What do you think?
Rate this book
Physics for Future Presidents: The Science Behind the Headlines
“A marvelously readable and level-headed explanation of basic science and how it relates to the issues.” —John Tierney, New York Times
This is “must-have” information for all presidents—and citizens—of the twenty-first century: Is Iran’s nascent nuclear capability a genuine threat to the West? Are biochemical weapons likely to be developed by terrorists? Are there viable alternatives to fossil fuels that should be nurtured and supported by the government? Should nuclear power be encouraged? Can global warming be stopped?
This is “must-have” information for all presidents—and citizens—of the twenty-first century: Is Iran’s nascent nuclear capability a genuine threat to the West? Are biochemical weapons likely to be developed by terrorists? Are there viable alternatives to fossil fuels that should be nurtured and supported by the government? Should nuclear power be encouraged? Can global warming be stopped?
380 pages, Hardcover
First published December 31, 2006
278 people are currently reading
3820 people want to read
About the author
Richard A. Muller
48 books154 followersRichard A. Muller is professor of physics at the University of California, Berkeley. He is a past winner of the MacArthur Fellowship. His popular science book Physics for Future Presidents and academic textbook Physics and Technology for Future Presidents are based on his renowned course for non-science students. He lives in Berkeley, California.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 312 reviews
February 22, 2010
At lunch with a friend last week I complained that science is generally considered to be a suitable pursuit for children or child-like adults, from Sid The Science Kid to the manic Bill Nye The Science Guy to the impish Richard Feynman.
It's as if American society believes that curiosity about science is merely a phase we go through as we grow up, like playing with Legos. Sure there are some adults who still do it, but it is considered vaguely unseemly. (Meanwhile the over 50% of Americans who believe in angels and the roughly 6% who believe the moon landings were faked live their lives unimpeded.)
Then I came across this book, which objectively and simply explains the physics behind some very adult topics like terrorism, nuclear war, and global warming. It begins with a wrenching explanation of the physics behind the 9/11 attacks and how gasoline packs more energy per pound than even TNT.
The probable effects of a dirty bomb attack on a major city is analyzed and shown to be relatively minimal. Sure, there will be a slightly increased rate of cancer due to increased radiation, but it the radiation is calculated to be roughly the same that residents of Denver are naturally exposed to. So if we evacuate the area around a dirty bomb attack, shouldn't we also evacuate Denver?
For me the bonus in reading this book was the section on global warming. I admit to not paying close attention to this topic, and I also admit that being deeply skeptical about the way both sides of the issue present their case. It turns out Dr. Muller is with me on the skeptical part.
He lays out the (few) known facts and the (many) cherry picked facts and anecdotes about global warming that are designed to appeal to emotion rather than reason. While reading this section, I realized that Dr. Muller is slyly including lessons on the scientific method as well as the ethics of science. This is worth the price of the book alone.
The important lesson of this book is that we could being making better decisions as a society simply by acknowledging the parts of reality that are completely objective and not up for debate. So it turns out that science is good for something more than just invoking a sense of wonder.
It's as if American society believes that curiosity about science is merely a phase we go through as we grow up, like playing with Legos. Sure there are some adults who still do it, but it is considered vaguely unseemly. (Meanwhile the over 50% of Americans who believe in angels and the roughly 6% who believe the moon landings were faked live their lives unimpeded.)
Then I came across this book, which objectively and simply explains the physics behind some very adult topics like terrorism, nuclear war, and global warming. It begins with a wrenching explanation of the physics behind the 9/11 attacks and how gasoline packs more energy per pound than even TNT.
The probable effects of a dirty bomb attack on a major city is analyzed and shown to be relatively minimal. Sure, there will be a slightly increased rate of cancer due to increased radiation, but it the radiation is calculated to be roughly the same that residents of Denver are naturally exposed to. So if we evacuate the area around a dirty bomb attack, shouldn't we also evacuate Denver?
For me the bonus in reading this book was the section on global warming. I admit to not paying close attention to this topic, and I also admit that being deeply skeptical about the way both sides of the issue present their case. It turns out Dr. Muller is with me on the skeptical part.
He lays out the (few) known facts and the (many) cherry picked facts and anecdotes about global warming that are designed to appeal to emotion rather than reason. While reading this section, I realized that Dr. Muller is slyly including lessons on the scientific method as well as the ethics of science. This is worth the price of the book alone.
The important lesson of this book is that we could being making better decisions as a society simply by acknowledging the parts of reality that are completely objective and not up for debate. So it turns out that science is good for something more than just invoking a sense of wonder.
July 2, 2010
The conceit of this book is, obviously, that it's addressed to whoever would win the Obama-McCain race: here are the bits of physics you need to understand if you're going to make the right decisions on terrorism, energy, nukes (both weapons and reactors), space and global warming. There's plenty of good stuff here as well as lots of fascinating facts that I'm sure I'll find myself tossing oh-so-casually into dinner-party conversations. The text is extremely readable, bouncing along at an exhilarating pace. But there are also some silly mistakes:
In the Manhattan Project, the scientists initially estimated that the amount needed for a critical mass was about 440 pounds. [. . .:] With a tamper, instead of leaking out, the neutrons are reflected back in, so the critical mass needed for an explosion dropped by about a factor four, down to only 33 pounds. (p129)
I've tried and I've tried and I've tried to make sense of that "factor of four" calculation, but I still can't get no satisfaction. The "440 pounds" is clearly a euphemism for 200kg, and I assume "33 pounds" is, in plain English, 15kg . . . but even looking at these somewhat easier-to-work-with numbers, hoping for some sort of four-related relationship between them, I can't imagine what he was talking about. Similarly here:
In 1974, the average refrigerator size in the United States had a volume of 18 cubic feet, and the energy it used was 1800 kilowatt-hours per year. That's 130 kilowatt-hours for each cubic foot. (p315)
If I divide 1800 by 18, I get 100, not 130. I've checked my calculation every which way, and I still think I'm right on this.
I have other concerns. In the long chapter on global warming, Muller adopts the position of being, not a climate change denier, but a denier of the need for draconian action . . . and he claims to produce the physics to support this. He obviously has a beef about Al Gore and the movie An Inconvenient Truth, because he loses no opportunity to carp at them, even in instances where quite clearly Gore's "error" was that the science he presented, while perfectly correct as of 2004, has since been amended. Perhaps Gore once farted in front of Muller's wife, or something. Even so, I was prepared to be educated on the subject, but then . . . well, what's this?
On page 283 we have a couple of diagrams credited to "Pielke & Landsea"? On p294 there's an approving mention of a correction to the climatologists' physics from Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick? The diagrams seem plausible and the correction to the physics may be fine for all I know, but nowhere is there a mention of the fact that Pielke, McIntyre and McKitrick are extremely controversial figures in the climate debate, being champions of the AGW-denialist movement. I for one would trust nothing emanating from any of these three until I had it confirmed in triplicate by independent authorities, and even then I'd be dubious. Yet Muller, who must have known that to much of his audience the names will mean nothing, fails to alert his readers to the fact that the arguments being produced in general on AGW by Pielke, McIntyre and McKitrick (and, again for all I know, Landsea) are, to euphemize, not universally accepted.
