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: $13.45
You Save: $13.50 (50%)
New (34) from $13.45
Avg. Customer Rating:  11 reviews
Sales Rank: 3030
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
Condition: Brand New Item. All Items are Shipped in Boxes the Same Day or Next Business Morning with Delivery Tracking Info Emailed to Customer.
|
| 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 6 more reviews...
 A Level-Headed Scientific Approach to Important Issues September 2, 2008
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
What drew me to this book was not so much its title, although it is quite intriguing, but its author. I had read a couple of Professor Muller's books in the past and found them to be very engaging as well as models of clarity. This book is no exception. Using logical scientific reasoning, the author addresses various topics that a future president would likely need to deal with. The topics are: terrorism, energy, nuclear matters, outer space and global warming. Removing any mythology and misinformation that may be associated with these issues, the author carefully analyzes them from a physics perspective; this is to help any future presidents in making solid well-informed decisions. The contentious matter of global warming is dealt with particularly well; in fact, it is one of the fairest and most level-headed discussions of this matter that I have read thus far. A set of notes at the end of the book contain a few simple calculations that complement some of the statements in the main text. However, a reader who is math-phobic need to not worry since the notes are not essential to fully appreciate the book's content. The writing style is very clear, accessible, authoritative, friendly and quite engaging. This informative book can be enjoyed by anyone, especially those interested in the use of a logical scientific approach to address important world issues.
 Opinions, not Science August 31, 2008
15 out of 21 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.
Physics for Everybody August 25, 2008
3 out of 13 found this review helpful
This an important primer for non-science types (i.e. those of us who avoided the sciences, especially physics, in colleges and elsewhere like the plague, but still have lots of opinions about energy and international policy, etc.) - nicely organized, clearly delivered, thought provoking, good humored, and humbling. We need a lot more conversations in this country in a process where citizens and their elected officials actually listen and learn from those who have been studying the topics Richard Muller presents in this book - and this is a great way to begin. Thank you, Dr. Muller.
An excellent book for any voter to read August 5, 2008
7 out of 16 found this review helpful
Muller's basic thesis is that we are sure we know certain things, but these things are actually false. He aims to give the basic science behind current issues like climate change, alternative energy sources, nuclear proliferation, and space.
I am not a scientist, but I often spent my time in high school study halls perusing physics texts rather than doing my homework. This book spares the reader all manner of arcane formulae and mathematics. It tries to present the bottom line on why and how things work they way they do. The net effect is to neutralize many fears common among the public. For example, a nuclear reactor cannot explode like an atomic bomb. It does not have the right kind of uranium and should something go wrong, the nuclear reaction naturally stops of its own.
Muller tries to distinguish between the science of something and its interpretation for what ought be done about an issue. When he violates his own rules for his book, he tries to tell the reader he is doing that.
Some basic factual information is repeated several times in the book. While that could be annoying, it serves to reinforce those concepts.
I found some parts of the book more interesting than others and expect that will be true for any other readers. But, those parts of greater interest to others may be the parts I found less interesting. This would be a good book for any voter to read. Our public discourse would be based more on facts and less on feeling. Still, as the author indicates, there are some areas where the science alone does not dictate how a decision should be made in some problem issue. Maybe the science is not even conclusive as science.
Steel melts @ 2500 DF; jet fuel burns @ about 1800 DF. August 5, 2008
7 out of 57 found this review helpful
Issue: "The burning jet fuel that took down the twin towers ... ." (From review of Muller's book in S.F. Chronicle, 8-3-08, by Graeme Wood, editor at Atlantic).
The physics of burning jet fuel and the melting point of steel do not provide an explanation as to the twin towers collapse.
Wood writes in his review of Muller's book:
"Muller has lucid explanations of how the World Trade Center collapsed ... ."
"The burning jet fuel that took down the twin towers ... ." (from the review of Muller's book).
This is not possible due to the physics of the problem:
Steel has a melting point of about 1370 Degrees C, or about 2500 Degrees F.
(Source Funk & Wagnall's New Encyclopedia (1983 edition, Vol 14, page 243).
Jet fuel when mixed in precise proportions with air will burn briefly at about 1800 Degrees F. The "open air" burn temperature of jet fuel is much lower. In fact "turbine inlet temperatures cannot exceed about 1100 Degrees C, or about 2000 Degrees F, because of the thermal limitations of the materials" in the jet engine. (Ibid, Vol 15, page 42). This temperature is INSIDE the jet engine with highly compressed air burning with the jet fuel in the "combustion chamber," not the "open air" burning temperature of jet fuel which took place in the Twin Towers.
A google search under "burning jet fuel temperature" is instructive.
Muller has not proved "lucid explanations of how the World Trade Center collapsed ... ."
It is intriguing that Muller, a "polymath in Berkeley's physics department," (Wood) is presenting "physics" which do not agree with the physics of the problem he is discussing.
|
|
|
