What do you think?
Rate this book
The Best American Science And Nature Writing 2020: A Gripping Anthology of Essays―Selected by Renowned Physicist Michio Kaku
A collection of the best science and nature writing published in North America in 2019, guest edited by New York Times best-selling author and ground-breaking physicist Dr. Michio Kaku.
Dr. Michio Kaku, one of the most influential living scientists and a New York Times best-selling author, selects the year’s top science and nature writing from writers who balance research with humanity and, in the process, uncover riveting stories of discovery across the disciplines.
Dr. Michio Kaku, one of the most influential living scientists and a New York Times best-selling author, selects the year’s top science and nature writing from writers who balance research with humanity and, in the process, uncover riveting stories of discovery across the disciplines.
384 pages, Paperback
First published November 3, 2020
361 people are currently reading
793 people want to read
About the author
Michio Kaku
53 books6,923 followers(Arabic: ميشيو كاكو
Russian: Митио Каку
Chinese: 加來道雄)
Dr. Michio Kaku is an American theoretical physicist at the City College of New York , best-selling author, a futurist, and a communicator and popularizer of science. He has written several books about physics and related topics of science.
He has written two New York Times Best Sellers, Physics of the Impossible (2008) and Physics of the Future (2011).
Dr. Michio is the co-founder of string field theory (a branch of string theory), and continues Einstein’s search to unite the four fundamental forces of nature into one unified theory.
Kaku was a Visitor and Member (1973 and 1990) at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, and New York University. He currently holds the Henry Semat Chair and Professorship in theoretical physics at the City College of New York.
Russian: Митио Каку
Chinese: 加來道雄)
Dr. Michio Kaku is an American theoretical physicist at the City College of New York , best-selling author, a futurist, and a communicator and popularizer of science. He has written several books about physics and related topics of science.
He has written two New York Times Best Sellers, Physics of the Impossible (2008) and Physics of the Future (2011).
Dr. Michio is the co-founder of string field theory (a branch of string theory), and continues Einstein’s search to unite the four fundamental forces of nature into one unified theory.
Kaku was a Visitor and Member (1973 and 1990) at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, and New York University. He currently holds the Henry Semat Chair and Professorship in theoretical physics at the City College of New York.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews
January 22, 2021
I found the book to be a generally fine anthology, and a great way to catch up with some recent findings - such as the remarkable Tanis (fossil site). The anthology format makes the book easy to read, because if it ever starts to drag a bit, soon enough you're on to the next piece.
I found the usual number of things to disagree with here and there, but one passage in particular stands out for its breathtaking naivety and bizarre understatement (from Sarah Kaplan's piece, Ghosts of the Future; italics mine):
"We already know what must be done to avert the worst effects of warming: starting next year, global greenhouse gas emissions must fall by 7.6 percent annually, reaching zero by the middle of the century. And although the scale of such action would be unprecedented, we already know how to achieve it: put a price on carbon, replace fossil fuels with renewable energy sources, restore nature landscapes that act as carbon sinks, equip ordinary people with the tools to adapt to a transformed world. No new technologies need to be invented to meet the terms of the Paris climate agreement. All we are waiting for is the will to change."
Books can be (and have been) written about everything she's glossing over. "Will" is hard enough to come by (ask any obese person, drug addict, or criminal who is trying to reprogram destructive urges), but the problem is much worse than a mere lack of will. People who deny climate change don't lack for "will" - they are highly dedicated to destroying civilization, while pretending to be doing something else (such as promoting their conservative values). Rather, the problem is that vast numbers of people believe in falsehoods, and reject the scientific method as a method for determining truth.
Has Sarah Kaplan been to a Trump rally? Watched Fox News? Dialogued with a climate change denier? Met anyone who manages to live without fossil fuels given "no new technologies"?
Anyone who has made a serious go of cutting their carbon footprint as far as possible, using "no new technologies" knows it's not quite as simple as the little word "will" might imply. Recall that "will" (or willpower) is precisely the ingredient in short supply in a range of stubborn behavioral and belief problems, such as substance addiction, obesity, and crime. In addition, human culture has always been pervaded by errors in thinking, such as those that lead to religion, racism, magical thinking, and more recently science denial.
Quitting fossil fuels is arguably harder than quitting tobacco, harder than losing weight and keeping it off, and harder than overcoming a childhood of religious brainwashing - because we all know people who have mustered the will to do those difficult things. But who do you know who has quit burning fossil fuels, directly and indirectly? It's hard enough for the individual - for governments it's even harder, as no government on the planet has managed to zero its own carbon footprint, let alone the carbon footprint of all its citizens.
While Kaplan's naivety is touching, sadly we don't "already know how to do it." For example, slapping a price on carbon might seem to be the magic solution to our climate problems. But a carbon tax doesn't necessarily incentivize burning less fossil fuel. Laws can also perversely incentivize law-breaking and law-repealing. People who don't care about their personal contributions to climate change, or who deny climate science, will apply their resourcefulness not to reducing their fossil fuel burn, but to repealing the carbon tax. The election of Donald Trump shows how easy this is. In short, a carbon tax can't force people to do much more than they want to do. Make the tax high enough to crush greenhouse gas emissions by a massive 7.6% per year (no mean feat in a world with a population that is still growing in numbers and in prosperity) and you'll get more people voting to repeal it. Just as voters in the USA did with alcohol prohibition in 1933. We couldn't get rid of alcohol with a law (and today alcohol continues to kill around 85,000 Americans every year). Prohibition failed because not enough people had been persuaded to recognize alcohol as the toxic substance it is. Laws and policies are largely useless in the absence of public buy-in.
To do "what must be done to avert the worst effects of warming" we have to do something that humans have never done before: agree to stop consuming a valuable resource before it's all gone. And to do this, we do need some new technologies: the technologies of persuasion and education. Nobody at present has a clue about how to fix the broken thinking that delivered the second-most votes in American election history to Donald Trump in 2020. Seventy-five million Trump voters either believe Trump's lies that climate change is a hoax, or they don't think the problem is pressing enough to require any government action. Even though Trump lost the election to Joe Biden, there is little possibility that a nation so divided is going to sustain the pace of greenhouse gas emission cuts necessary to "avert the worst effects of warming". (And even most Biden voters aren't fully on board with a further 7.6% cut in their greenhouse gas emissions year on year - which must be even stiffer for the individual as the overall population continues to grow.) We simply don't have the technology to impart expertise on climate science and climate change mitigation to the entire population at the speed necessary. In fact we don't know how to do it at all - the disinformers at Fox News and billionaire-funded conservative think tanks are winning the persuasion battle, at least with their Noah's Ark-believing base. And that's all they need to persuade, to effectively block any real action on climate, or to obliterate any previous action once they get back into power when the political pendulum swings again.
Imagine that America had tried to fight World War II with half the population doubting the existence of Germany and Japan. That's where we are with climate change. We do in fact need new technologies - of education and persuasion that can change people's core values. We need the entire population to think scientifically - to base their beliefs on facts and evidence, and to abandon faith (which is belief without evidence). Instead we see vast subsets of the population are easy prey for ridiculous falsehoods such as QAnon - and every mainstream religion with its equally baseless claims. Correcting this problem might require effective technologies for intelligence enhancement. We might need a way to make people actually smarter, something humans have not even started to try.
I found the usual number of things to disagree with here and there, but one passage in particular stands out for its breathtaking naivety and bizarre understatement (from Sarah Kaplan's piece, Ghosts of the Future; italics mine):
"We already know what must be done to avert the worst effects of warming: starting next year, global greenhouse gas emissions must fall by 7.6 percent annually, reaching zero by the middle of the century. And although the scale of such action would be unprecedented, we already know how to achieve it: put a price on carbon, replace fossil fuels with renewable energy sources, restore nature landscapes that act as carbon sinks, equip ordinary people with the tools to adapt to a transformed world. No new technologies need to be invented to meet the terms of the Paris climate agreement. All we are waiting for is the will to change."
Books can be (and have been) written about everything she's glossing over. "Will" is hard enough to come by (ask any obese person, drug addict, or criminal who is trying to reprogram destructive urges), but the problem is much worse than a mere lack of will. People who deny climate change don't lack for "will" - they are highly dedicated to destroying civilization, while pretending to be doing something else (such as promoting their conservative values). Rather, the problem is that vast numbers of people believe in falsehoods, and reject the scientific method as a method for determining truth.
Has Sarah Kaplan been to a Trump rally? Watched Fox News? Dialogued with a climate change denier? Met anyone who manages to live without fossil fuels given "no new technologies"?