Similarly, on pp104-105 Muller discusses the estimated death toll from long-term cancers in the wake of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, and tells us that the IAEA/UN best estimate for this number is 4000. I was surprised the figure was so low, since I was sure I'd heard of higher ones, but who was I to argue with the IAEA/UN? It was only by chance, in casual e-conversation with a friend a couple of days later, that I discovered there have been several estimates of this death toll, and the IAEA/UN one is controversial. Many of the other estimates, quick research revealed, have reliability problems of their own -- I mean, I love Greenpeace and have given them money, but they're an advocacy group and everyone knows you take with a pinch of salt the statistics produced by advocacy groups -- and it's quite possible the IAEA/UN estimate may be the best; but, for the sake of honesty, Muller should have indicated the existence of these other, far more pessimistic estimates.
The laffaloud irony is that, elsewhere, he's really quite strong about people who cherry-pick their information . . .
All in all, then, having found a few instances where I did not feel Muller was dealing fairly with his readers, I became uncertain as to how much of the rest of his text I could trust. And that's a pity, because I very much enjoyed the actual process of reading the book.
In the Manhattan Project, the scientists initially estimated that the amount needed for a critical mass was about 440 pounds. [. . .:] With a tamper, instead of leaking out, the neutrons are reflected back in, so the critical mass needed for an explosion dropped by about a factor four, down to only 33 pounds. (p129)
I've tried and I've tried and I've tried to make sense of that "factor of four" calculation, but I still can't get no satisfaction. The "440 pounds" is clearly a euphemism for 200kg, and I assume "33 pounds" is, in plain English, 15kg . . . but even looking at these somewhat easier-to-work-with numbers, hoping for some sort of four-related relationship between them, I can't imagine what he was talking about. Similarly here:
In 1974, the average refrigerator size in the United States had a volume of 18 cubic feet, and the energy it used was 1800 kilowatt-hours per year. That's 130 kilowatt-hours for each cubic foot. (p315)
If I divide 1800 by 18, I get 100, not 130. I've checked my calculation every which way, and I still think I'm right on this.
I have other concerns. In the long chapter on global warming, Muller adopts the position of being, not a climate change denier, but a denier of the need for draconian action . . . and he claims to produce the physics to support this. He obviously has a beef about Al Gore and the movie An Inconvenient Truth, because he loses no opportunity to carp at them, even in instances where quite clearly Gore's "error" was that the science he presented, while perfectly correct as of 2004, has since been amended. Perhaps Gore once farted in front of Muller's wife, or something. Even so, I was prepared to be educated on the subject, but then . . . well, what's this?
On page 283 we have a couple of diagrams credited to "Pielke & Landsea"? On p294 there's an approving mention of a correction to the climatologists' physics from Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick? The diagrams seem plausible and the correction to the physics may be fine for all I know, but nowhere is there a mention of the fact that Pielke, McIntyre and McKitrick are extremely controversial figures in the climate debate, being champions of the AGW-denialist movement. I for one would trust nothing emanating from any of these three until I had it confirmed in triplicate by independent authorities, and even then I'd be dubious. Yet Muller, who must have known that to much of his audience the names will mean nothing, fails to alert his readers to the fact that the arguments being produced in general on AGW by Pielke, McIntyre and McKitrick (and, again for all I know, Landsea) are, to euphemize, not universally accepted.
Similarly, on pp104-105 Muller discusses the estimated death toll from long-term cancers in the wake of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, and tells us that the IAEA/UN best estimate for this number is 4000. I was surprised the figure was so low, since I was sure I'd heard of higher ones, but who was I to argue with the IAEA/UN? It was only by chance, in casual e-conversation with a friend a couple of days later, that I discovered there have been several estimates of this death toll, and the IAEA/UN one is controversial. Many of the other estimates, quick research revealed, have reliability problems of their own -- I mean, I love Greenpeace and have given them money, but they're an advocacy group and everyone knows you take with a pinch of salt the statistics produced by advocacy groups -- and it's quite possible the IAEA/UN estimate may be the best; but, for the sake of honesty, Muller should have indicated the existence of these other, far more pessimistic estimates.
The laffaloud irony is that, elsewhere, he's really quite strong about people who cherry-pick their information . . .
All in all, then, having found a few instances where I did not feel Muller was dealing fairly with his readers, I became uncertain as to how much of the rest of his text I could trust. And that's a pity, because I very much enjoyed the actual process of reading the book.
February 24, 2024
excellent explanations and great visual graphics! I will have to re-read the section on nuclear fusion about 20 more times, sorry @nathan b
December 5, 2011
Leaving aside the counsel to a potential president conceit which wears out its welcome remarkably early in this egress into scientific realism from a sober and commonsensical physics professor, Muller provides a healthy splash of Chill the fuck out and take another bite of this here Clue Burger, y'all a bunch of Chicken Little motherfuckers. The sky ain't necessarily falling, and there's no need to be crying your pretty little eyes out that it is, chump change water over a bunch of thickly and pungently smoking brushfires that have broken out within various topical communities across the globe—terrorism, nuclear and biological weaponry, nuclear and non-renewable energy, global warming, and the potential of space exploration and utilization—with a linked refrain that shrill ideology and piercing alarmism, ofttimes paired with or stemming from shallow or selective knowledge of the matter in hand, seldom work to produce effective and enduring results, no matter the direction in which your political compass might point. In some cases they are still left smoldering—indeed, cannot be put completely out—but the air seems clearer and smells haler, the horizon starkly creased with all of that smoky plumage impressively and appreciably abated.
September 12, 2016
This was a fascinating book to read, and I really enjoyed it. Dr. Muller examines many of the science issues we hear about increasingly today, and also debunks much of the junk science and media sensationalism that have had a deleterious effect on public policies often purporting to be based on science. The friend of mine who loaned this book to me to read warned me that Dr. Muller was "somewhat liberal", but, honestly, I did not see any deliberate bias in his analyses and explanation of the science issues of our day. He is a believer in global warming, and, if I do have one criticism of his book, it is that he hangs his hat greatly in the last part of this book on the IPCC reports on climate change ---- although this body's predictions have been much criticized lately and although this body does not do its own research and has, on some occasions, used materials that have not been peer reviewed (aka so-called "grey literature"). However, this does not mar the overall worth of this book. It is interesting, fascinating, and a pleasure to read. I recommend this to anyone with an interest or a love of science!
December 3, 2021
Highly recommended. The only reason it got 4 stars instead of 5 is that it was published in 2006 which makes it a bit dated. For instance, fluorescents replacing incandescent bulbs with LEDs being a future innovation. That led to one disappointment since he only addressed the energy savings of fluorescents, not the manufacturing or disposal costs & issues. Generally, he seemed to cover these bases, though.
I recommend having a text copy handy since there are a fair few lists, numbers, charts, & illustrations that it helps to review & see. I listened to the audiobook & got the ebook so I could review the charts later on. I had no problems understanding the audio, but it was nice to confirm some of the numbers. His approximations are often very loose. For instance, he equates one horsepower with one kilowatt, but the latter is really about 3/4 hp. Still, that's close enough for this executive briefing.
Most should be familiar with the subjects he covers since he's dealing with the practical physics of common issues that we've been wrangling about for decades. We don't need him to tell us why we love fossil fuels, but he did provide quite a few energy equivalent comparisons in different ways. This is well narrated & a fairly quick read, yet it provides plenty of fuel for thought.
I've seen a lot of presidents & other officials come & go over the years as well as our sciences grow at an astounding rate. I've watched them make some astounding blunders such as the DMCA which made most of the computers on the Internet illegal due to their ignorance when writing the law. Just how much & often have they misunderstood other important items? More important, how can they get it right? There's an astounding amount to know & it's not their field of expertise, but they have to make a decision. As he points out several times, it's not what we know, but what we know that ain't so that's such a problem. On top of that, they often have to play to popular conceptions even when they're completely wrong. To make the job even more thankless, many decisions aren't right or wrong.
