by the welcoming jacket on this book. This is primarily an academic text.
   
   The subtitle is "physics and theology" and not the other way around. This may be deliberate, because although the book actually starts with an emphasis on theology it evolves (or devolves, depending on your perspective) into a treatise on advanced physics.
   
   Despite Jammer's sometimes ackward English and despite the fact that portions read like a master's thesis in philosophy - the book is most accessible on the theological side. The reader gets insight into the spiritual side of Einstein. Jammer shows conclusively that Einstein did believe in God and does a reasonably good job presenting the philisophical underpinnings of Einstein's beliefs.
   
   Unless you have studied advanced quantum physics the second part of this book is very tough going.



4. By some accounts Albert Einstein (1879-1955) was the greatest theoretical physicist of the twentieth century, if not of all time. Max Jammer, Professor of Physics Emeritus and former Rector at Bar-Ilan University in Israel, has written an eminently readable account of Einstein's thoughts on religion, a subject that he insists has been ignored by the over 400 books on Einstein published in the last several decades. Einstein renounced accusations that he was an atheist, and railed against the intolerance of those whom he called "the fanatical atheists." In his three long chapters Jammer portrays Einstein as "undogmatic and yet profoundly religious."
   
   In his first chapter Jammer treats the role of religion in Einstein's private life. Born to what he described as "entirely irreligious Jewish parents," Einstein attended a Catholic primary school where like all students he received religious instruction. From the influences of nature and music he developed pronounced religious feelings quite early, although by age twelve he became estranged from institutional religion (although not from religion as he would define it) through reading some popular scientific books. His first wife, Mileva Maric, was Greek Orthodox, and his last wishes were to be cremated rather than to be buried in any religious tradition. Einstein was decidedly irreligious in the sense that he rejected any and all institutional affiliations, never attended worship services or prayed, rejected all dogmatic theology (eg, miracles, the afterlife or prayer), did not believe that God was in any sense personal, and was a strict determinist. But he found it impossible not to think of himself as religious in the sense of humility and awe at the mystery, rationality and complexity of nature: "the eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility." Behind the mystery of nature there seemed to be some superior intelligence: "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings."
   
   Chapter two explores what Einstein wrote about religion (he studiously avoided using the word "theology"). As a convinced determinist Einstein did not believe in human free will. He viewed science and religion as complementary rather than as antagonistic, seen in his famous aphorism that "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Science cannot determine ethics or inform us of ultimate purpose or meaning, thought Einstein, for "knowledge of what is does not open the door directly to what should be." Science could never, then, displace or supercede religion. In his final and longest chapter, Jammer examines the possible ramifications of Einstein's theory of relativity and rejection of quantum mechanics ("God," wrote Einstein in 1926, "does not play dice.") for theological ideas like time, eternity, creation ex nihilo, and the Big Bang. Einstein himself rather disingenuously denied that there was any relationship between his physics and theology.
   
   Well-known for his aversion to social convention and defiance of authority, Einstein used a paradox to summarize his personal beliefs and professional thoughts about religion. About a year before he died Einstein wrote in a letter that he understood himself to be a "deeply religious unbeliever." He rejected any and all notions of traditional, institutional religion, but he just as vociferously repudiated atheists who tried to claim him for their cause. Rather, he embraced something like grateful and humble Cosmic Awe at the beauty and complexity of the world he strove so mightily to understand.



5. On page seventy-five Jammer writes "As he once explained to a Japanese scholar, a deep feeling and his belief in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of expeirence represent his concept of God." That's where I started to really fall for this book. When Jammer quotes Protestant Paul Tillich (passages written in 1940) and Catholic Hans Kung--both prominent Professors of Christian theology--on Einstein's denial of a personal God, I was in love with the book, now better understanding the theological term "a personal God" from the "Jewish-Christain" Tradition. One wonders if Einstein could have read what his friend Max Jammer has written whether Einstein would have softened or even overturned his statements about his denial of a personal God. Also, once Tillich's (with Hans Kung) and Einstein's ideas are laid out together, Einstein's views don't seem to have deserved the public outrage that they received in the 1930's onward by prominent members of the Catholic Church, Protestant Christians, and Orthodox Rabbis. As Max Jammer points out, it's not as if any of Einstein's critics believe that God is a mere person with all our faults and imperfections. In that sense no orthodox Rabbi, Preist, or Preacher would claim to believe in a personal God either.