Anyone who has made a serious go of cutting their carbon footprint as far as possible, using "no new technologies" knows it's not quite as simple as the little word "will" might imply. Recall that "will" (or willpower) is precisely the ingredient in short supply in a range of stubborn behavioral and belief problems, such as substance addiction, obesity, and crime. In addition, human culture has always been pervaded by errors in thinking, such as those that lead to religion, racism, magical thinking, and more recently science denial.
Quitting fossil fuels is arguably harder than quitting tobacco, harder than losing weight and keeping it off, and harder than overcoming a childhood of religious brainwashing - because we all know people who have mustered the will to do those difficult things. But who do you know who has quit burning fossil fuels, directly and indirectly? It's hard enough for the individual - for governments it's even harder, as no government on the planet has managed to zero its own carbon footprint, let alone the carbon footprint of all its citizens.
While Kaplan's naivety is touching, sadly we don't "already know how to do it." For example, slapping a price on carbon might seem to be the magic solution to our climate problems. But a carbon tax doesn't necessarily incentivize burning less fossil fuel. Laws can also perversely incentivize law-breaking and law-repealing. People who don't care about their personal contributions to climate change, or who deny climate science, will apply their resourcefulness not to reducing their fossil fuel burn, but to repealing the carbon tax. The election of Donald Trump shows how easy this is. In short, a carbon tax can't force people to do much more than they want to do. Make the tax high enough to crush greenhouse gas emissions by a massive 7.6% per year (no mean feat in a world with a population that is still growing in numbers and in prosperity) and you'll get more people voting to repeal it. Just as voters in the USA did with alcohol prohibition in 1933. We couldn't get rid of alcohol with a law (and today alcohol continues to kill around 85,000 Americans every year). Prohibition failed because not enough people had been persuaded to recognize alcohol as the toxic substance it is. Laws and policies are largely useless in the absence of public buy-in.
To do "what must be done to avert the worst effects of warming" we have to do something that humans have never done before: agree to stop consuming a valuable resource before it's all gone. And to do this, we do need some new technologies: the technologies of persuasion and education. Nobody at present has a clue about how to fix the broken thinking that delivered the second-most votes in American election history to Donald Trump in 2020. Seventy-five million Trump voters either believe Trump's lies that climate change is a hoax, or they don't think the problem is pressing enough to require any government action. Even though Trump lost the election to Joe Biden, there is little possibility that a nation so divided is going to sustain the pace of greenhouse gas emission cuts necessary to "avert the worst effects of warming". (And even most Biden voters aren't fully on board with a further 7.6% cut in their greenhouse gas emissions year on year - which must be even stiffer for the individual as the overall population continues to grow.) We simply don't have the technology to impart expertise on climate science and climate change mitigation to the entire population at the speed necessary. In fact we don't know how to do it at all - the disinformers at Fox News and billionaire-funded conservative think tanks are winning the persuasion battle, at least with their Noah's Ark-believing base. And that's all they need to persuade, to effectively block any real action on climate, or to obliterate any previous action once they get back into power when the political pendulum swings again.
Imagine that America had tried to fight World War II with half the population doubting the existence of Germany and Japan. That's where we are with climate change. We do in fact need new technologies - of education and persuasion that can change people's core values. We need the entire population to think scientifically - to base their beliefs on facts and evidence, and to abandon faith (which is belief without evidence). Instead we see vast subsets of the population are easy prey for ridiculous falsehoods such as QAnon - and every mainstream religion with its equally baseless claims. Correcting this problem might require effective technologies for intelligence enhancement. We might need a way to make people actually smarter, something humans have not even started to try.
October 30, 2022
The way to read this, or any of the entries in the "Best American Science and Nature Writing 20xx" books, is to skip the introduction by the series editor (which will be political), skip the introduction by that year's editor (a famous science writer whose books you probably should read, but not their introduction to this book), and proceed on to a bunch of good science and nature articles.
I've realized that these books function as science journals once did; a way to keep somewhat up to date on what is going on in science. Before they became a way of padding your resume and justifying your last (or next) research grant, science journals were for the purpose of telling you about science (and, in this case, also nature). Now that they no longer function well for this purpose, you can use this series. This is, for the most part, excellent writing on a range of topics; Michio Kaku has done an excellent job of picking out well-written articles.
I've realized that these books function as science journals once did; a way to keep somewhat up to date on what is going on in science. Before they became a way of padding your resume and justifying your last (or next) research grant, science journals were for the purpose of telling you about science (and, in this case, also nature). Now that they no longer function well for this purpose, you can use this series. This is, for the most part, excellent writing on a range of topics; Michio Kaku has done an excellent job of picking out well-written articles.
September 16, 2021
I really flew through the essays that had a strong connection to the more personal stories, but there's a lot of really interesting info in this book. I'm curious to see what the 2021 version will have.
April 4, 2021
Dieses Buch ist eine Ansammlung von Veröffentlichungen unterschiedlicher Wissenschaftsmagazine. Thematisch werden die besten Artikel aus dem Jahr 2020 gesammelt. Von Neurowissenschaften, AI, Klimawandel, fossile Dinosaurierfunde bis Sprachwissenschaften ist alles dabei. So berichten in einem Artikel von einem modernen Phineas Gage und welche Bedeutung der präfrontale Cortex hat und in einem anderen wird über Grammarly und die Bedeutung von Spracherkennungstools über die Fähigkeiten digital zu kommunizieren analyisiert.
Eine interessante Zusammenfassung über wichtige Themen aus dem Jahr 2020. Regt sehr zum Nachdenken an.
Eine interessante Zusammenfassung über wichtige Themen aus dem Jahr 2020. Regt sehr zum Nachdenken an.
January 28, 2022
I have been reading the anthologies in this series for many years. This one stands out as being the best by far, which wasn't surprising since the editor was Michio Kaku, who is one of the best science writers ever.
The best article was The Day the Dinosaurs Died by Douglas Preston. The protagonist is Robert DePalma, a doctoral student in paleontology, who discovered an area in the Hell’s Creek formation (Montana and North Dakota), where the KT level (a deposit of ash from the asteroid that slammed into the earth 66 million years ago, killing the dinosaurs) is only 2 feet from the surface. It is a site where a tsunami of regional waters, caused by the asteroid strike, drowned all life from near and far in a space that caused it to be fossilized. Along with the fossils DePalma found thousands of tektites, which are small pieces of fused earth, radiated by iridium, which fell on the earth soon after the asteroid strike. It is an amazing find that answers many questions, such as whether the dinosaurs were still alive when the asteroid struck – yes, definitely.
Another excellent article was Troubled Treasure by Joshua Sokol, about the mining and sale of insects from the Cretaceous era trapped in amber. The mining takes place in a war-torn area in Myanmar. Amber pieces are smuggled into nearby China, where they are sold on the street and advertised on the internet.
Other noteworthy articles included:
- one about medical research into prions (almost proteins that cause disease when folded in a particular way)
- one about efforts to recreate the olfactory sense with technology
- one about how a single layer of graphene (carbon atoms) twisted 1.1º becomes a superconductor.
- one about re-interpreting research that shows the brain is activated .5 seconds before a physical movement. Previous interpretations were that this was evidence of predetermination (opposite of free will), but the new interpretation is that the brain signal might just be a peak of regular ongoing activity.
- Adam Gopnick’s exploration of research on aging, which right now is not very promising.
– Beauty of the Beast – about how beauty effects evolution and how difficult it is to define beauty
- Vaccines Reimagined – about live vaccines providing protection again diseases other than the targeted one.
- New Blood, which was about the very new and expensive CAR-T cell therapy.
- one about about using the telescope on Mauna Kea in Hawaii to search for “planet nine,” which appears in mathematical models.
- one about a new idea for a theory of everything, which was based on how different mathematical formulas all lead to the same picture of reality, and
- one about brain plasticity – a kid lost 1/6 of his brain to remove a tumor, but his brain rewired itself.
The best article was The Day the Dinosaurs Died by Douglas Preston. The protagonist is Robert DePalma, a doctoral student in paleontology, who discovered an area in the Hell’s Creek formation (Montana and North Dakota), where the KT level (a deposit of ash from the asteroid that slammed into the earth 66 million years ago, killing the dinosaurs) is only 2 feet from the surface. It is a site where a tsunami of regional waters, caused by the asteroid strike, drowned all life from near and far in a space that caused it to be fossilized. Along with the fossils DePalma found thousands of tektites, which are small pieces of fused earth, radiated by iridium, which fell on the earth soon after the asteroid strike. It is an amazing find that answers many questions, such as whether the dinosaurs were still alive when the asteroid struck – yes, definitely.