Muller provides great examples of some tough decisions with radiation. The popular conception is that any radioactivity causes terrible mutations, cancers, & horrific deaths for centuries - think SF movies. Of course it doesn't, but that doesn't make for a good headline. In easy steps, he explains the types of radioactivity, half-lifes, & which elements & reactions are responsible for what sort of damage as well as for how long. He makes sense of the tables policy makers use & shows just how uncertain they are. He also gives real life examples & poses questions he doesn't attempt to answer, but a president will have to if there is any sort of nuclear incident. For instance, the area around Chernobyl is still off limits due to radioactivity, but there's very little additional risk due to it now. In fact, it's turned into a thriving nature preserve. Should the state still keep folks away from their homes? If so, based on the same tables, we should probably make people abandon Denver, CO for lower elevations. The real-life data doesn't support that decision, though.
I particularly liked the sections on climate change since it is a controversy in which he's participated. For instance, I hadn't realized the possible connection between Alaskan warming & China's growth which actually fits the climate model better than general global warming. He points out the problems with propaganda versus the real science & takes Gore, along with "An Inconvenient Truth" (2006), to task for the inaccuracies. (I believe Zaidan mentions how Gore thinks this is OK in Ingredients: The Strange Chemistry of What We Put in Us and on Us as well.) As we've seen, such embellishments just add fuel to the deniers' fires, lead to fanaticism, & screw up any meaningful dialogue in the middle.
There's a lot of food for thought &, due to its age, some updating that the reader will need to do, but don't let that turn you off. It's amazing how much some of these situations have changed while many others have stayed the same. There's still a lot to be learned & this is a good basis. If he updates this book, I'll be very interested in reading that, too.
Contents
INTRODUCTION
I • TERRORISM
1 NINE-ELEVEN
Inspecting Passengers
Taking Control
Flying and Navigating the Airplane
Impact
2 TERRORIST NUKES
Big Nukes
The Terrorist Dirty Bomb
Rogue Nukes
Uranium Bombs
Plutonium Bombs
3 THE NEXT TERRORIST ATTACK
Future Airplane Gasoline Attacks
Bombs on Airplanes
4 BIOLOGICAL TERRORISM
The Anthrax Attack
TERRORISM: PRESIDENTIAL SUMMARY
II • ENERGY
5 KEY ENERGY SURPRISES
Why We Love Oil Power
Energy Alternatives
The Bottom Line: The Cost of Energy
6 SOLAR POWER
An Anecdote
Basic Facts
Solar Power Plants
Solar Airplanes
7 THE END OF OIL
Oil From Coal: Fischer–Tropsch
The Price of Oil
ENERGY: PRESIDENTIAL SUMMARY
III • NUKES
8 RADIOACTIVITY AND DEATH
Radiation and Cancer
The Linear Effect
The Chernobyl Nuclear Reactor Disaster
The Linear Hypothesis
9 RADIOACTIVE DECAY
Dangers of Short Versus Long Half-Lives
Environmental Radioactivity
Horrific Mutations
X-Rays and Microwaves
Is Radioactivity Contagious?
10 NUCLEAR WEAPONS
The Key to an Explosion: The Nuclear Chain Reaction
World War II and the Manhattan Project
Critical Mass—The First Atomic Secret
Hiroshima—The Simple Bomb Design
The Hard Part: Purifying Uranium-235
Centrifuges
The Plutonium Bomb—An Implosion Design
The Hydrogen Bomb
Fallout
Big Bombs
Smaller Weapons, More Destruction
11 NUCLEAR MADNESS
The Neutron Bomb and the Weapons Paradox
Nuclear Proliferation
How Worried Should We Be?
Nuclear Weapons
12 NUCLEAR POWER
Can a Nuclear Reactor Explode Like an Atomic Bomb?
Manufacturing Plutonium
Fast Breeder Reactors
The China Syndrome
Three Mile Island—Fuel Meltdown
Chernobyl—A Runaway Chain Reaction
Pebble Bed Reactors
13 NUCLEAR WASTE
My Confession
Plutonium
Depleted Uranium
14 CONTROLLED FUSION
Tokamak
Laser Fusion
Cold Fusion
NUKES: PRESIDENTIAL SUMMARY
IV • SPACE
15 SPACE AND SATELLITES
Satellite Orbits: LEO, GEO, and MEO
GPS: A Set of Medium-Earth-Orbit Satellites
Spy Satellites
Rocket Science
16 GRAVITY APPLICATIONS
g’s
Using Gravity to Search for Ice, Oil, Hidden Craters, and Secret
Tunnels
Space Industry: Manufacturing in a Weightless Environment
Gravity on the Moon and Asteroids
Artificial Gravity
The X Prize
17 HUMANS IN SPACE
18 SPYING WITH INVISIBLE LIGHT
Infrared Radiation
Remote Sensing of the Earth
Military Special Ops
Stinger Missiles
Radar and Stealth
Radar Imaging
X-Ray Backscatter
SPACE: PRESIDENTIAL SUMMARY
V • GLOBAL WARMING
19 A BRIEF HISTORY OF CLIMATE
The Climate of the Past 14,000 Years
20 THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT
Carbon Dioxide
Calculating Greenhouse Warming
Another Danger: Acid Oceans
The Ozone Hole
21 A VERY LIKELY CAUSE
Doing Something About It: Alaska
22 EVIDENCE
Distortion
Exaggeration
Cherry Picking
News Bias
The Hockey Stick
Carbon Dioxide and Ancient Climate
Science and Propaganda
23 NONSOLUTIONS
Hydrogen Hype
Electric Automobiles
Fusion
Solar Power
Recycling
Kyoto
24 THE FRUIT ON THE GROUND
Comfortable Conservation
Compact Fluorescent Lights
Cool Colors: When Brown Paint Is White
Reason for Optimism: Rosenfeld’s Law
The Fizzling Population Bomb
Automobile Efficiency
25 NEW TECHNOLOGIES
Biofuels
Concentrating Solar
Safe Nukes
Clean Coal
Carbon Credits
Renewable Energy
GLOBAL WARMING: PRESIDENTIAL SUMMARY—THE BUCK STOPS HERE
I recommend having a text copy handy since there are a fair few lists, numbers, charts, & illustrations that it helps to review & see. I listened to the audiobook & got the ebook so I could review the charts later on. I had no problems understanding the audio, but it was nice to confirm some of the numbers. His approximations are often very loose. For instance, he equates one horsepower with one kilowatt, but the latter is really about 3/4 hp. Still, that's close enough for this executive briefing.
Most should be familiar with the subjects he covers since he's dealing with the practical physics of common issues that we've been wrangling about for decades. We don't need him to tell us why we love fossil fuels, but he did provide quite a few energy equivalent comparisons in different ways. This is well narrated & a fairly quick read, yet it provides plenty of fuel for thought.
I've seen a lot of presidents & other officials come & go over the years as well as our sciences grow at an astounding rate. I've watched them make some astounding blunders such as the DMCA which made most of the computers on the Internet illegal due to their ignorance when writing the law. Just how much & often have they misunderstood other important items? More important, how can they get it right? There's an astounding amount to know & it's not their field of expertise, but they have to make a decision. As he points out several times, it's not what we know, but what we know that ain't so that's such a problem. On top of that, they often have to play to popular conceptions even when they're completely wrong. To make the job even more thankless, many decisions aren't right or wrong.