No comments about James Hutton: Founder of Modern Geology TheThe Father of Modern Geology (Scot¬s Lives).

5 comments about The Angry Genie: One Man's Walk Through the Nuclear Age.

1. I really enjoyed this story about a good human being who descended from a long line of Lutheran ministers going back to Martin Luther. It required considerable courage for Dr. Karl Morgan to publically detail the "biggest mistake" of his life when he reluctantly agreed to censorship by his superiors. This book was clearly written from Morgan's soul and provides valuable perspective from a 91-year-old legend who started the entire field of health physics. This autobiography should be required reading for all Americans.



2. I was captivated by Karl Z. Morgan's 50 year battle with powerful elements in the nuclear industrial complex for common sense safety measures. I was appalled to discover the extent of the damage the government inflicted upon our citizens through the abuse of nuclear power and and careless weapons' tests. Even more disturbing is Morgan's summary of numerous radiation experiments our government secretly conducted on innocent Americans. Morgan stands out as a pillar of truth in a desert of deceit. No one can read this without thinking "I had no idea this was going on."



3. It is commonly understood that only the best books are made into audio tapes. On a whim my family and I put the Angry Genie to the test. We read the book aloud on our annual cross country car trip without one complaint from any family member. The surprize attraction of the Angry Genie is its real appeal to the non scientific person. By just glancing through the book one might assume that he or she could be overwhelmed with scientific material, however, by no means is that the case. In the 180 pages of story, from the amazing experiments under Chicago University Stadium to the many photos of actual players in our history, I was drawn to the personalities and inside details of the developments of a powerful scientific discovery. In fact I most recommend this book because if the surprizing revelations on several fronts. First, the power and importance of science and scientists in this centuary is no more dramatically illustrated than in this story of nuclear power. Not even the terror of 'Outbreak" or the suspence of 'Apallo 13" are equal to the reawakening we get in the Angry Genie. Second, Dr. Morgan was able to input all of the required technical information and formulas in the book without interupting the book's flow. Third, the historical, medical and sociological impact is compelling. There is the letter from Einstein to FDR about the potential of the bomb and the fascinating information about the effects of all the different types of rays on humans. I plan on telling my book club about this wonderful book as well as all my friends who love historical books.



4. This charming memoir starts in 1943, when Dr. Morgan was recruited away from his happy research on cosmic-ray physics to join the atomic-bomb project. He was one of the four or five persons assigned to figure out how to prevent bomb-workers from irradiating themselves to death. In 1943, it was barely known how to measure doses from the various types of radiation, so Dr. Morgan had to invent many a metering device. Additionally, no one knew how to store the radioactive waste which would accumulate at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, where Dr. Morgan detected its escape-routes and tried to plug them. He became an internationally honored expert and author on radiation health-effects and protection measures. This is the story of a man of great integrity, who made enormous contributions to protecting health, and yet by his own standards, failed to succeed well enough. His "walk" through the nuclear age helps to illuminate the suppression of scientific dissent in the nuclear enterprises --- and presents an interesting contrast to books by Dr. Glenn Seaborg (Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission) covering many of the same years. The ninth chapter covers Dr. Morgan's expert testimony for the plaintiffs in two landmark trials (the Karen Silkwood Case 1979, and the Utah Bomb-Fallout Case 1982). The memoir provides not only an important record of moral, legal, public health, environmental, and scientific history --- but it also provides a highly engaging personal story of coping with the unexpected.



5. This book is not for the recreational reader, indeed it is one of the most depressing and distressing documents I have ever read. Nevertheless, I urge all readers concerned with issues that impact on the survival of humanity to read it thoroughly and absorb the lessons which it so graphically presents. In terms of an indictment of our government and various vested interests, it compares favorably with J'accuse written in 1898 by Emile Zola in response to the corrupt behaivor of the French nation, government and army during the Dreyfus affair. The most horrifying event in the book, and there are many to choice from, is the description of how the Health Physics Division was subdivided after Dr. Morgan's retirement in 1972 and distributed among "other laboratory divisions where radiation protection is not a primary objective". When I read this my immediate thought was of the dismemberment of Lemuel Pitkin so brilliantly described by Nathanael West. One can only be appaled by the many destructive acts which occurred when the Angry Genie left the bottle. It is frightening that those responsible for them have, to my knowledge, never been cited for criminal irresponsibility.