39 of 42 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Another absorbing journey with Freeman Dyson., July 12, 1998
By A Customer
This review is from: Infinite in All Directions (Paperback)
Mr. Dyson is one of the most respected and distinguished physicists in the world. He is also a great science writer for the layman. Although a gentle and gracious man by nature, Dyson is not afraid to take on the sacred cows and unfashionable areas of science, and it is obvious that there is little beyond his powers of comprehension. When I read Freeman Dyson, I feel as though I am in the presence of supreme, but very kindly intellect. This is a collection of 17 lectures that touch on many subjects, including 6 on biology. Unplug the phone, lock the door--whatever it takes to have some quiet time to yourself--and read this absorbing and thoughtful book. It will change the way you look at the universe around you. This book will also introduce the you other fascinating books that you've never heard about but will wish that you had.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
17 of 17 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Meaning for Scientific Thought by a Master, August 12, 2007
As always with Freeman Dyson, this book is a provocative exploration of a set of interesting and often unusual themes in nature, thoughtfully related to the larger issues of the day. In "Infinite in All Directions" Dyson searches for meaning on the diversity of the Earth's ecosystem, the inner workings of the universe, and the place of humanity in our larger cosmological structure. Presented originally as a set of lectures at Aberdeen, Scotland, in 1985, the chapters of this book have a familiarity and sensitivity to events of the time that one might expect. This is both a strength and weakness of this book.
Dyson's interest in the origins and evolution of life emerges clearly in this volume, and this discussion sparked in part by the debates over abortion and creationism is most welcome. His concern for cold war issues, especially a lengthy discussion of the place of Austria, seems someone archaic more than twenty years later.
Somewhere in the middle is Dyson's admittedly important perspective and provocative essay on "nuclear winter," a theory advanced by Carl Sagan and others in the 1980s that suggested that a nuclear exchange between the superpowers would trigger a worldwide ice age. He questioned the theory with some excellent points drawn, as he said, from his background. Indeed, science may be autobiographical, Dyson writes, for Carl Sagan drew his analogies for "nuclear winter" from his studies of the cold, dry environment of Mars and the dust particles in its thin atmosphere. This is one approach, Dyson concludes, but not the only one and he drew his analogies from the London fog. "We both use the same mathematics and both work with the same laws of physics. Why then do we reach different conclusions?" (p. 262). As he notes: "If the atmosphere after a nuclear war is filled with dry soot, the temperature on the ground will fall and the Earth will experience nuclear winter. If the atmosphere is filled with wet soot, the temperature on the ground will stay roughly constant as it used to do under a London fog. The severity of a nuclear winter depends on whether the soot-laden atmosphere is predominantly dry or predominantly wet" (p. 263). Moreover, since we live on a water-dominated planet Dyson believes that such a nuclear exchange would not trigger the type of ice age that Sagan advanced.
This does not mean that Dyson saw no threat to humanity in nuclear weapons. He certainly did. In fact, he spent considerable space ruminating on the choices that scientists must make in confronting such scientific questions. In all cases, the mode of science is to seek to disprove or at least modify any new theory. Doing so helps to self-correct the state of knowledge, and there is no higher calling in science. "Every new theory has to fight for its existence against intense and often bitter criticism," Dyson comments (p. 258). He then adds, "On the other hand, nuclear winter is not just a theory. It is also a political statement with profound moral implications" (p. 259). In such a situation scientists face a dilemma that cannot be minimized. They may take their normal approach as scientists and seek to disprove the theory, which Dyson believed in the case of nuclear winter would be successful, but doing so would provide the decision makers with cover for belligerent actions. As he wrote: "So my instinct as a scientist comes into sharp conflict with my instinct as a human being...What does a scientist do when science and humanity pull in opposite directions" (p. 259). He offered three possible solutions, one ignoring humanity and seeking to disprove the theory, another embracing humanity and nuclear winter as a theory. A third option, one followed by most scientists in the "nuclear winter" debate, was to privately seek to disprove but publicly to support the theory. He offered this succinct statement of this third approach: "it will not do us any good in the long run to believe a wrong theory, but it will not do us any good in the short run to attack it publicly, so let us keep silent and reserve judgment until the facts become clear" (p. 260). Dyson, like many others, chose that third option in the "nuclear winter" debate.
Dyson's discussion of "nuclear winter" is an especially useful object lesson in the nature and conundrums of scientific thought and practice. Those who hold the mistaken belief that scientific understanding is objective and linear will be well served in reading this case study. Scientific understanding is infinitely more complex, convoluted, interesting, and significant than most believe. Apply this issue to the major scientific debates of the present, of which there are many, and it is apparent that there are few easy answers.
As always, Freeman Dyson's work is challenging and thoughtful. "Infinite in All Directions," despite some essays that are a bit out of date, is a worthy contribution which all would profit by reading.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
24 of 32 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
POetic Writing with an Internal Contradiction, December 6, 2003
This review is from: Infinite in All Directions (Paperback)
It has been noted that some of the best writing around can be found in the scientific world and this book is a confirmation. It is divided into two sections that the author describes as reflecting two meanings of the title - the infinite quality of the universe and the infinite responsibility of mankind. The essays are erudite, entertaining, informative and more than anything (especially in the "universe" section) demonstrate that the nature of science and humanity's involvement in it is complex, sometimes contradictory and at times perplexing.
Life is explored in all its variations - how it started, why it's complex, how it will end, what it means. Then the second part falters a bit. The author can be forgiven some of his remarks due to the date of publication as he goes on about the (former) Soviet Union, peace, NATO, Star Wars, Nuclear Winter, etc.
The problem with non-political types formulating policy is that over time the perception grows that Barbra Streisand is as knowledgable as Colin Powell or Freeman Dyson knows something that Madelaine Albright doesn't or that Jerry Falwell or Dr. Ruth or some college professor has the answer to the complex social problems of the day.
The peaceful manner in which the potentially explosive end of the Cold War was guided by those familiar with the situation is a rebuke to all the talking heads. A good essay on "Star Wars" and its meaning and potential was followed by some out of the box speculation on ways of dealing with the Soviet State. What was infuriating was the notion pushed by Dyson that scientists and intellectuals are peculiarly inclined toward peace. Do farmers, steel workers, bankers, programmers and chefs desire a nuclear war? Who created those weapons if not scientists? He, like many, dreams of a Star Trek world of universal peace, an end to racial and religious strife and a focus on scientific and artistic achievment. It sounds noble but in no way reflects our evolutionary heritage.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