Muller provides great examples of some tough decisions with radiation. The popular conception is that any radioactivity causes terrible mutations, cancers, & horrific deaths for centuries - think SF movies. Of course it doesn't, but that doesn't make for a good headline. In easy steps, he explains the types of radioactivity, half-lifes, & which elements & reactions are responsible for what sort of damage as well as for how long. He makes sense of the tables policy makers use & shows just how uncertain they are. He also gives real life examples & poses questions he doesn't attempt to answer, but a president will have to if there is any sort of nuclear incident. For instance, the area around Chernobyl is still off limits due to radioactivity, but there's very little additional risk due to it now. In fact, it's turned into a thriving nature preserve. Should the state still keep folks away from their homes? If so, based on the same tables, we should probably make people abandon Denver, CO for lower elevations. The real-life data doesn't support that decision, though.
I particularly liked the sections on climate change since it is a controversy in which he's participated. For instance, I hadn't realized the possible connection between Alaskan warming & China's growth which actually fits the climate model better than general global warming. He points out the problems with propaganda versus the real science & takes Gore, along with "An Inconvenient Truth" (2006), to task for the inaccuracies. (I believe Zaidan mentions how Gore thinks this is OK in Ingredients: The Strange Chemistry of What We Put in Us and on Us as well.) As we've seen, such embellishments just add fuel to the deniers' fires, lead to fanaticism, & screw up any meaningful dialogue in the middle.
There's a lot of food for thought &, due to its age, some updating that the reader will need to do, but don't let that turn you off. It's amazing how much some of these situations have changed while many others have stayed the same. There's still a lot to be learned & this is a good basis. If he updates this book, I'll be very interested in reading that, too.
Contents
INTRODUCTION
I • TERRORISM
1 NINE-ELEVEN
Inspecting Passengers
Taking Control
Flying and Navigating the Airplane
Impact
2 TERRORIST NUKES
Big Nukes
The Terrorist Dirty Bomb
Rogue Nukes
Uranium Bombs
Plutonium Bombs
3 THE NEXT TERRORIST ATTACK
Future Airplane Gasoline Attacks
Bombs on Airplanes
4 BIOLOGICAL TERRORISM
The Anthrax Attack
TERRORISM: PRESIDENTIAL SUMMARY
II • ENERGY
5 KEY ENERGY SURPRISES
Why We Love Oil Power
Energy Alternatives
The Bottom Line: The Cost of Energy
6 SOLAR POWER
An Anecdote
Basic Facts
Solar Power Plants
Solar Airplanes
7 THE END OF OIL
Oil From Coal: Fischer–Tropsch
The Price of Oil
ENERGY: PRESIDENTIAL SUMMARY
III • NUKES
8 RADIOACTIVITY AND DEATH
Radiation and Cancer
The Linear Effect
The Chernobyl Nuclear Reactor Disaster
The Linear Hypothesis
9 RADIOACTIVE DECAY
Dangers of Short Versus Long Half-Lives
Environmental Radioactivity
Horrific Mutations
X-Rays and Microwaves
Is Radioactivity Contagious?
10 NUCLEAR WEAPONS
The Key to an Explosion: The Nuclear Chain Reaction
World War II and the Manhattan Project
Critical Mass—The First Atomic Secret
Hiroshima—The Simple Bomb Design
The Hard Part: Purifying Uranium-235
Centrifuges
The Plutonium Bomb—An Implosion Design
The Hydrogen Bomb
Fallout
Big Bombs
Smaller Weapons, More Destruction
11 NUCLEAR MADNESS
The Neutron Bomb and the Weapons Paradox
Nuclear Proliferation
How Worried Should We Be?
Nuclear Weapons
12 NUCLEAR POWER
Can a Nuclear Reactor Explode Like an Atomic Bomb?
Manufacturing Plutonium
Fast Breeder Reactors
The China Syndrome
Three Mile Island—Fuel Meltdown
Chernobyl—A Runaway Chain Reaction
Pebble Bed Reactors
13 NUCLEAR WASTE
My Confession
Plutonium
Depleted Uranium
14 CONTROLLED FUSION
Tokamak
Laser Fusion
Cold Fusion
NUKES: PRESIDENTIAL SUMMARY
IV • SPACE
15 SPACE AND SATELLITES
Satellite Orbits: LEO, GEO, and MEO
GPS: A Set of Medium-Earth-Orbit Satellites
Spy Satellites
Rocket Science
16 GRAVITY APPLICATIONS
g’s
Using Gravity to Search for Ice, Oil, Hidden Craters, and Secret
Tunnels
Space Industry: Manufacturing in a Weightless Environment
Gravity on the Moon and Asteroids
Artificial Gravity
The X Prize
17 HUMANS IN SPACE
18 SPYING WITH INVISIBLE LIGHT
Infrared Radiation
Remote Sensing of the Earth
Military Special Ops
Stinger Missiles
Radar and Stealth
Radar Imaging
X-Ray Backscatter
SPACE: PRESIDENTIAL SUMMARY
V • GLOBAL WARMING
19 A BRIEF HISTORY OF CLIMATE
The Climate of the Past 14,000 Years
20 THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT
Carbon Dioxide
Calculating Greenhouse Warming
Another Danger: Acid Oceans
The Ozone Hole
21 A VERY LIKELY CAUSE
Doing Something About It: Alaska
22 EVIDENCE
Distortion
Exaggeration
Cherry Picking
News Bias
The Hockey Stick
Carbon Dioxide and Ancient Climate
Science and Propaganda
23 NONSOLUTIONS
Hydrogen Hype
Electric Automobiles
Fusion
Solar Power
Recycling
Kyoto
24 THE FRUIT ON THE GROUND
Comfortable Conservation
Compact Fluorescent Lights
Cool Colors: When Brown Paint Is White
Reason for Optimism: Rosenfeld’s Law
The Fizzling Population Bomb
Automobile Efficiency
25 NEW TECHNOLOGIES
Biofuels
Concentrating Solar
Safe Nukes
Clean Coal
Carbon Credits
Renewable Energy
GLOBAL WARMING: PRESIDENTIAL SUMMARY—THE BUCK STOPS HERE
March 8, 2016
The Physics for Future Presidents
It is a fascinating book using science to explain and sometimes solve today’s major problems. Estimating future types of terrorist attacks can be calculated by knowing how destructive each potential weapon is. The surprising answer is that gasoline not “smart” nuclear bombs are their weapon of choice.
Do you want to know how to bring down oil prices? The answer is to make oil from coal. Coal is our countries most abundant natural resource. The reason why we do not do it is because it is costly to build a coal to oil plant. And when OPEC finds out they immediately drop the price of oil and as a result we switch back to OPEC oil immediately. Is solar power the solution? No. Is nuclear power a good option? Yes. The reasons are presented by the author.
Nuclear power and nuclear weapons are explained in detail. Satellites and Rocket Science also have detailed explanations.
Global warming is presented in an interesting fashion. He alludes to his belief in it in the early chapters. But when we get to his section “Global Warming” he gives us a chapter called “Evidence” where he dismisses a host of global warming proving science as distortion and exaggeration. He goes as far as stating that Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” is “propaganda.” He does however state that he believes that global warming is happening and that human activity is likely the cause. But points out that America produce no more CO2 than most of Europe. The real CO2 culprits are India and China.
Conservation seems to be his global warming solution. For example he says that there are cool colors that can be used for roof paint that would cool the house below. He also explains why ethanol will not solve the oil crises but butanol made from miscanthus could solve it.
For anyone interested in the major issues challenging us today this book is a must read.
It is a fascinating book using science to explain and sometimes solve today’s major problems. Estimating future types of terrorist attacks can be calculated by knowing how destructive each potential weapon is. The surprising answer is that gasoline not “smart” nuclear bombs are their weapon of choice.
