Archive for the ‘science’ Category

Enter Jeeves by P.G. Wodehouse

Friday, June 5th, 2009

First off, Jeeves is a valet, not a butler. He works for Bertie Wooster, a man of leisure. This is a collection of some of the early Jeeves stories and a few non-Jeeves stories. The stories, although fairly similar to each other, are good. The dialogue is great, with old chestnuts like “Right-o!” and “Did you, by Jove?” Good stuff.

After reading this book, I really want to be a man of leisure. Most of the characters have plenty of money without working. Several of the stories involve a character trying to keep his income that he receives from his rich uncle or aunt. They just sleep late, eat breakfast and read the paper, head down to the club for some lunch, and then go out for a show and dinner in the evening. What a life! Where do I sign up?

Book Review: The Idiot’s Guide to Biology by Glen E. Moulton

Sunday, February 8th, 2009

It’s been 17 years since I took a biology class; I’m more of a physics/chemistry kind of guy. Over the past few years, though, I’ve been reading books about biology, mostly Richard Dawkins, and I felt I needed to go back and get a base in the subject. So, I picked up The Idiot’s Guide to Biology.

Does anyone like the title The Idiot’s Guide to…? I can’t imagine anyone says “Yeah, the idiot’s guide. Just what I need!” They should go with something more subtle, but I can’t think of an alternative right now. At least it’s better than …for Dummies. Anyway, I read it on the train here in Japan, so it didn’t really matter, but I doubt I would read it in public in the U.S. There would just be too many people yelling, “Hey, idiot!”

In very clear, easy-to-understand language the book starts with some chemistry and then moves on to cell structures and functions, inheritance, evolution, and then to plants and animals before ending on biospheres. I’m embarrassed to say I really learned a lot. There was so much new information for me, I’ll probably read it again. There were parts that I thought might have been over the heads of those new to biology, but overall it builds well upon itself and assumes little previous knowledge on the reader’s part.

If you want to catch up on some biology, I recommend this book.

The Ancestor’s Tale by Richard Dawkins #7

Friday, August 24th, 2007

I just finished The Ancestor’s Tale.  It’s by far my favorite Dawkins book because it’s by far the most readable.  Dawkins is most interesting when he’s discussing specific examples, and this book is full of tales about the animals that join us on the backwards pilgrimage to the ancestor of all life on earth.

Near the end, he wrote about the possibility of evolution repeating itself if it began again from the same starting point.  It was interesting to read about different animal features that have evolved independently, such as the eye.  Maybe our first alien visitors will have eyes.

Also, I didn’t realize before that life as we know it couldn’t originate in our current atmosphere because of the oxygen.

If you haven’t read Dawkins before this book is a good place to start.  I wish I had read it before The Blind Watchmaker and The Selfish Gene.  The next Dawkins book I’d like to read is The Extended Phenotype, but it won’t be soon as I have other books to read.

The Ancestor’s Tale by Richard Dawkins #6

Tuesday, July 24th, 2007

Today I learned that starfish don’t have blood; they use pumped sea water instead.  Amazing!  What will they think of next?

The Ancestor’s Tale by Richard Dawkins #5

Friday, July 6th, 2007

Today I read about the size of testes in animals and how it relates to that animal’s mating habits.  Gorillas, when compared to the size of their bodies, have small testes, while chimpanzees have large testes.  The reason Dawkins gives is that chimpanzees often mate with multiple partners around the same time, so their sperm compete to pass on that chimpanzee’s genes.  Chimpanzees with larger testes produce more sperm, giving them a higher chance of success.  Male gorillas, however, tend to have harems.  Their competition to reproduce is physical, so they need to be big, but they don’t need big testes.  Now, if only Dawkins would explain why tanuki have such large testes.

The Ancestor’s Tale by Richard Dawkins #4

Saturday, June 30th, 2007

I’ve always wondered how islands become populated with animals and vegetation, especially those islands that are created by cooled lava. How does an island go from being made of rock to being covered with soil and vegetation? Part of the answer came to me while reading this book today.