Another excellent article was Troubled Treasure by Joshua Sokol, about the mining and sale of insects from the Cretaceous era trapped in amber. The mining takes place in a war-torn area in Myanmar. Amber pieces are smuggled into nearby China, where they are sold on the street and advertised on the internet.
Other noteworthy articles included:
- one about medical research into prions (almost proteins that cause disease when folded in a particular way)
- one about efforts to recreate the olfactory sense with technology
- one about how a single layer of graphene (carbon atoms) twisted 1.1º becomes a superconductor.
- one about re-interpreting research that shows the brain is activated .5 seconds before a physical movement. Previous interpretations were that this was evidence of predetermination (opposite of free will), but the new interpretation is that the brain signal might just be a peak of regular ongoing activity.
- Adam Gopnick’s exploration of research on aging, which right now is not very promising.
– Beauty of the Beast – about how beauty effects evolution and how difficult it is to define beauty
- Vaccines Reimagined – about live vaccines providing protection again diseases other than the targeted one.
- New Blood, which was about the very new and expensive CAR-T cell therapy.
- one about about using the telescope on Mauna Kea in Hawaii to search for “planet nine,” which appears in mathematical models.
- one about a new idea for a theory of everything, which was based on how different mathematical formulas all lead to the same picture of reality, and
- one about brain plasticity – a kid lost 1/6 of his brain to remove a tumor, but his brain rewired itself.
January 2, 2021
I think I liked it more than last year's but less then 2018. While the overall quality was consistent, there were few "wow" essays that make me put down the book and just think. Those gems are a reason I love this series and this collection qualifies as "solid".
December 22, 2020
Each chapter is a different topic by a different author which made the book more interesting to me. Some topics I found very interesting while others I lost my interest in and would not have read through if they were any longer. Good variety of topics.
October 28, 2021
Very good for the most part. I think the AI articles were among the most creepy. 'The Next Word' by John Seabrook described the work of OpenAI, an AI startup company and its reader GPT-2. As a human reader and someone who reads a lot and writes a fair number of reviews it is absolutely unnerving to see how far AI has come in the written language. And with the 'compute power' increasing (dues Moore's Law and improved chip design, network architecture and cloud-based resources) to unfathomable levels (total power estimated in 2018 at 300,000 times 2012) it is hard to see how humans will be relevant in that field. An AI will be capable of drawing on a literally infinite reservoir of 'knowledge' and spitting it out in a format indistinguishable from human. Of course same goes for about anything else that machines can and will be doing better than humans--medicine, weather forecasting, finance, you name it. Until of course they screw up, due of course to human error! Plenty of other mostly depressing stuff, climate doom, species loss, even the incredible breakthroughs in genetics to save and extend life seem vaguely disturbing as the increase in human footprint just hastens the demise of the planet described in the next article. Still it's all very fascinating to the curious human mind even with our puny storage, recall and retrieval gifts.
January 19, 2022
Do love this series. I'm always uninterested in pieces on astronomy, not sure why. I esp enjoyed the one on fighting wildfires and the last piece, on neuroplasticity.
February 6, 2021
A step in the right direction.
You have to have had your head under a rock to not notice the last few years that this series was hit hard by politics. No, not Trump, but the desperate attempt to be politically sensitive. And as a result, it chose some editors who were, well, not good. This isn't exclusive to the Science and Nature Writing series--the Best American Essays has fallen into the similar slump.
What I mean by their not good editors is they chose them for reasons of who they were (their celeb clout, as the young folks say) rather than by actual merit. And their picks were...well, preachy is one word for it (if you yourself are famous for preaching, you obviously prefer preachy texts as well), but also kinda...boring? Like I'd read most of them already because they'd been hyped up so much? And that was my real disappointment with the series in recent years--that it didn't feel that the editors were in the habit of widely reading science literature at all, and thus picked the already trendy stuff...which is already played out.
This volume is not a return to the former high standards, but it is a damn bit better than the last three years. There is, and the editors address it in their intros, a bit of that disconnect that everything has--we've been up to our sinuses in pandemic for the last 10 months, so it almost feels weird to read about 'normal' things like astronomy untouched by this damn virus that has managed to infect everything--but not only is there a good range of science involved, the essays also don't all slide into despair.
See, the last few years this series beat the climate change drum very hard. My issue with that is (no, I'm no climate denier, read on) that if you're writing 'climate change is real!!' in a book called Science and Nature Writing, chances are your audience already knows that, so...what exact work are you doing here? WE KNOW. Secondly, every single entry on that topic already tells us basically it's too late. Which, I mean, I don't expect science to blow smoke up my ass, but you can't tell me we need to do something, and then tell me in the same essay that there's essentially nothing to be done because it's already too late. And let's be honest. Reading 200 pages of gloom and doom are not a great read. Which is ironic since the bad choices were clearly chosen very much to push excitement in STEM. If you're into STEM and you read a book that tells you the world will be a barren cinder in 10 years...you don't really feel like going into STEM. Or doing much of anything except quietly weeping in a corner and then worrying about the damage the salt in your tears is doing.
SO, this book of course had a few climate essays, and they were much the same, but thankfully had a nice variety of other sciences covered. My favorite by far was the one on amber markets in China, and a close second is one involving a sort of renegade paleontologist discovering what might be the KT line. There's excitement (working toward the discovery of Planet IX) and awe (machine learning and AI) which is very, very welcome to return to the series.
My biggest bone to pick with this collection is that STUPID essay about the Camp Fire. It was gripping reading, harrowing with details and just impossible to put down. SO why am I calling it stupid? Because the author is so determined to blame Climate Change they don't even entertain the idea that one of the reasons (that anyone who has lived in wildfire country knows) that the Camp Fire and other recent California fire seasons have been so devastating is...Governor Newsom and his refusal to allow for controlled burns and brush clearing.
Let me repeat for any dummy about to open their mouths. I am NOT saying the Camp Fire wasn't bad in part due to climate change. I AM saying is that we need to consider ALL the factors, and, if we actually care about the people and preventing as much human damage as possible, become better stewards of the land by using the controlled version of Nature's own technique of controlled burns. Pointing to government ineptitude doesn't mean no fingers are pointing at climate change, but if we can't find all the causes of blame, we can't fix any of them.
Anyway it was a decent read, for a change. I'd given up on this series, and only picked it up after seeing reviews that said much what I said--that the series used to be great, hit a slump, and this was the start of a better path. It's not the level it used to be, but then...is anything?
You have to have had your head under a rock to not notice the last few years that this series was hit hard by politics. No, not Trump, but the desperate attempt to be politically sensitive. And as a result, it chose some editors who were, well, not good. This isn't exclusive to the Science and Nature Writing series--the Best American Essays has fallen into the similar slump.
What I mean by their not good editors is they chose them for reasons of who they were (their celeb clout, as the young folks say) rather than by actual merit. And their picks were...well, preachy is one word for it (if you yourself are famous for preaching, you obviously prefer preachy texts as well), but also kinda...boring? Like I'd read most of them already because they'd been hyped up so much? And that was my real disappointment with the series in recent years--that it didn't feel that the editors were in the habit of widely reading science literature at all, and thus picked the already trendy stuff...which is already played out.
This volume is not a return to the former high standards, but it is a damn bit better than the last three years. There is, and the editors address it in their intros, a bit of that disconnect that everything has--we've been up to our sinuses in pandemic for the last 10 months, so it almost feels weird to read about 'normal' things like astronomy untouched by this damn virus that has managed to infect everything--but not only is there a good range of science involved, the essays also don't all slide into despair.
See, the last few years this series beat the climate change drum very hard. My issue with that is (no, I'm no climate denier, read on) that if you're writing 'climate change is real!!' in a book called Science and Nature Writing, chances are your audience already knows that, so...what exact work are you doing here? WE KNOW. Secondly, every single entry on that topic already tells us basically it's too late. Which, I mean, I don't expect science to blow smoke up my ass, but you can't tell me we need to do something, and then tell me in the same essay that there's essentially nothing to be done because it's already too late. And let's be honest. Reading 200 pages of gloom and doom are not a great read. Which is ironic since the bad choices were clearly chosen very much to push excitement in STEM. If you're into STEM and you read a book that tells you the world will be a barren cinder in 10 years...you don't really feel like going into STEM. Or doing much of anything except quietly weeping in a corner and then worrying about the damage the salt in your tears is doing.