Do you want to know how to bring down oil prices? The answer is to make oil from coal. Coal is our countries most abundant natural resource. The reason why we do not do it is because it is costly to build a coal to oil plant. And when OPEC finds out they immediately drop the price of oil and as a result we switch back to OPEC oil immediately. Is solar power the solution? No. Is nuclear power a good option? Yes. The reasons are presented by the author.
Nuclear power and nuclear weapons are explained in detail. Satellites and Rocket Science also have detailed explanations.
Global warming is presented in an interesting fashion. He alludes to his belief in it in the early chapters. But when we get to his section “Global Warming” he gives us a chapter called “Evidence” where he dismisses a host of global warming proving science as distortion and exaggeration. He goes as far as stating that Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” is “propaganda.” He does however state that he believes that global warming is happening and that human activity is likely the cause. But points out that America produce no more CO2 than most of Europe. The real CO2 culprits are India and China.
Conservation seems to be his global warming solution. For example he says that there are cool colors that can be used for roof paint that would cool the house below. He also explains why ethanol will not solve the oil crises but butanol made from miscanthus could solve it.
For anyone interested in the major issues challenging us today this book is a must read.
January 13, 2009
This book is a must-read for anyone interested in the current issues of global warming, energy or terrorism. It outlines the reality of the science and its impact on these issues in the public realm. I found it very informative and helpful to be able to follow these issues and determine what my stand is and what course I feel our country ought to take. It also helps to not be easily misled by varying reports.
July 25, 2008
This book is hands-down the most important book anyone can read this year. If I had the money, I would buy a copy for every person I know: it's that good. The book discusses the science behind topics that would be critical to any presidency: terrorism, the fuel situation, nuclear bombs and other related topics, global warming, alternative energy... and more.
What I really like about the book is that it's politics-free. Liberals and conservatives alike stand to learn a lot about themselves and the arguments they make by reading this book. And it's based entirely on science. There's no spin, no hype, no agenda... the book is so refreshing to read after all those talking head books put out by both the left and the right.
Anyone who will be voting this November needs to do themselves a favor and read this book from start to finish.
What I really like about the book is that it's politics-free. Liberals and conservatives alike stand to learn a lot about themselves and the arguments they make by reading this book. And it's based entirely on science. There's no spin, no hype, no agenda... the book is so refreshing to read after all those talking head books put out by both the left and the right.
Anyone who will be voting this November needs to do themselves a favor and read this book from start to finish.
April 29, 2015
This book explained the physics behind important issues that the President of the United States might have to deal with. Issues like bombs, nuclear energy, spy satellites, and climate change are discussed.
I liked this book because it explained physics in a way I could understand. Muller did a good job of breaking the science down into understandable examples and simpler words so that I didn't get lost in a bunch of technical jargon.
It's also amusing because he writes the book as if he is talking to the future president. You, the reader, are a future President of the U.S.A. Even if you know that you will never be in the White House, it's fun to imagine while you are reading.
I liked this book because it explained physics in a way I could understand. Muller did a good job of breaking the science down into understandable examples and simpler words so that I didn't get lost in a bunch of technical jargon.
It's also amusing because he writes the book as if he is talking to the future president. You, the reader, are a future President of the U.S.A. Even if you know that you will never be in the White House, it's fun to imagine while you are reading.
August 21, 2008
Science is not everybody's (including our leader's) favorite topic. Trying to keep it simple, real and factual is not always the easiest task. The author takes current issues from climate change to terrorism and gives us a way to cut through the media hum to understand what is going on and to come to rational decisions. Definitely worth browsing even if you are not interested in all the topics.
January 15, 2024
Informative, but the rampant oversimplifications were oftentimes irritating.
March 30, 2009
What didn't I learn from this book!?
I'd go ahead and list everything that I did but to do so would be to simply paraphrase the wonderfully concise and informative Executive Summaries a the end of each chapter!
What a fantastic idea of Muller's that a future President must be aware of a number of basic, scientific principles that he can then use to help shape and guide his agenda. While he (admitedly so) gets a little personal with regards to the use of nuclear power in the States, for the most part, Muller stays politically neutral as he presents 'the facts' about the physics behind the most pressing problems that a future president is likely to face.
From terrorirsm to nukes, global warming to space, all scientifically relevant topics are covered. To top it off, Muller declares that the majority of equations and formulas used to arrive at the conclusions he makes are rather irrelevant for a future president (as that is why he hires staffers). Thus, the majority of the book presents the conceptual, theoretical and demonstrable physics behind the these pressing political, and of course, scientific, issues.
A fun read for anyone with an interest in science, politics or simply current events as the conclusions drawn by Muller are likely those that will guide public policy in the very near future. As for future presidents, well, it's obviously a must read! If only a specialist in every field could do this. Imagine where we'd be right now if someone had written Economics for Future Presidents. . .think about it!
I'd go ahead and list everything that I did but to do so would be to simply paraphrase the wonderfully concise and informative Executive Summaries a the end of each chapter!
What a fantastic idea of Muller's that a future President must be aware of a number of basic, scientific principles that he can then use to help shape and guide his agenda. While he (admitedly so) gets a little personal with regards to the use of nuclear power in the States, for the most part, Muller stays politically neutral as he presents 'the facts' about the physics behind the most pressing problems that a future president is likely to face.
From terrorirsm to nukes, global warming to space, all scientifically relevant topics are covered. To top it off, Muller declares that the majority of equations and formulas used to arrive at the conclusions he makes are rather irrelevant for a future president (as that is why he hires staffers). Thus, the majority of the book presents the conceptual, theoretical and demonstrable physics behind the these pressing political, and of course, scientific, issues.
A fun read for anyone with an interest in science, politics or simply current events as the conclusions drawn by Muller are likely those that will guide public policy in the very near future. As for future presidents, well, it's obviously a must read! If only a specialist in every field could do this. Imagine where we'd be right now if someone had written Economics for Future Presidents. . .think about it!
June 22, 2015
Hmmm...look at the title. Maybe the word "Future" should be changed to include "and Current". I'm just say'n.
Everything that is in the news today from nuclear bombs, to alternative energy sources, to global warming is succinctly covered in layman's language. I used my Kindle to mark some text that I thought was interesting and wanted to share. First regarding nuclear weapons, "small amounts of radioactivity have such small consequences that they could properly be ignored. Radiological weapons are not the threat that many seem to fear."
Second regarding global warming, "New Orleans was not struck by a category 4 or 5 storm (the number of these category storms hitting the US have not increased, like the global warming folks would have you believe), and any category 3 storm that hit the city in the past 50 years could equally well have destroyed the city."
The book is filled with examples such as this that run counter-intuitive to what the public has been led to believe. It will absolutely open your eyes and you will view news stories in a new light.
Finally, the author doesn't leave you hanging…he puts up his ideas to implement if he were president with conservation of resources leading the way.
Being president is not easy but having an understanding of the physics regarding some of the tough issues you'd face could make your job that much easier.
Everything that is in the news today from nuclear bombs, to alternative energy sources, to global warming is succinctly covered in layman's language. I used my Kindle to mark some text that I thought was interesting and wanted to share. First regarding nuclear weapons, "small amounts of radioactivity have such small consequences that they could properly be ignored. Radiological weapons are not the threat that many seem to fear."
Second regarding global warming, "New Orleans was not struck by a category 4 or 5 storm (the number of these category storms hitting the US have not increased, like the global warming folks would have you believe), and any category 3 storm that hit the city in the past 50 years could equally well have destroyed the city."
