Customer Reviews

Imaginary Weapons: A Journey Through the Pentagon's Scientific Underworld

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(7)
1 star:		(11)

 

 

I bought the book "Imaginary Weapons" hoping to have an entertaining read on some of the less plausible ideas and concepts that are thrown around the "Pentagon's Scientific Underworld." I'm very interested in both science and technology, so I was also interested to hear the "science" behind these prospective weapons and the case studies on them.

Sadly, the book matched neither the title nor my expectations. In reality, the book focuses exclusively on "isomer weapons" and the "hafnium bomb," or, I should say, the in-squabbling that takes place between fringe scientists over these ideas. The book is less of a study, less of a technological focus and more of a "he said, she said" soap opera of the scientific world, with a narrow focus to those scientists in the isomer/hafnium field.

If you're interested in the history of isomer/halfium research, then this may be a good read, otherwise, I advise you look elsewhere.

Imaginary Weapons by Sharon Weinberger is an extremely disappointing book. Promos claimed it would be a broad investigation of the unconventional technologies evaluated by the DOD. What it turns out to be is a pitifully narrow view of a single trivial issue about whether the energy stored in a peculiar isomer form in Hafnium can be useful or not. Having no technical competence, the author seems only able to spend the 300 pages producing an immature view of hypothetical squabbling between characters portrayed in a totally unconvincing style. By the end of the book it is clear that the analysis reported in the Product Forum got it right. Imaginary Weapons is fiction concocted from interviews with sources that have no credibility or corroboration. What a waste of $10.10!

I saw the author plugging the book on The Daily Show and she was quite engaging and the book sounded like a good read. But after reading the book I can't recommend it. It was very dry and reminded me of a college term paper that was very much padded for length. There is one central story and it's beaten to death over and over. This book would have made a very interesting magazine article, no doubt about that, but as a book there just wasn't enough of a story. And one other thing...the book is loaded with TYPOS!! Very distracting...I'd say I noticed six or seven typos and generally you shouldn't find ANY.

Imaginary Weapons by Sharon Weinberger is worse than garbage. I knew Jack Agee also and he is nothing like the slanderous image repeated over and over in the book. I also know some of the Texas people and they too are nothing like the picture that this vicious gossip columnist tries to cram down the reader's throats. From personal knowledge I can say that all individuals Weinberger demonizes are regular people who are trying to do their best to meet their heavy responsibility to our country, their work intentionally made much harder by the lies and vendettas promoted by Sharon Weinberger.

The book market has already figured it all out, that Imaginary Weapons is a total flop, the secondary booksellers have dumped their books at cut-rate prices, and you can read most of the nasty parts for free by using the CAP links. Don't buy this garbage book because it might encourage another book by Sharon Weinberger.

Reviews and Forums seem to divide between misguided loyalist partisans who want to believe and to argue that Sharon Weinberger uncovered some big deal in Imaginary Weapons and others like myself who are convinced that the book is fiction. Recently posted is conclusive evidence that one more event the author describes in graphic detail is false. Starting on page 205 she writes:

"In early April 2004, Esen Alp, a senior physicist at the Argonne lab, appeared in the office of the director of the SPring-8 synchrotron in Japan.... Alp was another in a long line of Collins critics who had bristled when the obscure Texas scientist...he brought with him one small present for the director at SPring-8, a copy of my Washington Post Magazine article featuring the cover story on Carl Collins.... He wanted to be sure the director got a copy of the article. Pictures and all."

On July 31, 2006 the Chief Counsel of the Chicago Office of the US Department of Energy (that owns Argonne) sent a letter saying "Dr. Alp advised that he did not provide Spring-8 officials with Ms. Weinberger's magazine article, contrary to the account in the book." The full text of the letter is posted on the internet.

Myself, I can see no other resolution of the conflict between these two statements except to conclude that Sharon Weinberger just fabricated her story out of nothing.

It is interesting to see how reviews of Imaginary Weapons mature as people actually read the book before writing about it. The use of Google to search upon the title "Imaginary Weapons," returns a rich menu of opinions, from blogs and reviews that are not just the panegyrics seen here that are designed to push sales. Starting with "wickedly funny" and "clear to anyone regardless of their education", we finally arrive at "I am truly sorry to conclude that Imaginary Weapons by Sharon Weinberger is just made-up nonsense, if not worse." In the forum section below, I find the author's preference to weave and evade legitimate questions about the provenance of events she described to be particularly telling. Myself, I must agree with George's conclusion - Imaginary Weapons is made-up nonsense.

I was hoping this would be a run down of declassified weapons projects that didn't make the cut or lost funding or just didn't work. NOPE! Just a single silly idea that this author documented to death (literally) and then wrote into a book (sort of).

My biggest question at the end? Who the heck would think anyone would care!! Save your money. Just terrible!!