SO, this book of course had a few climate essays, and they were much the same, but thankfully had a nice variety of other sciences covered. My favorite by far was the one on amber markets in China, and a close second is one involving a sort of renegade paleontologist discovering what might be the KT line. There's excitement (working toward the discovery of Planet IX) and awe (machine learning and AI) which is very, very welcome to return to the series.
My biggest bone to pick with this collection is that STUPID essay about the Camp Fire. It was gripping reading, harrowing with details and just impossible to put down. SO why am I calling it stupid? Because the author is so determined to blame Climate Change they don't even entertain the idea that one of the reasons (that anyone who has lived in wildfire country knows) that the Camp Fire and other recent California fire seasons have been so devastating is...Governor Newsom and his refusal to allow for controlled burns and brush clearing.
Let me repeat for any dummy about to open their mouths. I am NOT saying the Camp Fire wasn't bad in part due to climate change. I AM saying is that we need to consider ALL the factors, and, if we actually care about the people and preventing as much human damage as possible, become better stewards of the land by using the controlled version of Nature's own technique of controlled burns. Pointing to government ineptitude doesn't mean no fingers are pointing at climate change, but if we can't find all the causes of blame, we can't fix any of them.
Anyway it was a decent read, for a change. I'd given up on this series, and only picked it up after seeing reviews that said much what I said--that the series used to be great, hit a slump, and this was the start of a better path. It's not the level it used to be, but then...is anything?
January 3, 2021
I have read about 4 years of these. A pleasant way to expose myself to a diverse collections of topics in the scientists voice. A deeper unfolding of the theme from a journalist or scientist that is not the short online news article. There are many people tirelessly working to discover our world. These are their stories.
This year was more paleontology and seemed less diverse, but still a good way to catch up.
This year was more paleontology and seemed less diverse, but still a good way to catch up.
January 3, 2021
An excellent collection of science and nature shorts. I enjoyed them all except the one about the Paradise fire - which was long and seemed out of place in the collection.
December 12, 2020
Damn good yearly antho as always: this collection leans towards astronomy, physics, with some good paleontological hits and AI language learning essays as well. All really important pieces to read that will inspire a bunch of sci-fi in my head, but also longform climate journalism I can pursue. I have preferred past years in terms of ToC, but hey, that's the luck of the draw.
February 15, 2021
OK, so back at this series again.
The 2013 one was required reading, and the 2019 was a read of easy access. Read this one because the anthology series has done a solid job in past years, and I like the cover this time around; I almost wished I was better as frosting cookies to mimic the science-y bacterial cultures or petri dishes or whatever actual smart term that scientists have for the colorful round samples. For some reason, it reminds me of a suspension or bagel smear in agar agar that gelatin substitution for those opposed to animal products but want the appearance of jiggles. Sorry, got in a food tangent.
Heads up, Future Me, the ones I liked are going to be bolded; like most of the non-fiction I enjoy, the ones with the human stories and personal connections tend to click with me more.
Ross Andersen - A Journey into the Animal Mind: It is a humble brag, but I was already familiar with Jainism because of two seasons viewing a CW show English language show inspired by telenovelas and involving IVF shenanigans as the inciting incident. Bird hospitals sounds like a lot of droppings to clean up too. Questioning whether other beings have higher sentience is neat, but I personally just did not connect with the question posed. Same reason why I rarely enjoy 'when will AI count as consciousness, and what rights will they have' types of questions.
Kelly Clancy - Sleep No More: Goodness, this was a gut punch. The optimism and strength of the couple is extraordinary. When I saw the p word, I knew the almost definite outcome/prediction and just wanted it all to magically work it out. I truly hope they make it, but I am terrified to keep up with their progress if worst comes to worst
Daniel Duane - What Remains: For being a physicist, the guest editor Michio Kaku likes the geology stories quite a bit; not a complaint but interesting to note. Also, RIP the world's glaciers.
David H. Freedman - With a Simple Twist, a "Magic" Material is Now the Big Thing in Physics: I did not understand most of the subject, but that's OK. I have known about the potential of graphene for a while, so this article just makes me want more graphene in Science Fiction writing I do get around to reading. Also, Twistronics is such a cute name.
Rivka Galchen - The Eighth Continent: Space exploration is just inherently cool. The moon is our one and only, so of course I am inclined to be fond of it. Also, a new space race for space science and space mining that might lead to space piracy when there is no privately owned space; adding SPACE in front of a word is just fun.
Bahar Gholipour - The Tumultuous History of a Mysterious Brain Signal That Questioned Free Will: Even if everything is predetermined, I do not care about proving it; I would rather falsely believe in free will if ain't hurting anything.
Adam Gopnik - Younger Longer Fascinating and is increasingly relevant giving an aging American population. Also, the framing of putting on and off the old age suit really does sound like a good way to generate empathy since younger folks can be as cruel as a cranky oldster who craves control of a deteriorating body.
Sara Harrison - Right Under Our Noses: I really want to pet the good dogs that sniff out cancer and land mines and all that nasty stuff. Or at least give them a treat when they are not working. Also, fake noses seem important.
Patrick House - I, Language Robot: AI learning is not a topic of interest for me unfortunately.
Ferris Jabr - Beauty of the Beasts: Yeah, I would side with the guy who says maybe animals get crazy with physical ornamentation because it looks pretty to them; I would mainly side with the guy to see how upset the obviously perturbed majority opinion would get.
Sarah Kaplan - Ghosts of the Future: There's this one video I watched years ago that gives a very basic overview of things that first introduced me to the the line "IT's THE CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION", but it sang it so that is how I always remember the phrase. Also, the article ends not neatly; ends in a 'climate change is a problem that needs to be taken seriously' bow that feels ugh for a conclusion. I am not a denier just felt shoehorned in.
Adam Mann - Intelligent Ways to Search for Extraterrestrials: Yep, it is about SETI. Your assumption of the title was correct. I kind of want to watch Jodi Foster's movie "Contact".
Deanna Csomo McCool - Total Eclipse: This hits hard. Must be in the right frame of mind to deal with the heaviness of the subject matter. On a brighter note, NIMH always reminds me of "The Secret of NIMH" even if smart mice and rats might not be the main thing about a mental health institute, but it has been a while since I have seen that movie.
Jon Mooallem - "We Have Fire Everywhere": Last year there was a fire story too, so just the new normal. *sighs in climate change* Clear and well organized especially considering how scary and chaotic fire can be.
Melinda Wenner Moyer - Vaccines Reimagined: Nice to be reminded what attenuated vaccines are. Also, waiting my turn for that COVID-19 vaccine roll out.
Siddhartha Mukherjee - New Blood: My dude, Siddhartha! His "Emperor of All Maladies" really found me at the right time, so I have bias toward his writing style. Glad gene therapy exists, but that price tag is hefty.
Douglas Preston - The Day the Dinosaurs Died Dinosaurs are awesome. Also, this Robert DePalma gives outsider/underdog vibes that made me want to learn more about KT line. And I think his reasoning for wanting control the specimens he unearths feel valid when he was burned before. Hope it did/does work out for him and the site he found.
Tim Requarth - The Final Five Percent: Motorcycles and the brain injuries associated with them scare me.
John Seabrook - The Next Word: I am OK with this AI story since Smart Reply is helpful and the ESL angle of Grammerly usage is nice.
Joshua Sokol - Troubled Treasure: Hunting for amber was written in such a fun way, and the moral issue of acquiring Myanmar amber was a good point to bring up.
Joshua Sokol - The Hidden Heroines of Chaos: Felt like a necessary acknowledgement of these women's contributions. Unfortunately, I did not feel excited about the subject matter.
Shannon Stirone - The Hunt for Planet Nine: Find it interesting that the guy who dethroned the planet status of Pluto is looking for a Planet 9.
Natalie Wolchover - A Different Kind of Theory of Everything: Honestly, did not connect with me at all. Just a me thing.
Andrew Zaleski - The Brain That Remade Itself: Neuroplasticity is a good thing. Kind of sucks if you have an adult brain that gets a major brain injury or brain surgery.
Fine anthology. May or may not continue with the series.
The 2013 one was required reading, and the 2019 was a read of easy access. Read this one because the anthology series has done a solid job in past years, and I like the cover this time around; I almost wished I was better as frosting cookies to mimic the science-y bacterial cultures or petri dishes or whatever actual smart term that scientists have for the colorful round samples. For some reason, it reminds me of a suspension or bagel smear in agar agar that gelatin substitution for those opposed to animal products but want the appearance of jiggles. Sorry, got in a food tangent.