The book is filled with examples such as this that run counter-intuitive to what the public has been led to believe. It will absolutely open your eyes and you will view news stories in a new light.
Finally, the author doesn't leave you hanging…he puts up his ideas to implement if he were president with conservation of resources leading the way.
Being president is not easy but having an understanding of the physics regarding some of the tough issues you'd face could make your job that much easier.
May 31, 2010
Basic, which is just what I was after. A couple of things are worth noting. He takes a very even-handed approach to global warming. He rightly believes the hysteria on any matter causes a strong overreaction that makes discussing the real merits of the issue very challenging. Another thing that's not really an explicit emphasis of the book that I appreciate is his willingness to differentiate his role as physicist and as citizen. He is very clear and open about when he steps out of physicist role to make a policy recommendation. I think we'd avoid some problems if everyone did not feel compelled to be an expert on everything. Think, for example, of all the nonesense that religious clergy feel obligated to speak about even though they have had no training whatsoever on these areas--biology; economics; geology, etc. Same holds true with politicians. This is not a call to defer mindlessly to experts. It's a call for authority to be respected within its circumscribed roles. But now I risk departing entirely from the book.
My real wish for the book, which is stupid, is that it were a "science" for future presidents book. a series, followed next by, say, a biologist or chemist, would be very interesting.
My real wish for the book, which is stupid, is that it were a "science" for future presidents book. a series, followed next by, say, a biologist or chemist, would be very interesting.
May 9, 2011
Pretty much everyone should read this, regardless of the presence or absence of designs on the highest office in the land. If you, you know, read the news or vote or anything like that, this book is for you. Not only is it incredibly helpful in contextualizing some of the science-related policy debates currently being waged, it's also just fascinating stuff (for example, the reason plutonium bombs are round and uranium bombs are cylindrical, or the fact that a square yard of sunlight delivers about a horsepower when it hits the ground). And all the complicated math is hidden in the end notes, so you don't even have to pay attention to that if it's not your bag.
By the way, I hereby state, and mean all that I say, that I never have been and never will be a candidate for President; that if nominated by either party, I should peremptorily decline; and even if unanimously elected I should decline to serve.
By the way, I hereby state, and mean all that I say, that I never have been and never will be a candidate for President; that if nominated by either party, I should peremptorily decline; and even if unanimously elected I should decline to serve.
February 5, 2010
I feel by this book, in the area of natural law, the way I do about "Rich Dad,.." for finance. It discusses the physics that I believe EVERYONE should understand in today's world. It's a non-mathematical presentation of the physics that's applicable to our (the world's) current situation. One of the problems I have with people, in general, in our society (and the world for that matter) is that we're ruled by our prejudices (emotions) rather than our reason. I sincerely do NOT believe that God screwed up when he created the universe. Many people do! If our emotions are inconsistent with natural law (physics) then we only have three choices: we got the physics wrong, God screwed up, or our beliefs are wrong. I don't know about you, but the physics is pretty solid; I'm much more willing to believe that I screwed up than God.
September 12, 2008
This is an absolute must read, or must listen to. You can get his physics for non scientists podcast also (Dr. Muller teaches at Cal-Berkeley). For those who don't love physics or math, a couple of notes, there are about 2 equations in the whole book (he puts the rest in the appendix) and it is a fun and enjoyable read. It is also the most even handed discussion of the science behind terrorism, energy (including a long section about nuclear), and space exploration that I have read. The best section is on global warming. It changed the way I viewed things by not minimizing the uncertainties, but actually discussing viable solutions that won't cripple us but still prepare us for the scarier scenarios. I really can't recommend this enough.
July 25, 2016
Read this if you want to understand more about the science you see on the news. From an actual scientist rather than a journalist. Written without spin, and using words easily understood by the lay person.
December 2, 2023
I’ve referenced this book for quite some time, but finally finished reading it cover to cover. The concept of this book is incredibly important. Regardless of what degree we have, understanding science is critical in almost every field. Muller attempted to make a thorough crash course in all the scientific areas that impact government (climate change, energy, oil, nuclear weapons, space, etc). While this book is out dated (published in 2008), it does a great job of explaining basic science and why it matters. I also appreciate how Muller doesn’t shy away from explaining the military applications and the importance of understanding military applications of science as someone working in the government.
This book should be updated and expanded because the concept is too important to not address in a post-COVID era. Maybe a new edition could have information about disease control, updated information about the space industry, and information about AI or the cyber realm more generally.
This book should be updated and expanded because the concept is too important to not address in a post-COVID era. Maybe a new edition could have information about disease control, updated information about the space industry, and information about AI or the cyber realm more generally.
March 18, 2024
this book changed my life idk what to do anymore. where do i go from here seriously.
January 3, 2025
First half is good, second half less memorable
August 29, 2021
4.5. While this is pretty technical in places, it should be required reading for all citizens to help understand important issues like energy use and climate change. The one thing against this is that it is dated as it was published in 2008 and there have been significant improvements in solar energy and other technologies.
November 17, 2013
La física, las cifras y la ciencia precisan mucho las cosas. Lo que dice el Libro: "Desaprender" todo aquello que damos por cierto y no lo es. El 9 de octubre de 2006, Corea del Norte probó su primera bomba atómica. Un arma robada sigue siendo el mayor peligro. Los atentados biológicos probablemente serán más accesibles y más fáciles de cometer que los nucleares. La riqueza y el consumo energético parecen ser equivalentes. Los chinos están construyendo centrales eléctricas a un ritmo de una nueva central gigante -de un gigavatio- por semana. Cuanto más largo sea el cañón más energía se transfiere a la bala. En un día, un hogar consume 24 kilovatios hora de energía. En Estados Unidos el costo medio de un kilovatio hora es de 10 centavos. La potencia eléctrica total de Estado Unidos ronda los 450 gigavatios (1 gigavatio=mil millones de vatios). Un vatio hora equivale a una caloría. Resulta curioso que la energía dependa tanto de su fuente. Nuestros ojos no verán los automóviles solares. Las reservas de crudo extraíbles totalizan en la actualidad otros 5.000 millones de barriles. El carbón puede convertirse en gasolina. Los humanos tenemos el 20% de probabilidades de morir de cáncer. La fuga radioactiva de Chernobíl provocó 4.000 muertes en todo el mundo. La radioactividad no se contagia. Bomba de uranio, difícil de obtener material (uranio 235), fácil de fabricar. Bomba de plutonio, fácil obtener material, difícil de fabricar, la bomba de Nagasaki fue de plutonio. Bomba de hidrógeno, puede liberar 1.000 veces más energía que la de uranio y plutonio, más difíciles de fabricar de todas. La bomba de Hiroshima utilizó 40 kilos de uranio, la mayor parte del uranio no explotó, la eficiencia de la bomba de Hiroshima fue apenas del 2%. La mayor parte del arsenal nuclear estadounidense consiste en bombas de hidrógeno. En 2007, Usa tenía 5.866 cabezas nucleares y Rusia dijo tener 4.162. Países con armas atómicas: USA, Reino Unido, Rusia, Francia, China, India, Pakistán y Corea del Norte, posiblemente Israel y se teme que Irán. Hace 10.000 años el hombre descubrió la agricultura, hace 5.000 la escritura. 8 km por segundo velocidad necesaria para mantenerse en órbita terrestre. Las 7 maravillas de la antigüedad eran arquitectónicas. Para salir al espacio se requiere una velocidad de 4.350 km por hora. Velocidad orbital de la tierra 30 Km por segundo. Mach 18 (18 veces velocidad del sonido) es lo mismo que 8 km por segundo. La mitad del dióxido de carbono que emiten los combustibles fósiles termina en el mar, lo que aumenta la acidez de los océanos. Dos tercios de la masa terrestre se encuentra al norte del ecuador. Ciudades, islas de calor. La última glaciación concluyó hace 12.000 años, hemos gozado de 12 milenios relativamente cálidos. Efecto invernadero, a la energía le resulta más fácil entrar que salir. La proporción de dióxido de carbono en la atmósfera es de380 partes por millón. Antes o después nos quedaremos sin bosques. Nuestra mayor laguna en materia de cálculos climáticos se debe a lo poco que sabemos sobre cómo se forman las masas nubosas. El hidrógeno no es una forma de energía; tan sólo es un medio de transportar energía. Una sola central eléctrica de un gigavatio produce una tonelada de CO2 cada tres segundos. Los seres humanos somos los causantes de un aumento del 36% de la concentración atmosférica del CO2. Se desperdicia una cantidad enorme de energía. El ahorro energético es la mejor inversión.
