The Ideas of Physics by Douglas C. Giancoli (review)

Books 333 no cause for alarm; the economic system of capitalism has becomemore stable, conditions of life have improved vastly, in the former non-white colonies conditions have not actually worsened and Marx was wrong to reject the idea of gradual reform. No suggestion here of crisis in the economic system, of a crisis of energy resources; no suggestion of third world famine; no suggestion that there might be limits to ballot-box reform, that the rich may fight to protect what they have. No doubt the charge of complacency is unfair, but the general format of the book invites it. Finally, at one point Stevenson suggests that the seven different views are not necessarily all incompatible and can be seen as emphasizing differentelements in the whole truth about humans. He backs away from this conclusion a bit, but in any introductory survey it should be shunned. Who will struggle to understand Sartre, if Sartre is simply emphasizing the element of moral responsibility in humans? Or Lorenz, if Lorenz is simply emphasizing the animal origins of some human behaviour? And it is hard to seewhat element Christianity is emphasizing: one cannot say the divine element unless one is a believer. The point that is likely to attract the beginner is that these rival views are subversive of received opinion, all in their different ways (including Christianity, taken seriously). To suggest otherwise may blunt enthusiasm. This is a book whose basic concept is dubious. Yet the concept is skillfullyexecuted. The Ideas of Physics. Douglas C. Giancoli. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York, 1974. 453 pp. Reviewed by Grace Marmor Spruch* During the last few decades, attempts have been made in the USA. to make sciencemore accessibleto the general public. To reach readers who, otherwise intelligent, go into shock at the sight of an equation, a spate of books has been published recently that teachers of physics characterize as ‘physics for poets’. These are of two types, one dealing with the history and/or philosophy of science, generally on a sophisticated level. The other is what could be called a watered-down physics text, in which only a few subjects are covered,these with verylimited mathematics and a multitude of examples from everyday life. Giancoli’s book straddles both categories and falls into neither. It covers some history, some philosophy and the physics in a standard first-year university text but with the entire book watered down. The ‘ideas of physics’ of the title means not major concepts but the broad spectrum of physics in words, without mathematics. It is like an encyclopedia with entries arranged conceptually rather than alphabetically. The approach is interesting. The explanations areclear and understandable. There are numerous examples from daily life and simple experiments are outlined for the reader to perform with materials that are readily available. The illustrations resembleartists’ sketchesmore than draftsmens’ drawings found in textbooks. All of this certainly helps to make physics accessible. The author frequently states equations in words rather than mathematical symbols, which may be cheating, but experience in teaching nonsciencestudents has shown that it works for those suffering ‘mathematicalblock‘. My reservations are not about the physics in the book. Physicscan be watered down without distortion, particularly by a physicist, who, presumably, knows which details should not be omitted; and watering down may well be necessaryfor those who cannot, or will not, ‘take their physics straight’. That is not the case with history or philosophy, however. They becomesimplisticwhen oversimplified;and they can be taken undiluted. To treat Galileo’s recantation of his scientific beliefs with the line ‘being a practical man-for which men of sciencecan be thankful-Galileo recanted his views and was released‘ gives no insight into what occurred *Dept. of Physics, Newark College of Arts and Sciences, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ 07102,USA. .and may even be a disservice. The same is true for sentences such as: ‘The planets and the fixed stars became part of the religion of the ancients; and astrology was born.’ ‘Woodrow Wilson pointed out that the political philosophy of the British Whigs, which influenced the American Revolution, was a copy of Newtonian physics.’ Surely the last requires additional explanation to be meaningful. A second quarrel...