|
| Physics for Future Presidents: The Science Behind the Headlines | 
 enlarge | Author: Richard A. Muller
Publisher: W. W. Norton
Category: Book
List Price: $26.95
Buy New: $15.59
You Save: $11.36 (42%)
New (31) Used (6) from $15.00
Avg. Customer Rating:  17 reviews
Sales Rank: 3867
Media: Hardcover
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 354
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.1
Dimensions (in): 9.3 x 6 x 1.5
ISBN: 0393066274
Dewey Decimal Number: 530
EAN: 9780393066272
ASIN: 0393066274
Publication Date: August 4, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Learn the science behind the headlines—the tools of terrorists, the dangers of nuclear power, and the reality of global warming.
We live in complicated, dangerous times. They are also hyper-technical times. As citizens who will elect future presidents of the most powerful and influential country in the world, we need to know—truly understand, not just rely on television's talking heads—if Iran's nascent nuclear capability is a genuine threat to the West, if biochemical weapons are likely to be developed by terrorists, if there are viable alternatives to fossil fuels that should be nurtured and supported by the government, if nuclear power should be encouraged, and if global warming is actually happening. This book is written in everyday, nontechnical language on the science behind the concerns that our nation faces in the immediate future. Even active readers of serious journalism will be surprised by the lessons that the book contains. It is "must-have" information for all presidents—and citizens—of the twenty-first century. 50 illustrations.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 12 more reviews...
 One of the Most Important Books of the Twenty First Century July 23, 2008
33 out of 46 found this review helpful
Buy this book! Read it, and understand it. Then buy one for your Senators and Congressman, and insist they read and understand it. Richard Muller, a physics professor at Cal Berkeley and researcher at Laurence Berkeley Labs, has written a highly accessible book that treats some of the most important, yet misunderstood, topics of our time. He treats, in understandable language, the physics and some of the economics of terrorism, energy, nukes, space, and global warming. You will get no politics. In fact, you probably will have no idea who he might vote for. But you will learn the key facts, questions, and alternatives on the vital issues. You will be amazed at what you didn't know, what you knew that actually isn't true, and what the real alternatives for solutions likely are. You will be outraged at the ignorance of our politicians, policymakers, television news anchors and commentators, as well as newspaper editors and columnists. But you will not be bored.
Professor Muller reveals the real story, the promise and the limitations of solutions to topics such as these: Nine-Eleven, terrorist nukes, the next terrorist attack, and biological terrorism; key energy surprises, solar power, and the end of oil; radioactivity; nuclear weapons, nuclear power, nuclear waste, and controlled fusion; space and satellites, humans in space, and spy satellites; history of climate change, the greenhouse effect, evidence and false evidence, non-solutions, real solutions, and new technologies.
My personal biases: I have a background in both physics and management, and practiced both during a 35-year career with NASA. I do not know Professor Muller, but have admired his work since I discovered his "Physics for Future Presidents" podcasts on iTunesU. I highly recommend this book.
 Oval office science July 26, 2008
30 out of 40 found this review helpful
We don't expect our presidents to be literal rocket scientists (though it would be nice if one of them every so often was at least a metaphorical one), but we ought to expect them to know enough about science to surround themselves with the very best advisors. The troubling truth of the matter is that presidents, like most Americans, know little about science, even though public policy is increasingly dependent on scientific expertise. So author Richard Muller, who teaches science to nonscience majors at UC-Berkeley, has written his Physics for Future Presidents not only for future presidents but also current citizens.
The book isn't an easy read, and there are enough graphs and equations to set aflutter the hearts of even the most intrepid of nonscientists. But Muller recognizes this possibility, and recommends that nonscientific readers go for the big picture, not allowing themselves to get bogged down with details that might be too complicated on a first run-through. And the big picture--or rather big pictures--he wants us to understand are the science behind bombs and biological weapons likely to be used by terrorists (chapters 1-4), the fossil fuel crisis (chapters 5-7), nuclear energy and nuclear weapons (chapters 8-14), space technology, including space weapons (chapters 15-19), and global warming (chapters 19-25). Especially helpful are the "Presidential Summaries" in which Muller offers convenient wrap-ups of each of the five topics he discusses and some quick public policy recommendations.
My guess is that many readers will find his section on global warming the most interesting and contentious. Muller concludes that global warming is a reality, but one which has been exaggerated in certain ways. Other conclusions that will doubtlessly be contested by some include his claim that disposal of nuclear waste from power plants isn't really a problem (pp. 173-77) and that there's no viable alternative to fossil fuels in sight (in this regard, by the way, Muller agrees with James Howard Kunstler's conclusion in the latter's brilliant The Long Emergency).