November 8, 2009
After reading this book and getting onto Goodreads to plop it onto my read shelf, I noticed the 3 star rating I had previously given to "Black Hole War". I was prepared to give this book 2 stars, but after seeing my 3 star rating for BHW, a book that is way better, I had to knock this down to 1.
I read the whole thing, but it wasn't easy. Not because the physics was too thick - Muller begins the book by stating quite clearly that as President you are probably to stupid or preoccupied to grok why E=mc squared, and so he's leaving out all equations from the text. Reading that line in the opening chapter was incredibly depressing. Have we come to expect so little from our elected officials that we have to dumb things down to the Malibu Stacy level of "Math is hard!"?
It took me a while to realize that the book was actually written prior to the 2008 presidential election. This is really a physics (actually an earth science/general science text book) for sixth graders. Given that perspective I think it's easy to understand that the title of this book should really be - Physics for The Last President: Who was an Idiot and Needed Simple Things Explained Slowly and Repetitively.
Add to this premise the very narrow definition of "the Headlines" - Nukes, Energy, Global Warming, Terrorism - and you get a good idea gone wrong. The Global Warming section is nothing but a rebuttal of everything in An Inconvenient Truth that just ends up sounding like sour grapes. Like Muller is kicking himself for not playing the Al Gore role in that movie. The Energy section could have added in another couple of pages and then we wouldn't need the exhaustive, scene by scene recreation of Gores movie.
There's other things that bother me about the book. The assertion that Yucca Mountain is too small to accept all of our nuclear waste early on in the book, only to counter that later on by saying if we just opened Yucca we'd all be living in a nuclear utopia, is just one example.
If you are so afraid or uninterested in science that you need things dumbed down this much, then you probably aren't going to pick up a book like this in the first place. So why was it written and published? I can only assume it was a hurried attempt to cash in on the '08 race.
I read the whole thing, but it wasn't easy. Not because the physics was too thick - Muller begins the book by stating quite clearly that as President you are probably to stupid or preoccupied to grok why E=mc squared, and so he's leaving out all equations from the text. Reading that line in the opening chapter was incredibly depressing. Have we come to expect so little from our elected officials that we have to dumb things down to the Malibu Stacy level of "Math is hard!"?
It took me a while to realize that the book was actually written prior to the 2008 presidential election. This is really a physics (actually an earth science/general science text book) for sixth graders. Given that perspective I think it's easy to understand that the title of this book should really be - Physics for The Last President: Who was an Idiot and Needed Simple Things Explained Slowly and Repetitively.
Add to this premise the very narrow definition of "the Headlines" - Nukes, Energy, Global Warming, Terrorism - and you get a good idea gone wrong. The Global Warming section is nothing but a rebuttal of everything in An Inconvenient Truth that just ends up sounding like sour grapes. Like Muller is kicking himself for not playing the Al Gore role in that movie. The Energy section could have added in another couple of pages and then we wouldn't need the exhaustive, scene by scene recreation of Gores movie.
There's other things that bother me about the book. The assertion that Yucca Mountain is too small to accept all of our nuclear waste early on in the book, only to counter that later on by saying if we just opened Yucca we'd all be living in a nuclear utopia, is just one example.
If you are so afraid or uninterested in science that you need things dumbed down this much, then you probably aren't going to pick up a book like this in the first place. So why was it written and published? I can only assume it was a hurried attempt to cash in on the '08 race.
June 13, 2009
What information does a president of the United States really need to know to make informed decisions about some of the most important issues we are facing as a nation and as a global community? Richard Muller believes that some of this knowledge should be an understanding of the basic principles of physics.
I loved the format of this book. Muller writes this book as though the reader was the next president of the United States. The book applies basic physics to a better understanding of five key areas: terrorism, energy, nukes, space, and global warming. I found this book to be truly enlightening. Almost daily I am bombarded by news stories featuring the challenges we are facing in at least one of these areas. Muller presents the facts, in a fair and balanced manner (honestly, I really can't tell which political party he favors) , allowing the reader to draw their own conclusions.
For example, Muller explores why the greatest threats we face from terrorists are not "dirty bombs" or stolen nuclear weapons, and why solar powered cars are not really feasible, at least with our current technology. Personally, I was especially intrigued by the section on global warming, and I felt that this section alone would have justified the purchase price of the book. In each section he also presents a brief historical perspective with an emphasis on the physics involved in each situation. I was totally fascinated by his exploration of the facts surrounding the anthrax attacks which followed the 911 attacks.
Muller's writing style is pleasantly conversational, almost as though you were having a discussion with your own personal science advisor. He also strikes the right balance between simplifying the physics to the level of easy understanding without insulting the intelligence of the reader. I enjoyed this book so much that I lent the copy I borrowed from our local library to my husband, who promptly purchased a copy midway through reading the book. This was a great read, and one that I wouldn't hesitate to recommend, even to our current president.
I loved the format of this book. Muller writes this book as though the reader was the next president of the United States. The book applies basic physics to a better understanding of five key areas: terrorism, energy, nukes, space, and global warming. I found this book to be truly enlightening. Almost daily I am bombarded by news stories featuring the challenges we are facing in at least one of these areas. Muller presents the facts, in a fair and balanced manner (honestly, I really can't tell which political party he favors) , allowing the reader to draw their own conclusions.
For example, Muller explores why the greatest threats we face from terrorists are not "dirty bombs" or stolen nuclear weapons, and why solar powered cars are not really feasible, at least with our current technology. Personally, I was especially intrigued by the section on global warming, and I felt that this section alone would have justified the purchase price of the book. In each section he also presents a brief historical perspective with an emphasis on the physics involved in each situation. I was totally fascinated by his exploration of the facts surrounding the anthrax attacks which followed the 911 attacks.
Muller's writing style is pleasantly conversational, almost as though you were having a discussion with your own personal science advisor. He also strikes the right balance between simplifying the physics to the level of easy understanding without insulting the intelligence of the reader. I enjoyed this book so much that I lent the copy I borrowed from our local library to my husband, who promptly purchased a copy midway through reading the book. This was a great read, and one that I wouldn't hesitate to recommend, even to our current president.
June 8, 2010
After reading this book, you'll be tempted to correct people you overhear, comment on a host of news articles with corrections, and go on a Facebook comment rampage on the Walls of less informed friends. Don't say I didn't warn you.