I read about the separation of Old World Monkeys and New World Monkeys. I’d never really thought about how monkeys made their way from Africa to South America. Dawkins’ idea is that they crossed from Africa to South America on rafts made of land that broke off from the mainland. The two continents were closer then and the ocean level was lower, which means there could have been islands along the way. Although the odds are low that this would happen, millions of years can turn low odds into good odds. He gave an example of iguanas traveling from one island to another on earth and logs after a hurricane a few years back in the Caribbean. I would love to see a group of monkeys rocking across the Atlantic on a piece of floating earth. Go monkeys, go!

The Ancestor’s Tale by Richard Dawkins #3

Wednesday, June 27th, 2007

I’m reading now about the ideas of why humans became bipedal. Dawkins summarizes some interesting theories, the most interesting of which is that males stood upright to show off their genitalia and females stood upright to hide their genitalia. Wow. The idea that Dawkins seems to support is that standing upright freed the hands to do other things. An interesting point is that there isn’t much difference in the brains of our ancestors who stood upright as opposed to those who walked on all fours, at least for those that lived around the same time. The idea he mentions is that the hardware (our bodies) changed first and then the software (our brains) caught up. I should probably correct myself, as the term “our ancestors” isn’t a fair term. I should say “hominids who lived at that time” as they didn’t all become our ancestors.

The Ancestor’s Tale by Richard Dawkins #2

Saturday, June 23rd, 2007

I’m just over a tenth of the way through this book and it’s great so far. One of the points early in the book that caught my attention is the Great Leap Forward. Around 40,000 years ago humans changed. It wasn’t a physical change, at least no more a change through evolution than there’s been at any other time. For millions of years before the Great Leap, human artifacts that we find look about the same. After the leap, paintings, carvings, figurines, and musical instruments appear. What happened 40,000 years ago to make us change so quickly? Did God give us a boost? Did aliens? Or, did we just finally start thinking abstractly?

Later, Dawkins writes about the development of language in humans. It’s still a point of debate–a society in Paris that he mentions stopped debates of the topic in the 1800’s because they saw it as unsolvable–but his explanation of the evidence is interesting.

The Ancestor’s Tale by Richard Dawkins #1

Friday, June 15th, 2007

The Ancestor’s Tale follows evolution backwards in time to find a common ancestor for all life on the planet. This is the fourth Dawkins book I’ve read, and although I’m still very early in the book, I think it’s going to be my favorite. Dawkins’ books are most interesting when he writes about concrete examples, not just theories or ideas, and so far real world examples have filled the text.

After a general prologue in which he explains the organization of the book and some of the research methods used, he writes about the Agricultural Revolution. I remember learning about the Agricultural Revolution in school, but I never thought about the implications outside of Mesopotamia or its relation to civilization. Then I read Ishmael by Daniel Quinn, and I understood that through agriculture groups of people could stay in the same place and build cities, thus creating civilization. Another idea from Ishmael is that people were doing fine before the Agricultural Revolution and although there was some fighting between groups, overall people lived in relative peace with each other and nature. Then, with the onset of civilization, civilized groups spread their culture, mostly through warfare, throughout most of the world. This spread of civilization brought with it destruction of natural resources and increased work for people, who had previously lived off the land with relative ease. I know that can’t be completely true, but I was mostly convinced for a while that civilization was bad and that it was more of a disease than a way to live. Dawkins, however, disagrees. He says that even before the agricultural revolution, species of animals went extinct because of human hunters, so the idea of an early Utopia with groups of people living in harmony with nature is wrong. Either way, we did a lot less damage before the revolution than after it.

As an aside, I mentioned extinction in the previous paragraph as a negative, which I think it is if humans are directly responsible for it. I don’t think, however, that extinction in nature is necessarily bad: it’s a natural part of evolution. If a species has qualities that allow it to survive, then it should be able to evolve again.

Dawkins also discussed lactose intolerance in humans. Although I knew it was unnatural for us to drink the milk of other animals, I didn’t realize human genes generally stop tolerance for lactose around the age of four. I drink lots of milk and have no problems with it at all. The people who are intolerant are normal, so I guess that makes me a freak. All right!