Imaginary Weapons addresses issues regarding the use of public funds for highly speculative military research. Weinberger's main theme is that a line must be drawn between "high risk, high payoff" projects, and projects which are overt wastes of money and resources, and she argues that consensus within the scientific community should play a major role in where such a line is drawn. The story that she narrates about the hafnium bomb project demonstrates how personalities and politics can lead defense officials to cross this line from the risky to the insane.

I give the book five stars because the topic is extremely important and has implications for a very wide audience, but it is a topic that is rarely, if ever, discussed in a way that is accessible to the general public. Weinberger discusses the issues in a way that is entertaining as well as enlightening. In parallel with the story of the isomer bomb, she makes basic philosophical arguments regarding the responsibilities that the government and the public have in funding large science projects. Her arguments are clear to anyone regardless of their education, just as any discussion relevant to the general public should be. For these reasons, I give the book the highest recommendation possible.

I was going to write a long and detailed review of this book outlining its many minor and few major flaws. However I notice with these types of books, with controversial subjects, tend to get reviews of two types: If you agree with the subject matter, it was well written. If you don't, it is poorly written.

This book is different: Not enough information is given to form an opinion on the triggering of Hafnium, and I had never heard of `isomer triggering' before I read this book. So I am left with no opinion on the basic science that Weinberger discusses, and the writing style was so uninspiring that I am not left with enough care to do my own research.

It is quite obvious from the beginning that Weinberger has made up her mind (despite indicating otherwise toward the end). All of the `good guys' have `decades of research experience', whilst the `bad guys' (those in favour of Hafnium research), have `decades long obsessions'.

As many other reviewers have noted, the typographical errors are numerous and annoying. For example Tantalum is always spelt Tantulum (except once, which I assume was a typo, ironically).

Also, for such a recent book (2006), her research on Cold Fusion is woefully out of date. It is as if she stopped looking for anything written on the subject in the last 15 years.

I would only recommend this book for an audience that understands bad science, and how even poor logic can be used to get the right answer (that applies to both sides of the argument in this book). This book might make a useful resource in a university level course on scientific methods. However, the equally terrible, Penn and Teller: BS series would be better. A good test for the class might be to spot the logical inconsistencies and bad science used by Penn and Teller, or Weinberger, even though their conclusion may be correct.

I used to work in one of the New Mexico labs mentioned in her book. Forrest Agee's boss at AFOSR, our "best man", was also from New Mexico. He personally selected Agee to head up the Physics and Electronics basic research for the Air Force. I am familiar with many of the cast of characters in her book- especially Forrest Agee who liked to be called "Jack", Tony Tether and "Uncle" Rummy. I must say, Sharon Weinberger did a supererb job of characterizing the individuals in the book.

Sharon Weinberger does a super job explaining how Tether likes to remind everyone "there is no sin in failing at DARPA". However, it is a sin for DARPA to fail the US taxpayer. "High Risk" is important to invest in - DARPA used to have top notch scientists that had a good nose for ferreting out the good stuff to invest in. Nonsense under the guise of "High Risk" is silly and has no chance of going anywhere - much worse than even winning the lottery. Sharon Weinberger does a great service educating the reader about the importance of funding good science and how our country depends on it.

DARPA also points out in their program strategy that good research ideas have to have top notch people and lab facilities to do the research. Sharon does a great job of describing the facility where the research took place. The web sites help too -they show pictures of research laboratory lab that is the subject of the book. Perhaps, in the second edition of the book, Weinberger could include pictures - they might be worth much more than a thousand words.

So where did the money go? Sharon Weinberger does a good job of discussing the "renting" the Hafnium sample. Perhaps this is one area Sharon Weinberger could have done a bit better. I'm sure Tony Tether and the AFRL would jump at the opportunity to have another interview with Weinberger on that matter. I'm sure the readers and taxpayers would love to hear more about that too.

SDI is often referred to as a "brilliant bluff" - but at least it had science theory behind it - and now some of the ideas are actually able to be implemented. Sharon also does a nice job of explaining what others throughout the world thought of the research - in addition to the JASONs. This "imaginary weapon" is not pure science - it is just pure nonsense - no science behind it - and it couldn't even be used to bluff anyone - except only our high level government officials like Agee, Tether and Rumsfeld who couldn't seem to tell the difference between real science and "fringe" science - even when they paid the JASONs to look into it and they shot down the idea. This is one of the things the JASONs apparently claim they are good for - according to Ann Finkbeiner's book - which is also a quite good read. However, the JASONs were not even able to shoot this one down - that literally took an act of Congress.

Sharon Weinberger went where no high level Government Official has gone before - to the very bottom of an important matter. Although her book did not go into the technical details - Sharon Weinberger left a trail of publications easy for me to obtain and read for myself. I thought this was a reasonable level of detail for her book. The book did a nice job explaining the jelly donut - a great explanation for both the physicist and the layperson to enjoy. Her radio interviews are enlightening to listen to as well. I bet the government research labs are chomping at the bit to read her next book - I know I am - I know all sorts of people within the government (5 different agencies) I referred the book to are spreading the word like wildfire.