This book is so necessary right now, with cherry-picked data and outright propaganda trumping fact-based debate. Muller tells you "everything you know that just ain't so," which you might not even know until reading this book. To name just a few highlights, he explains the physics behind why and how the Twin Towers melted; why we should not be terribly afraid of dirty bombs (you'd likely get more natural, ground-based radiation just from living in Colorado than you would in an urban area if a dirty bomb goes off); all the various types of nuclear energy and yes, why some are in fact quite clean and safe; why the half-lives of nuclear materials make Yucca Mountain storage a very safe idea; why solar energy is so challenging to channel; why global warming is most certainly real (but not perfectly understood, which does not mean it's not real); and why energy conservation, in terms of getting more for the same energy, is the way we need to go (think of the improvements in the efficiency of home appliances now vs. in the 1970s).
Those who are, and are determined to remain conspiracy theorists, outright opposed to nuclear energy no matter what, and fans of the idea that "natural" radiation is somehow "different" or "better for you" than "other" radiation, and so on may not like this book... but probably need it more than anyone.
This book is so necessary right now, with cherry-picked data and outright propaganda trumping fact-based debate. Muller tells you "everything you know that just ain't so," which you might not even know until reading this book. To name just a few highlights, he explains the physics behind why and how the Twin Towers melted; why we should not be terribly afraid of dirty bombs (you'd likely get more natural, ground-based radiation just from living in Colorado than you would in an urban area if a dirty bomb goes off); all the various types of nuclear energy and yes, why some are in fact quite clean and safe; why the half-lives of nuclear materials make Yucca Mountain storage a very safe idea; why solar energy is so challenging to channel; why global warming is most certainly real (but not perfectly understood, which does not mean it's not real); and why energy conservation, in terms of getting more for the same energy, is the way we need to go (think of the improvements in the efficiency of home appliances now vs. in the 1970s).
Those who are, and are determined to remain conspiracy theorists, outright opposed to nuclear energy no matter what, and fans of the idea that "natural" radiation is somehow "different" or "better for you" than "other" radiation, and so on may not like this book... but probably need it more than anyone.
March 31, 2012
This was great, it was not so much over my head. It was a practical book, it explained about the difference in dirty bombs and why so much gasoline was so powerful, liquid gasoline is equal to TONS of TNT, it explained is simple scientific terms how the molecules vibrate creating more energy causing the other molecules to vibrate and gasoline is just about the most powerful explosive around because it ignites in the air- or something like that. He said if the president got a call about a dirty bomb, unless it was in a stadium full of don't evacuate a city because the panic would cause more catastrophe than the bomb. You have to know what kind it is too. It talked about the facts of global warming and the cherry picking both sides do to make their "agenda" the valid one. This was a great book just laden with fact and misinformation ladled out to people, possible viable alternatives to fuel use with realistic consequences. The true numbers after Chernobyl and what they meant as a whole after the leak. This was a simple non-biased, if you were president you need to know this so don't get bamboozled. We needed it so we wouldn't have been bamboozled, this "felt" like one of the most honest books I've listened to while not boring me to death. It lays out arguments both side of the political spectrum have used while not using numbers that are vital to result. Less scientifically over my head, and way less preachy. This book is just about what is, without excessive embellishment, and what that means in the way of fuel use decisions for the future. etc.
March 2, 2009
Physics for Future Presidents was originally a class taught by the author at UC Berkeley. Students voted it the best class on campus. Then it became a series of podcasts, and now it's this book, which is extremely readable, very interesting, and ought to be required reading for everyone in the US, future presidents included.
The book covers the physics of subjects like terrorism, nuclear weapons, nuclear energy, energy policy, and global warming. The genius of this approach is that it cuts through all the political rhetoric on both sides: laws of physics are laws of physics and they aren't budging for anyone, and they make a big difference in what can and should be done on all these issues.
A recurring theme in the book is that the real problem isn't complete ignorance on a subject - it's all the things "well-informed" people think they know that turn out not to be true. It turns out I had a lot of these - like the "the real danger is a dirty bomb" (actually, the radiation in a dirty bomb, which uses conventional explosives to spread radioactive trash over a large area, is only a danger to the terrorists using it, since they're the ones in contact with it *before* it explodes, while the radiation is still concentrated enough to hurt somebody).
This is a great popular science book in which the science is actually rigorous, and it can apply to everybody's life, whether you're listening to the news or trying to figure out the best way to lower your fuel bills.
The book covers the physics of subjects like terrorism, nuclear weapons, nuclear energy, energy policy, and global warming. The genius of this approach is that it cuts through all the political rhetoric on both sides: laws of physics are laws of physics and they aren't budging for anyone, and they make a big difference in what can and should be done on all these issues.
A recurring theme in the book is that the real problem isn't complete ignorance on a subject - it's all the things "well-informed" people think they know that turn out not to be true. It turns out I had a lot of these - like the "the real danger is a dirty bomb" (actually, the radiation in a dirty bomb, which uses conventional explosives to spread radioactive trash over a large area, is only a danger to the terrorists using it, since they're the ones in contact with it *before* it explodes, while the radiation is still concentrated enough to hurt somebody).
This is a great popular science book in which the science is actually rigorous, and it can apply to everybody's life, whether you're listening to the news or trying to figure out the best way to lower your fuel bills.
November 11, 2019
Dr. Richard Muller taught this popular class at UC Berkley. You learn all the principles of physics by understanding what the President should know - power of a dirty bomb, how heat seeking missiles work, the power of solar panels, etc. This library-book version doesn't have the homework that the textbook version has. But the core theory is here. Extremely practical!
Table of Contents:
Chapter 1 – Energy and Power, and the physics of explosions.
Chapter 2. Atoms and Heat.
Chapter 3. Gravity and force.
Chapter 4. Nuclei and radioactivity.
Chapter 5. Chain reactions, nuclear reactors, and atomic
Chapter 6. Electricity and magnetism.
Chapter 7. Waves
Chapter 8. Light
Chapter 9. Invisible light.
Chapter 10. Quantum physics.
Chapter 11. Relativity
Chapter 12. The UniversePuzzles. How can the Universe expand? What came before the beginning? The Solar System. Companion star? Planets around other stars. The Milky Way. Galaxies. Dark matter. WIMPs and MACHOs. Extraterrestrial life and Drake's equation. SETI. Looking back in time. Expansion of the Universe. Hubble's Law. The beginning. Dark energy. The Big Bang. The 3K cosmic microwave radiation – created in the Big Bang. Gravity and Relativity. Twins in gravity. Black holes, again. Finite Universe? Before the Big Bang. A Theory of Everything. The Creation (a poem)
Table of Contents:
Chapter 1 – Energy and Power, and the physics of explosions.
Chapter 2. Atoms and Heat.
Chapter 3. Gravity and force.
Chapter 4. Nuclei and radioactivity.
Chapter 5. Chain reactions, nuclear reactors, and atomic
Chapter 6. Electricity and magnetism.
Chapter 7. Waves
Chapter 8. Light
Chapter 9. Invisible light.
Chapter 10. Quantum physics.
Chapter 11. Relativity
Chapter 12. The UniversePuzzles. How can the Universe expand? What came before the beginning? The Solar System. Companion star? Planets around other stars. The Milky Way. Galaxies. Dark matter. WIMPs and MACHOs. Extraterrestrial life and Drake's equation. SETI. Looking back in time. Expansion of the Universe. Hubble's Law. The beginning. Dark energy. The Big Bang. The 3K cosmic microwave radiation – created in the Big Bang. Gravity and Relativity. Twins in gravity. Black holes, again. Finite Universe? Before the Big Bang. A Theory of Everything. The Creation (a poem)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 312 reviews