Heads up, Future Me, the ones I liked are going to be bolded; like most of the non-fiction I enjoy, the ones with the human stories and personal connections tend to click with me more.
Ross Andersen - A Journey into the Animal Mind: It is a humble brag, but I was already familiar with Jainism because of two seasons viewing a CW show English language show inspired by telenovelas and involving IVF shenanigans as the inciting incident. Bird hospitals sounds like a lot of droppings to clean up too. Questioning whether other beings have higher sentience is neat, but I personally just did not connect with the question posed. Same reason why I rarely enjoy 'when will AI count as consciousness, and what rights will they have' types of questions.
Kelly Clancy - Sleep No More: Goodness, this was a gut punch. The optimism and strength of the couple is extraordinary. When I saw the p word, I knew the almost definite outcome/prediction and just wanted it all to magically work it out. I truly hope they make it, but I am terrified to keep up with their progress if worst comes to worst
Daniel Duane - What Remains: For being a physicist, the guest editor Michio Kaku likes the geology stories quite a bit; not a complaint but interesting to note. Also, RIP the world's glaciers.
David H. Freedman - With a Simple Twist, a "Magic" Material is Now the Big Thing in Physics: I did not understand most of the subject, but that's OK. I have known about the potential of graphene for a while, so this article just makes me want more graphene in Science Fiction writing I do get around to reading. Also, Twistronics is such a cute name.
Rivka Galchen - The Eighth Continent: Space exploration is just inherently cool. The moon is our one and only, so of course I am inclined to be fond of it. Also, a new space race for space science and space mining that might lead to space piracy when there is no privately owned space; adding SPACE in front of a word is just fun.
Bahar Gholipour - The Tumultuous History of a Mysterious Brain Signal That Questioned Free Will: Even if everything is predetermined, I do not care about proving it; I would rather falsely believe in free will if ain't hurting anything.
Adam Gopnik - Younger Longer Fascinating and is increasingly relevant giving an aging American population. Also, the framing of putting on and off the old age suit really does sound like a good way to generate empathy since younger folks can be as cruel as a cranky oldster who craves control of a deteriorating body.
Sara Harrison - Right Under Our Noses: I really want to pet the good dogs that sniff out cancer and land mines and all that nasty stuff. Or at least give them a treat when they are not working. Also, fake noses seem important.
Patrick House - I, Language Robot: AI learning is not a topic of interest for me unfortunately.
Ferris Jabr - Beauty of the Beasts: Yeah, I would side with the guy who says maybe animals get crazy with physical ornamentation because it looks pretty to them; I would mainly side with the guy to see how upset the obviously perturbed majority opinion would get.
Sarah Kaplan - Ghosts of the Future: There's this one video I watched years ago that gives a very basic overview of things that first introduced me to the the line "IT's THE CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION", but it sang it so that is how I always remember the phrase. Also, the article ends not neatly; ends in a 'climate change is a problem that needs to be taken seriously' bow that feels ugh for a conclusion. I am not a denier just felt shoehorned in.
Adam Mann - Intelligent Ways to Search for Extraterrestrials: Yep, it is about SETI. Your assumption of the title was correct. I kind of want to watch Jodi Foster's movie "Contact".
Deanna Csomo McCool - Total Eclipse: This hits hard. Must be in the right frame of mind to deal with the heaviness of the subject matter. On a brighter note, NIMH always reminds me of "The Secret of NIMH" even if smart mice and rats might not be the main thing about a mental health institute, but it has been a while since I have seen that movie.
Jon Mooallem - "We Have Fire Everywhere": Last year there was a fire story too, so just the new normal. *sighs in climate change* Clear and well organized especially considering how scary and chaotic fire can be.
Melinda Wenner Moyer - Vaccines Reimagined: Nice to be reminded what attenuated vaccines are. Also, waiting my turn for that COVID-19 vaccine roll out.
Siddhartha Mukherjee - New Blood: My dude, Siddhartha! His "Emperor of All Maladies" really found me at the right time, so I have bias toward his writing style. Glad gene therapy exists, but that price tag is hefty.
Douglas Preston - The Day the Dinosaurs Died Dinosaurs are awesome. Also, this Robert DePalma gives outsider/underdog vibes that made me want to learn more about KT line. And I think his reasoning for wanting control the specimens he unearths feel valid when he was burned before. Hope it did/does work out for him and the site he found.
Tim Requarth - The Final Five Percent: Motorcycles and the brain injuries associated with them scare me.
John Seabrook - The Next Word: I am OK with this AI story since Smart Reply is helpful and the ESL angle of Grammerly usage is nice.
Joshua Sokol - Troubled Treasure: Hunting for amber was written in such a fun way, and the moral issue of acquiring Myanmar amber was a good point to bring up.
Joshua Sokol - The Hidden Heroines of Chaos: Felt like a necessary acknowledgement of these women's contributions. Unfortunately, I did not feel excited about the subject matter.
Shannon Stirone - The Hunt for Planet Nine: Find it interesting that the guy who dethroned the planet status of Pluto is looking for a Planet 9.
Natalie Wolchover - A Different Kind of Theory of Everything: Honestly, did not connect with me at all. Just a me thing.
Andrew Zaleski - The Brain That Remade Itself: Neuroplasticity is a good thing. Kind of sucks if you have an adult brain that gets a major brain injury or brain surgery.
Fine anthology. May or may not continue with the series.
February 13, 2021
“We especially need imagination in science. It is not all mathematics, nor all logic, but it is somewhat beauty and poetry.” Maria Mitchell
I first became aware of the intersection of science and poetry in Annie Dillard’s Pilgrim at Tinker Creek (does anyone else have a book that changed and continues to change your life like this does for me?) where she wrote about the nature of her backyard but delved into the deep science and made it sound poetic.
Diane Ackerman extended the experience and even had Carl Sagan on her doctoral committee so she was assured to get the science right in her poetry and prose. Geopoetry is my mantra, the imagery of how geology explains the “annals of a former word” made lyrical. Maria Popova has created a stunning event linking poets to astronomers for the past few years in the Universe In Verse: https://www.brainpickings.org/live/
These were amazing articles about nature and science, and I felt poetry in nearly every one; they connect to so much in my own life, and since as the poet Li-Young Lee says, “People who read poetry have heard about the burning bush, but when you write poetry, you sit inside the burning bush,” here is my review as a poem. I have been doing a lot of found poems lately, but this is composed and weaved in my words, inspired by the lyrical, human reporting of the scientific trends and discoveries that illumine and limn the beauty of our world and being alive on these days.
My eyes are reading words
that my brain accepts as music,
in the same area that shivers
of awe and wonder originate,
because somewhere, some-why,
researchers are trying to
invent new colors.
Elsewhere, consciousness is
being dreamed of; If an insect
or amoeba has it, where it has it,
what is looks like, or even if free will,
how it proves we are not as lonely in our
perceptions as short sighted
voices of old proclaim. Where were you
when you heard this greatest of news?
Geopoetry sings a song of glaciers;
Their aliveness and voice interpreted
as they disintegrate in a human changed world,
Perhaps melting out lunar regolith-
Dust of the moon- that can make
The snow and dust glitter rainbows, and
that fell to earth as other planets or
black holes in their singularity
were formed, in the age of dinosaurs,
That perished with the meteor of all meteors,
and a few warning it could happen again,
a single day of change, of the surface
of the earth rippling
like a raindrop on a still lake, a mountain
Rising and falling in a day, tsunamis
Distributing marine life to the middle
Of a continent, tektikes (natural glass
caused by meteor impact) sparkling
In sunshine and leading me there, or
Maybe I’d like to go to the moon, or Mars, or
Planet Nine, excavate the layers of rock,
And read that story of time, the physical messages
From further out, from the cosmos, in deep space,
Among constellations and stars so bright we ourselves glow,
proclaiming we are not alone, a certain uncertainty
But that feels possible in our bones,
Science and poetry interweaved and
Running in our blood, like rare, inconceivable
Pieces of matter like viruses and prions,
Invisible points of life we are trying to translate into stars.
Is there a researcher inventing a new language,
Other than mathematical or quantum physics to explain
What the furnace of a wildfire feels like inside a car?
Did you know several times in the life
Of the world, people have been able to outrun
A wildfire? But never a meteor?
Climate change is not a meteor, it is a
Conflagration we caused and have the power to affect,
To redirect into a new path wired into our DNA.
Can we change? I am changed each time
I walk in a forest, or a desert or shore.