It's in the arena of public policy recommendations that Muller, I think, falls short. His answers are too often quick and easy. (Quick example: when it comes to public policy, we (meaning the US but presumably any other country too) "have no right" to insist that China (or presumably any other country) cut back on pollution creation. The implication of this is that the international community has no moral authority--a scary conclusion. And even though Muller claims to be letting science speak for itself in every chapter but one (p. 173), science, performed as it is by opinionated humans, rarely speaks in neutral terms, especially in a book like this. Perceptive readers will pick up on Muller's interpretation of what he considers to be basic data, especially when it comes to global warming trends.
Still, a very helpful, very good book. Even if presidential candidates don't actually read it, it's good that voters do.
 I dunno if I'd trust a President who read this for PHYSICS guidance July 30, 2008
24 out of 65 found this review helpful
The idea of the title is good, teach someone as busy and often-sidetracked as a President some of the fundamentals of a Science. But if I may humbly say... the book tends to read more like it should have been titled "Because I have a soapbox and some fans I've let it go to my head and here are my non-science personal beliefs and feelings on what a President should do about policy"
Hit the store and just flip to that Humans In Space chapter. Just read that short one and I think you'll see what I mean. You thought you were holding a book on the Science of Physics, but really you're being told - with NO basis in the Science Of Physics that a President should not even consider sending Humans Beings beyond low Earth Orbit. Why? Because robots are better ... Why? Is it because the author is also a Master of Robotics and A.I. technologies or Space Medicine? Nope, humans should stay home and watch Space happen on TV simply because the author says so, that's why ;-)
Hmmm.. maybe "humans should not be allowed to do things that We Smarter And Elite People can program a machine to do" is what a grant-chaser really believes and maybe even what one or two Future Presidents would like to hear. But it's not Physics.
I brought my copy back. There were other books on Physics that a regular person could get real-world related Physics information from... ones that actually were about the Science.
But that's just me.
 Opinions, not Science August 31, 2008
24 out of 40 found this review helpful
The first thing to know about this book is that it is not about Physics, or even more broadly about Science. The book is about what the author believes and wants the reader to believe about various public policy issues. I agree with many of his beliefs, and disagree with a few. He is entitled to his opinion, but he should present his opinion as Science.
The author leads you to believe that what he is telling you is Science, not opinion when he writes, "I'll bring in engineering aspects they are needed, but the focus here will be on the science. Laws of countries can be changed, but laws of physics are pretty much set." However, he fails to meet the goal he set. He also writes, "Physicicsts, by tradition, have a more stringent standard than the courts: if you get caught exaggerating, distorting, or cherry picking, your scientific reputation is damaged if not destroyed." But then he goes on to exaggerate, distort, and cherry pick himself.
Even in cases where the situation would present a great opportunity to introduce the reader to important ideas from Physics, the author fails to present the reader with the information that would argue against his opinion. For example, as a physicist, the author surely understands what thermodynamics says about limits on the conversion of heat to work, but he treats all energy forms as equivalent by quoting their heating value. Given the difference in work that can be obtained from gasoline (his favorite fuel) and electricity, this is a serious distortion.
As an example of cherry picking, the author dislikes electric cars. He claims his dislike is based in physics, but it is not. He cites the energy density of batteries compared to gasoline to show that electric cars are impractical. That is cherry picking, because there are other relevant facts he refuses to tell the reader.
This book also provides little basis for the reader to learn more on his or her own. The "facts" presented are not substantiated with references, or only with the claim that the author heard it from an acquaintance. However, some of his facts are incorrect.
I do not recommend this book.
Very basic physics plus logic and conversions = Clarity July 27, 2008
21 out of 33 found this review helpful
Although there are a few graphs and diagrams and a lot of numbers and units, I think this book is accessible to any reader with a citizen's interest in energy, terrorism, nuclear weapons and nuclear power (not the same!), and climate change. You don't have to consider yourself a future president to want and really need to understand this stuff - all elected officials and voters should have this level of familiarity with the science (and often engineering) behind these important issues. And it's really not that hard to follow - it's very readable.
There are no equations here (OK, a few in the notes if you're interested), and the "physics" comes mainly in the approach, breaking problems down into essentials to which basic concepts like energy conservation and efficiency can be applied. A lot can be accomplished simply by converting energy and other quantities in different situations into common units (Muller uses mainly common US units rather than metric units that physicists use in their real work).
It is true that Muller does not completely remove his own opinions in favor of "pure science" - but this is a book for general readers, not a text book (he also has a text book version for his course at UC Berkeley). And the issues are real-world issues, not abstract physics problems. But for the most part he is combining basic science with logic and common sense, and if you learn to do this yourself, and remember some of the conversions and rules of thumb he discusses, you will be better able judge for yourself whether some claim about energy or terrorism really makes sense, and have a better calibration of risks and opportunities in this complex world.
P.S. I was a physics major and have a masters in optics, but I also do educational outreach programs, so I'm really viewing this more from the perspective of an educator and citizen than as a science-educated person. And I personally learned a lot. Also note that one review from 2007 really applies to Dr. Muller's textbook, not this new general interest book.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