I believe in us.
I first became aware of the intersection of science and poetry in Annie Dillard’s Pilgrim at Tinker Creek (does anyone else have a book that changed and continues to change your life like this does for me?) where she wrote about the nature of her backyard but delved into the deep science and made it sound poetic.
Diane Ackerman extended the experience and even had Carl Sagan on her doctoral committee so she was assured to get the science right in her poetry and prose. Geopoetry is my mantra, the imagery of how geology explains the “annals of a former word” made lyrical. Maria Popova has created a stunning event linking poets to astronomers for the past few years in the Universe In Verse: https://www.brainpickings.org/live/
These were amazing articles about nature and science, and I felt poetry in nearly every one; they connect to so much in my own life, and since as the poet Li-Young Lee says, “People who read poetry have heard about the burning bush, but when you write poetry, you sit inside the burning bush,” here is my review as a poem. I have been doing a lot of found poems lately, but this is composed and weaved in my words, inspired by the lyrical, human reporting of the scientific trends and discoveries that illumine and limn the beauty of our world and being alive on these days.
My eyes are reading words
that my brain accepts as music,
in the same area that shivers
of awe and wonder originate,
because somewhere, some-why,
researchers are trying to
invent new colors.
Elsewhere, consciousness is
being dreamed of; If an insect
or amoeba has it, where it has it,
what is looks like, or even if free will,
how it proves we are not as lonely in our
perceptions as short sighted
voices of old proclaim. Where were you
when you heard this greatest of news?
Geopoetry sings a song of glaciers;
Their aliveness and voice interpreted
as they disintegrate in a human changed world,
Perhaps melting out lunar regolith-
Dust of the moon- that can make
The snow and dust glitter rainbows, and
that fell to earth as other planets or
black holes in their singularity
were formed, in the age of dinosaurs,
That perished with the meteor of all meteors,
and a few warning it could happen again,
a single day of change, of the surface
of the earth rippling
like a raindrop on a still lake, a mountain
Rising and falling in a day, tsunamis
Distributing marine life to the middle
Of a continent, tektikes (natural glass
caused by meteor impact) sparkling
In sunshine and leading me there, or
Maybe I’d like to go to the moon, or Mars, or
Planet Nine, excavate the layers of rock,
And read that story of time, the physical messages
From further out, from the cosmos, in deep space,
Among constellations and stars so bright we ourselves glow,
proclaiming we are not alone, a certain uncertainty
But that feels possible in our bones,
Science and poetry interweaved and
Running in our blood, like rare, inconceivable
Pieces of matter like viruses and prions,
Invisible points of life we are trying to translate into stars.
Is there a researcher inventing a new language,
Other than mathematical or quantum physics to explain
What the furnace of a wildfire feels like inside a car?
Did you know several times in the life
Of the world, people have been able to outrun
A wildfire? But never a meteor?
Climate change is not a meteor, it is a
Conflagration we caused and have the power to affect,
To redirect into a new path wired into our DNA.
Can we change? I am changed each time
I walk in a forest, or a desert or shore.
I believe in us.
September 28, 2022
The Best American Series adalah kumpulan tulisan yang diterbitkan setiap tahun sejak 1915, dipilih oleh editor ahli dari tulisan-tulisan yang terbit di berbagai media di Amerika Utara di tahun sebelumnya. Ada beberapa tema buku, salah satunya seri Science and Nature Writing yang mulai terbit tahun 2000.
Untuk edisi 2020 ini, Michio Kaku menjadi editor ahli, sekaligus menulis kata pengantarnya. Di sini ia bercerita bagaimana anaknya sendiri bertanya "Kok orang mau-maunya jadi ilmuwan?" sambil sibuk menghafal nama-nama mineral dan kristal untuk ujian geologi. Kaku menyayangkan bagaimana pengajaran sains lewat hafalan seperti ini memberikan gambaran yang tidak menarik dan membuat banyak orang menjauhi sains.
"Ilmuwan dan penulis bidang sains punya tugas penting: bagaimana membuat sains menarik dan relevan bagi orang awam, agar mereka peduli akan sains," ujarnya. Konsekuensinya negatif jika orang banyak menjauhi sains karena tidak mengerti. Bukan saja karena kemajuan suatu bangsa akan tersendat, tapi malah terhalang jika misalnya, pemimpinnya anti sains.
Menurut Kaku, salah satu kunci merengkuh publik adalah dengan menulis artikel-artikel ilmiah yang memikat. Bagaimana suatu tulisan ilmiah bisa memikat awam? Ada 3 hal yang harus diperhatikan, katanya:
1. tulisan tersebut bisa menangkap semangat ilmuwan dalam menjalankan bidang ilmunya.
2. tulisan tersebut bisa mengangkat 'drama' suatu proses ilmiah, proses pencarian hingga menemukan jawabannya.
3. tulisan tersebut membuat pembaca awam ikut bersemangat, ingin tahu lebih jauh, dan bisa ikut melihat potensi manfaat penemuan ilmiah tersebut bagi kemanusiaan.
Ada 24 tulisan dengan bermacam-macam topik di buku ini, mulai dari kesadaran binatang, lenyapnya sebuah sungai es karena perubahan iklim, kisah paleontolog muda yang menemukan area fosil penting, komputer yang bisa menulis esai, hingga kisah seorang ibu mencari pengobatan kesehatan mental bagi anaknya, yang akhirnya bunuh diri.
Salah satu tulisan yang menarik bagi saya adalah cerita tentang kebakaran hutan di California yang memusnahkan kota Paradise (saya ingat beritanya tahun 2018, waktu itu saya membagikannya di timeline dengan caption "Hell in Paradise"). Penulisnya, Jon Mooallem, menceritakannya dengan narasi yang mencekam dan menegangkan. Campur aduk rasa saat membacanya, seperti menonton film action.
Tulisan lain yang juga menarik, bercerita tentang suami istri yang beralih profesi dari pengacara dan analis transportasi menjadi ilmuwan periset penyakit genetik langka yang diderita si istri. Di sini pembaca bisa menangkap kesulitan ilmuwan dalam melakukan riset, mencari dana, dan lain-lain. Yang juga menarik, sebagai 'orang luar' yang baru memasuki dunia riset, mereka terheran-heran dengan obsesi para ilmuwan kolega mereka untuk menerbitkan paper ilmiah. "Kalau ditanya tentang bidang mereka, jawabnya soal paper review, politik, aplikasi dana. Padahal kami ingin tahu tentang perkembangan ilmunya itu sendiri."
Buku kumpulan tulisan seperti ini menarik, menjadi jendela bagi berbagai bidang ilmu dalam satu buku, dan jadi tahu penulis-penulis mana yang cocok gaya penulisannya dengan selera kita, supaya kapan-kapan bisa kita cari tulisan atau bukunya.
-dydy-
Untuk edisi 2020 ini, Michio Kaku menjadi editor ahli, sekaligus menulis kata pengantarnya. Di sini ia bercerita bagaimana anaknya sendiri bertanya "Kok orang mau-maunya jadi ilmuwan?" sambil sibuk menghafal nama-nama mineral dan kristal untuk ujian geologi. Kaku menyayangkan bagaimana pengajaran sains lewat hafalan seperti ini memberikan gambaran yang tidak menarik dan membuat banyak orang menjauhi sains.
"Ilmuwan dan penulis bidang sains punya tugas penting: bagaimana membuat sains menarik dan relevan bagi orang awam, agar mereka peduli akan sains," ujarnya. Konsekuensinya negatif jika orang banyak menjauhi sains karena tidak mengerti. Bukan saja karena kemajuan suatu bangsa akan tersendat, tapi malah terhalang jika misalnya, pemimpinnya anti sains.
Menurut Kaku, salah satu kunci merengkuh publik adalah dengan menulis artikel-artikel ilmiah yang memikat. Bagaimana suatu tulisan ilmiah bisa memikat awam? Ada 3 hal yang harus diperhatikan, katanya:
1. tulisan tersebut bisa menangkap semangat ilmuwan dalam menjalankan bidang ilmunya.
2. tulisan tersebut bisa mengangkat 'drama' suatu proses ilmiah, proses pencarian hingga menemukan jawabannya.
3. tulisan tersebut membuat pembaca awam ikut bersemangat, ingin tahu lebih jauh, dan bisa ikut melihat potensi manfaat penemuan ilmiah tersebut bagi kemanusiaan.
Ada 24 tulisan dengan bermacam-macam topik di buku ini, mulai dari kesadaran binatang, lenyapnya sebuah sungai es karena perubahan iklim, kisah paleontolog muda yang menemukan area fosil penting, komputer yang bisa menulis esai, hingga kisah seorang ibu mencari pengobatan kesehatan mental bagi anaknya, yang akhirnya bunuh diri.
Salah satu tulisan yang menarik bagi saya adalah cerita tentang kebakaran hutan di California yang memusnahkan kota Paradise (saya ingat beritanya tahun 2018, waktu itu saya membagikannya di timeline dengan caption "Hell in Paradise"). Penulisnya, Jon Mooallem, menceritakannya dengan narasi yang mencekam dan menegangkan. Campur aduk rasa saat membacanya, seperti menonton film action.
Tulisan lain yang juga menarik, bercerita tentang suami istri yang beralih profesi dari pengacara dan analis transportasi menjadi ilmuwan periset penyakit genetik langka yang diderita si istri. Di sini pembaca bisa menangkap kesulitan ilmuwan dalam melakukan riset, mencari dana, dan lain-lain. Yang juga menarik, sebagai 'orang luar' yang baru memasuki dunia riset, mereka terheran-heran dengan obsesi para ilmuwan kolega mereka untuk menerbitkan paper ilmiah. "Kalau ditanya tentang bidang mereka, jawabnya soal paper review, politik, aplikasi dana. Padahal kami ingin tahu tentang perkembangan ilmunya itu sendiri."
Buku kumpulan tulisan seperti ini menarik, menjadi jendela bagi berbagai bidang ilmu dalam satu buku, dan jadi tahu penulis-penulis mana yang cocok gaya penulisannya dengan selera kita, supaya kapan-kapan bisa kita cari tulisan atau bukunya.
-dydy-
April 18, 2025
As the title says, this is a selection of short pieces focused on Science themes, from a range of magazines and journals. The essays cover experiments with materials, personal stories about questing for cures, moon exploration, AI and longevity studies.
All the pieces are interesting and are well selected to convey an overview of some of the main themes in contemporary Science.
One that particularly stood out for me was the piece on vaccines and the way that vaccines seem to be having an unintended additional immunology benefit, boosting children’s abilities to resist more than just what the vaccine was designed to deal with. The implications of that are enormous, especially in the challenging environments depicted in the article where child mortality is still so high that parents do not give their babies a name for several months after birth, in case they don’t make it.
Another interesting piece was the one on Free Will. It is reporting somewhat older science, but there are still many who are unaware of it, so it was good to see the piece. It takes as its point of departure the older research by Libet which initially seemed to suggest that there was no such thing as free will because an ‘action’ signal spikes in the brain before people are aware of their decision to act. So, clearly the brain decides to act, before people decide. Thus there is no freewill (or so the argument used to go).
The article focuses on Aaron Schurger’s 2012 research which suggests that the initial brain signal has been misinterpreted. That signal (Bereitschaftspotential) is not causal. It seems to be symmetry breaking in neuronal interactions, rather than causing actions. Part of what showed this to be the case was reconstructing Libet’s original experiments but adding a control group that did nothing at all. When similar brain signals were seen in that group, as in the group which initiated an action, it finally began to show that that brain pattern cannot be ‘causing’ a free will decision to act, otherwise why was it present in the group that did not act.
Overall this is an enjoyable wide ranging set of thought provoking essays, which has been written for non-specialists. The pieces are accessible to readers with a general interest, including potentially interested high school students.
All the pieces are interesting and are well selected to convey an overview of some of the main themes in contemporary Science.
One that particularly stood out for me was the piece on vaccines and the way that vaccines seem to be having an unintended additional immunology benefit, boosting children’s abilities to resist more than just what the vaccine was designed to deal with. The implications of that are enormous, especially in the challenging environments depicted in the article where child mortality is still so high that parents do not give their babies a name for several months after birth, in case they don’t make it.
Another interesting piece was the one on Free Will. It is reporting somewhat older science, but there are still many who are unaware of it, so it was good to see the piece. It takes as its point of departure the older research by Libet which initially seemed to suggest that there was no such thing as free will because an ‘action’ signal spikes in the brain before people are aware of their decision to act. So, clearly the brain decides to act, before people decide. Thus there is no freewill (or so the argument used to go).
The article focuses on Aaron Schurger’s 2012 research which suggests that the initial brain signal has been misinterpreted. That signal (Bereitschaftspotential) is not causal. It seems to be symmetry breaking in neuronal interactions, rather than causing actions. Part of what showed this to be the case was reconstructing Libet’s original experiments but adding a control group that did nothing at all. When similar brain signals were seen in that group, as in the group which initiated an action, it finally began to show that that brain pattern cannot be ‘causing’ a free will decision to act, otherwise why was it present in the group that did not act.
Overall this is an enjoyable wide ranging set of thought provoking essays, which has been written for non-specialists. The pieces are accessible to readers with a general interest, including potentially interested high school students.
June 21, 2021
I like reading these books to catch up on all the features I may have missed throughout the year — more often than not, these features relate to climate change or the environment, and the concrete, human stories that come with it. But another dimension of these stories, as Jaime Green writes in the foreword, is the “wonder and beauty and pain” within each of these essays, and our never-ending quest to understand science and nature.
Michio Kaku, in his introduction, emphasizes the need for scientists to leave the ivory tower and excite the public by creating “compelling, exciting, and fascinating stories” in three ways: 1. capturing the excitement of scientists doing research; 2. bringing the drama out of the aha moment of scientific discovery; and 3. getting the reader excited about the potential benefits of this discovery.
All valid criteria for selecting these essays. Unfortunately, as a professor of physics, Kaku seemed to favor a number of non-environmental stories: from brain functions to the science of smelling to extraterrestrial exploration — all uniquely fascinating stories, but stories that fail to resonate with me like a good climate read.
That said, a number of stories did pique my interest. These include “The Eighth Continent,” which explores the future of moon colonization, as it relates to resource extraction; “Younger Longer,” which writes a new narrative on aging, one that extends life by cutting out aging; “We Have Fire Everywhere,” which gives a devastating firsthand account of the infamous 2018 Camp Fire in California; “The Final Five Percent,” which investigates how much we’re captive to the impulses of our brain, through the story of a brain-damaged criminal; and “The /Hunt for Planet Nine,” which describes the painstaking process of searching for a planet far beyond the boundaries of Pluto, and the sometimes unexpected satisfaction of searching versus actual discovery.
Michio Kaku, in his introduction, emphasizes the need for scientists to leave the ivory tower and excite the public by creating “compelling, exciting, and fascinating stories” in three ways: 1. capturing the excitement of scientists doing research; 2. bringing the drama out of the aha moment of scientific discovery; and 3. getting the reader excited about the potential benefits of this discovery.
All valid criteria for selecting these essays. Unfortunately, as a professor of physics, Kaku seemed to favor a number of non-environmental stories: from brain functions to the science of smelling to extraterrestrial exploration — all uniquely fascinating stories, but stories that fail to resonate with me like a good climate read.
That said, a number of stories did pique my interest. These include “The Eighth Continent,” which explores the future of moon colonization, as it relates to resource extraction; “Younger Longer,” which writes a new narrative on aging, one that extends life by cutting out aging; “We Have Fire Everywhere,” which gives a devastating firsthand account of the infamous 2018 Camp Fire in California; “The Final Five Percent,” which investigates how much we’re captive to the impulses of our brain, through the story of a brain-damaged criminal; and “The /Hunt for Planet Nine,” which describes the painstaking process of searching for a planet far beyond the boundaries of Pluto, and the sometimes unexpected satisfaction of searching versus actual discovery.
December 16, 2021
The guest editors of any edition of the Best American series have an outsized influence on how enjoyable/interesting each edition is, with each editor leaving their mark on the type of essays selected. The 2020 edition of the Science & Nature Writing clearly shows Michio Kaku's interests: there are a lot of essays and articles about technology (including two very similar one's about AI and writing), space and neuroscience, as well as articles with very technical writing (the graphene one). There's also some interesting choices, such as 'The Day the Dinosaurs Died', which was heavily criticized by paleontologists when it first came out in the New Yorker in 2019. But, because it's an anthology, there's always a handful of standouts. This year, these were the stories with one or two clear characters: The Final Five Percent, "We Have Fire Everywhere", "The Hunt for Planet Nine" and the heart-breaking Total Eclipse.
This did feel like a less diverse collection, both in terms of the author's background (9/24 were written by women) and the topics+sources (no plant focused stories for instance, most of the researchers are at American/European research institutes and universities).
This did feel like a less diverse collection, both in terms of the author's background (9/24 were written by women) and the topics+sources (no plant focused stories for instance, most of the researchers are at American/European research institutes and universities).
April 9, 2021
I am a fan of this series. Although, I missed the categorization of topics used in the 2019 edition, the articles chosen for this year's (2020) edition were excellent. My preference is for articles that relate one on one personal experiences that the author has had with the topic. This edition was loaded with that type of writing. Depending on the article, you could be in the middle of a California wildfire, on the top of a Hawaiian mountain looking for a new planet, being present on the day dinosaurs were exterminated by an asteroid, following dogs in a hospital to sniff out cancer in patients, treating cancer patients with super energized cells from their own body, having artificial intelligence predict accurately what you wanted to say in an essay or buying extinct creatures encased in a solid clear ball of amber. What's not to like in this edition for a scientist interested in well constructed articles covering a wide range of science? And as a microbiologist, I even enjoyed the cover photography that depicted petri dishes with inoculated MacConkey, blood agar, etc., plates.
April 9, 2023
“So scientists and science writers have a monumental task: making science exiting and relevant to the average person, so that they care about science. If we fail in this endeavor, then we must face dire consequences.”
Awesome anthology of science writing. Topics ranged from things I knew I was interested in (animal consciousness, glaciers disappearing from Yosemite, the search for extraterrestrial life) to subjects I didn’t know much about but was happy to learn about (human aging, AI)
Other quotes I liked:
“One evolutionary rationale is that there is something essential to human groups, with the slowly unfolding infancy of their young, in keeping the old folks around even when they can’t make more young folks. Old folks are the cultural repositories of extended cultural memory: it would seem to be advantageous to have a few senior citizens around who know what to do, so to speak, when winter comes.”
“The true condition of youth is the physical ability to forget ourselves”
Awesome anthology of science writing. Topics ranged from things I knew I was interested in (animal consciousness, glaciers disappearing from Yosemite, the search for extraterrestrial life) to subjects I didn’t know much about but was happy to learn about (human aging, AI)
Other quotes I liked:
“One evolutionary rationale is that there is something essential to human groups, with the slowly unfolding infancy of their young, in keeping the old folks around even when they can’t make more young folks. Old folks are the cultural repositories of extended cultural memory: it would seem to be advantageous to have a few senior citizens around who know what to do, so to speak, when winter comes.”
“The true condition of youth is the physical ability to forget ourselves”
June 17, 2024
I always enjoy these essay collections. I was flustered that the editions cover the preceding year, so this one was actually 2019 articles. Aaarghhh. I wanted an overview of Covid science!! Oh well - onto the next one!
This one had lots of gems. Stuff that really struck me:
- The horrors of California wildfires, as experienced on the ground.
- Two excellent paleontology articles (who knew I loved paleontology so much).
- An adorable buddy movie about astrophysicists trying to find Planet Nine.
- A heartbreaking one about a young girl's mental health.
- A great one about immunotherapy.
Less exciting was the stodgy New Yorker article about natural language processing, large language models (aka, LLMs, aka ChatGPT and "AI"). There wasn't anything explicitly factually incorrect about it - it does a decent job of describing what LLMs are, etc - and I even agreed with some of the opinionated Luddite hand-wringing. But something altogether about it felt cringe.
This one had lots of gems. Stuff that really struck me:
- The horrors of California wildfires, as experienced on the ground.
- Two excellent paleontology articles (who knew I loved paleontology so much).
- An adorable buddy movie about astrophysicists trying to find Planet Nine.
- A heartbreaking one about a young girl's mental health.
- A great one about immunotherapy.
Less exciting was the stodgy New Yorker article about natural language processing, large language models (aka, LLMs, aka ChatGPT and "AI"). There wasn't anything explicitly factually incorrect about it - it does a decent job of describing what LLMs are, etc - and I even agreed with some of the opinionated Luddite hand-wringing. But something altogether about it felt cringe.
May 26, 2021
This may be the one in this series that has broken me. I'm reluctant to read another volume in the Best American Science and Nature Writing series ever again. There were a couple of pieces I really liked. These were "I, Language Robert" by Patrick House and "Beauty of the Beasts" by Ferris Jabr. House's essay, as well as another in this collection by John Seabrook, reveal what a false promise predictive AI has been for language software programs. "Beauty of the Beasts" is a wonderful little essay about the evolutionary value of beauty and struggles with without answering the question, Are things made beautiful for selective advantage or is beauty a byproduct of nature's design? Everything else... Well, maybe you'd find something you like here.
May 16, 2023
Just a reminder that three stars means "I liked it." (Hey, I didn't design the system.)
This is very much a book to read if you're into science and nature writing and very much a book not to read if you're not. The selections generally are interesting topics and the ones chosen are well written and designed to be read by anyone with an interest in the subject and enough background knowledge not to get bogged down.
And don't forget that if you're reading this because you're interested in the subject matter, you are actually allowed to skip an article if you just can't get into it. I didn't have that problem but I'd hate for anyone to lay the book aside just because one article isn't up your alley. Plus you don't even have to read the articles in order.
This is very much a book to read if you're into science and nature writing and very much a book not to read if you're not. The selections generally are interesting topics and the ones chosen are well written and designed to be read by anyone with an interest in the subject and enough background knowledge not to get bogged down.
And don't forget that if you're reading this because you're interested in the subject matter, you are actually allowed to skip an article if you just can't get into it. I didn't have that problem but I'd hate for anyone to lay the book aside just because one article isn't up your alley. Plus you don't even have to read the articles in order.
July 25, 2025
I love a thrift store find as high quality as this! This book started off interesting due to the timing of all the essays selected juxtaposed with the forward, which was written after the pandemic hit. And from there, it just kept going.
My favorite essays were Sleep No More, about the scientist power couple working to solve their own genetic ticking time bomb; Right Under Our Noses about smell; I, Language Robot, which was fascinating to read now that generative AI has been in the public sphere for a hot minute; "We Have Fire Everywhere," about fires in CA; The Day The Dinosaurs Died; and The Hidden Heroines of Chaos, about two unsung women behind Chaos Theory.
All in all, an excellent read. I'll probably pick up another one of these from a different year at some point.
My favorite essays were Sleep No More, about the scientist power couple working to solve their own genetic ticking time bomb; Right Under Our Noses about smell; I, Language Robot, which was fascinating to read now that generative AI has been in the public sphere for a hot minute; "We Have Fire Everywhere," about fires in CA; The Day The Dinosaurs Died; and The Hidden Heroines of Chaos, about two unsung women behind Chaos Theory.
All in all, an excellent read. I'll probably pick up another one of these from a different year at some point.
March 4, 2021
A lucky dip of essays with some familiar topics, where a different angle is provide, and some less familiar topics to me. Some good selections on infections, diseases, and treatments this year. I particularly enjoyed essays on aging, engineering T-cell treatments for cancer, and non-specific effects of measles vaccination. One or two controversial articles where you need to look up the background to check whether the science is solid (sometimes it isn't). All thought provoking.
September 6, 2021
Excellent selection of pieces exemplifying the art of science communication. All thoroughly readable and enjoyable. Some also stimulating, some truly enlightening. Notably absent are polemic and hard sell prescriptions for "fixing" things, which have detracted from some recent popular science best sellers. Personal favorite: "New Blood," by Siddhartha Mukherjee, which other cancer survivors may want to read, too.
October 6, 2021
Awesome. So informative, lots of articles on a wide range of subjects. I admit, I did not understand all the science, but reading about the folks that do understand it and are pursuing it and making progress and discoveries is uplifting. Nice compilation series. I saw in the back there are a bunch of others in "The Best American" writing series of books, and I may look for the Short Stories one. Great find!
December 6, 2022
A fascinating collection of 24 articles about a wide range of science and nature topics. Most of the articles are accessible for someone not well versed in science writing, which is appreciated. A couple got heavy into technical details, and they were the hardest to get through. I recommend reading each article at a time, rather than trying to power through the book in one go.
I'm still fascinated by the inability to make an AI that can smell.
I'm still fascinated by the inability to make an AI that can smell.
February 6, 2024
Interesting articles but they weren't organized by subject matter which I thought was odd. There were so many interesting sounding articles listed in the back, for recognition but they didn't make the cut for the book, that I thought it was dumb there were multiple very similar articles chosen when there were that many other good pieces to choose from. There were 2 similar neuroscience ones and 2 paleontology ones- I thought they were kind of too similar to both be included.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews