The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, by Thomas Kuhn

I read The Structure of Scientific Revolutions in preparation for writing on my Physics Rebooted blog. This book blew my mind. It showed that the process of scientific discovery we're taught in school is a complete fabrication. They say the history books are written by the winners, and the same is true for science books.

This idea is something I've noticed in my own work in drug discovery. Many scientists think that progress is as easy as coming up with a theory and then doing a few experiments to prove the theory. And then they are shocked when the experiments don't go as expected. I believe this attitude is a result of how science is taught in school because it mostly removes mention of competing theories, false starts, incorrect assumptions, etc.

The net result is that most people, including many practicing scientists, don't realize that Science is F**king Hard. This view is further supported by Kuhn's book.

Written in 1962, the book gives many examples of how scientific revolution is the normal process for how progress is made in science. This is the best book I've read on how science actually works and how it is actually practiced. For instance, most professional scientists are content to be "puzzle solvers" working on problems nicely contained within a proscribed area with clearly defined theories and assumptions. And most are very uncomfortable when those theories and assumptions are challenged.

The book helps explain by Lewis Little's Theory of Elementary Waves has not taken the physics world by storm even though it finally gives a non-contradictory explanation of quantum phenomena such as the double-slit experiment. Kuhn's book is also useful in setting expectations for my Physics Rebooted blog--it will probably take a generation or more for Little's theory to be generally accepted (assuming, of course, that it is shown to be correct).

Life Ascending: The Ten Great Inventions of Evolution, by Nick Lane

This book covers ten key events in evolution, from the origin of life to the origin of death. Lane is a biologist and knows his stuff. He is also very good at explaining complicated science. I thought the chapters on the evolution of photosynthesis, of muscles and of the eye were especially good.

I enjoyed all the chapters except one--the one on consciousness. For some reason, he believes the key unit of consciousness is a feeling rather than an integration, and induction or even a choice to focus. He doesn't seen to realize that feelings are automatic evaluations made by our brain to tell us if our current situation is good or bad according to the values we've chosen.

However, even in the flawed chapter on consciousness, he did provide several interesting facts on how the brain works such as the synchronous waves around 40 hertz which appear to be necessary to bring something from the sub-conscience up to the conscious level.

Overall, the book is a fascinating look into how biological systems work and how they came to be.

Animal Farm, by George Orwell

I read this book in high school when I didn't know it was an allegory for Soviet Russia.  This time around, it was interesting to look up the parallels to the Soviet revolution.

The book was a quick read but not as good as I remembered. The style is very narrator-centered and reads more like a newspaper story at times than a novel. Animal Farm was most powerful when I remembered that the farm animals represented real people and personality types in Soviet Russia.

Soft-Wired, by Michael Merzenich

Soft-Wired: How the New Science of Brain Plasticity Can Change your Life confirmed my view that the brain is like any other organ in your body--it needs to be exercised otherwise it atrophies. Merzenich is a brain scientist at UCSF and has been studying the brain for over thirty years. He gives a very convincing case that the brain can be modified at any age to improve it efficiency and power.

Although it is still just a theory, he suggests that by exercising your brain you can forestall the onset of Alzheimer's disease and has created a company, BrainHQ, to provide exercises. I plan to get a subscription and try it out.

I read his book because his company is also tackling diseases such as schizophrenia and autism which will be the future focus of my research at work. Perhaps the biggest breakthroughs in these disease will be through computer-based training rather than pharmaceuticals.

No Place to Hide, by Glenn Greenwald

I read No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State by Glenn Greenwald after watching Citizenfour. The documentary was excellent and was amazing because it showed actual footage of what happened when Snowden first came forward. The book did provide some more details and had a better explanation of the documents Snowden released, but the movie was much more compelling.

Wool, by Hugh Howey

I only made it to through three of the five Wool books. I liked the first one because there was the big mystery of the silo and the character was interesting. And then the main character was killed off! It was tough to start over again with book two getting to know a new character and I didn't like her as much as the first one.  This book is a good example of why you shouldn't have the reader invest time getting to know a character only to kill them off in the middle of the book.

But I stopped reading the series because it got boring. Once the mystery of the silo was revealed, I just didn't care what happened any more. The characters weren't compelling enough. Perhaps if they were more proactive. Or if we knew more of their backstory so we knew what motivated them.

The Fountainhead, by Ayn Rand

I believe this is the third time I read The Fountainhead and, of course, I enjoyed it. I read it because my son read it in his 8th grade class as Van Damme Academy. I had trouble helping him answer some of his essay questions on the novel about the character's motivations so I thought I'd read it again so I was more clear on the characters. Unfortunately, I still didn't understand all the motivations and why they said the things they did.

Reading it again, I realized The Fountainhead is probably Ayn Rand's most autobiographical novel, at least as her own motivations are concerned. I believe the motivations of Roark and Dominique are similar to Rand's and she was explaining how she thinks about her art in some of the key passages in The Fountainhead.

It's a great book, but I still like Atlas Shrugged better.

The People Have Spoken (and They Are Wrong): The Case Against Democracy, by David Harsanyi

I read this book after Republicans chose Trump as their nominee in the 2016 presidential primaries (which shocked and appalled me). I don't remember much about it except that a) it reinforced my view that democracy is really just mob rule and was not intended to be the system the Founders created, and b) some chapters got too technical and weren't as interesting.

But overall, a book worth reading.

13 Hours, by Mitchell Zuckoff with the Annex Security Team

I read this after seeing the movie which I really enjoyed. I read this to learn more about what happened but it didn't provide much more than what was in the movie. And, unfortunately, it wasn't as compelling as the movie.

Overall, both the movie and the book was balanced and non-partisan which is what should be expected.

It, by Stephen King (Parts 1 & 2)

Even though It is very good, I have to take a break after completing 40%. It has all the characteristics of a great Stephen King novel: excellent description and style that brings the reader into the story, deep characters that are interesting to read about, and a fascinating premise about a monster that terrorizes a town every 27 years. However, even with these elements, I don't look forward to reading it at night the way I did with King's other epic novels, The Stand and Under the Dome. Is it because I've grown to love these characters and I don't want to read about bad things happening to them, which I know is coming? Or is it because I know the ending is not going to bring everything together in a satisfying conclusion and will disappoint me the way The Stand and Under the Dome did? Or is the world that King has created in It just too fantastical for my taste? Or too scary?

I'm not sure. All I know is that I need a break from It. I'll read 13 Hours next (I watched and enjoyed the movie last night) and then I'll see if I can get back into It.

Ready Player One, by Ernest Cline

I thoroughly enjoyed Ready Player One while I read it. But this book is right in my wheelhouse: I grew up playing Atari 2600 games, programming early Atari computers, and hanging out in dark arcades playing Tempest, Battlezone and Donkey Kong. The book tells the story of an Easter egg hunt in an elaborate multi-player game that has become an escape for millions in a dystopian future.

Wade Watts, known as Parzival while in the game, is the main character and is well fleshed out because we get to know his inner thoughts and concerns. Unfortunately, he's the only character that comes to life. But this story is primarily driven by the hunt for the Easter egg. The style is fairly pedestrian and relies mostly on telling with very little showing.

As for theme, Cline tries to bring in the idea that escaping reality through video games is problematic and that people should face their fears and learn to deal with people in the real world. But this comes too little, too late because the theme wasn't developed throughout the novel. For instance, if Wade had chosen earlier in the book to hide from reality and it created a set-back in his quest, the theme could have been better developed. But as it stands, the theme felt tacked on at the end.

However, as a whole, I enjoyed Ready Player One and it shows that an excellent concept with a compelling plot can carry modest characterization and an unexceptional style.

The Martian, by Andy Weir

I simply loved The Martian. But take heed: I'm a science geek and if you're not also one, you might hate this book. Some portions are elaborate math problems that Weir walks you through step by step. It sounds boring, but it was actually fascinating to me because solving these problems was the only way Mark Watney, a NASA astronaut stranded on Mars, could stay alive.

What I liked best about The Martian was Watney's sense of humor. Even though he was often in impossible situations, he kept his sense of humor and always met his challenges head on, using science and his ingenuity to save himself time and again.

The book also covers events at NASA as they work to save Watney and on board the Hermes where the rest of his crew escaped to after they accidentally left him alive on Mars. These parts are also good, but Watney on Mars are the best ones.

I went to see the movie the day after I finished reading the book, and I had high expectations. Perhaps too high because I liked the book a lot better. The movie version made Watney more dramatic and lost most of his sense of humor. However, the ending of the movie where both the captain and Watney are involved in the final rescue was better than the ending of the book. In fiction, the hero always needs to be the prime mover in the resolution of the story.

The Great Train Robbery, by Michael Crichton

The Great Train Robbery, one of Crichton's novels from the middle of his career, reads more like non-fiction than fiction with extensive research into an actual robbery that took place in 1855. Even though it wasn't told in a dramatized fashion, the story was still very interesting. I also enjoyed reading about 19th century life in London.

Most of the book involves the copying of four keys needed to unlock the safe carrying gold on the train. The last quarter of the book involves the actual robbery itself and all the last minute changes in plans make this part especially exciting. But the real payoff of the book is the ending, where the criminal mastermind behind the crime announces his escape during his trial and then actually pulls it off.

It's interesting that Crichton seems to be telling an un-embellished history of the actual train robbery but still markets it as a novel. Perhaps he just figured it would sell more copies that way.

Dark Watch, by Clive Cussler

I still don't understand the appeal of Clive Cussler (or his co-writers who are probably writing most of his books these days). There's plenty of action, but it's boring and tedious because the characters aren't well developed. It's odd. Even though we get background on the captain and learn some of his motivation, I still didn't care about him.

But perhaps what turned me off most in Dark Watch was that the bad guys plan was to corner the market on gold so they could mess with the world monetary supply (or something). But this is completely ridiculous because the world hasn't been on a gold standard since 1974! Once I'd read that, I lost all confidence in the authors and it made it difficult to continue.

I only made it about half way through, and it didn't get any better. I suppose this just isn't my type of fiction. But there are plenty of people who do enjoy it, and that's cool.

The Finale Silence, by Stuart Neville

This is book four in the Belfast novels, all apparently featuring Jack Lennon as the protagonist, but it's the first I read from this author. It was decent, but not great, and I likely won't read another book by this author. It kept me interested but I never got too attached to any of the characters. The main character, Jack Lennon, is a bit of a loser in his personal life. And in his professional life, I don't remember him doing anything very daring or clever to solve the case.

I read this book a few months ago and it's tough to remember much about it. I did enjoy the beginning and actually liked the character of Rea. Unfortunately, she didn't live very long in the book, and a lot of what got me interested in The Finale Silence died with her.

In general, I think it's a mistake to develop a character only to kill them off in the middle of the book. While it will be shocking to the reader in the short term, it's also not fair to the reader either, and destroys some of the trust between reader and author.

A Disgrace to the Profession, by Mark Steyn

A Disgrace to the Profession, The World's Scientists--in their own words--on Michael E. Mann, His Hockey Stick, and Their Damage to Science is brilliant. Michael Mann sued Mark Steyn for calling Mann's so-called Hockey Stick graph of temperature change fraudulent. Steyn is fighting the lawsuit to fight for free speech, and part of his defense it to show that his characterization of the graph as fraudulent is not slander because other climate scientists also believe it is questionable, a few going so far as to also call it a fraud. This book is Steyn's research, organized by topic and very easy to read. Any one looking to see how corrupt climate science has become need look no further than A Disgrace to the Profession.

Whiskey Sour, by J. A. Konrath

Whiskey Sour was a decent book with an interesting protagonist, good suspense and efficient plotting. There were several times where I thought the story was going in one direction only to take a completely different turn which made it more exciting.

Konrath is a solid writer who excels at plot and suspense, and Whiskey Sour is a good example.

Finders Keepers, by Stephen King

I loved the first third of this book, and thought it would compete with Misery as my favorite Stephen King book. He introduced two interesting characters, one a thief with mother issues who is passionate about a particular writer, and the other a high school student from a troubled home who is passionate about the same writer. King goes into the magic that writers can have on people and the soul-filling nourishment that a good book can give people, especially ones who feel alone and alienated in the world. Finders Keepers was heading for great things with an important theme, something King hits upon once in a while.

And then Bill Hodges and his detective gang entered the book, and everything changed. Hodges was no longer the suicidal ex-cop looking for a reason to live (as he was in the first novel) and instead worries about his cholesterol. Gone were the important themes about literature to be replaced by an ex-con on the loose threatening people to get back what he stole thirty years earlier. The book became a standard detective thriller, which in itself wasn't bad, but it could have been so much more based on the first third of the book. I had gotten my hopes up for something along the lines of The Green Mile and Shawshank Redemption, but instead got the more pedestrian Under the Dome.

The Given Day, by Dennis Lehane

This is the first Dennis Lehane novel I've read and I think I selected poorly. I was looking for a suspenseful thriller, which his earlier works apparently are, but with this book he was going for more of a "literary work." Unfortunately, "literary" appears to include a meandering plot and a main character who acts inconsistently and doesn't really believe in anything. I kept waiting to see what the book was really about, but I never found out.

Lehane brought up many potentially interesting themes--worker's rights, immigrant's rights, police men's rights--but the main character never took a consistent stand on these and so the book ended up not having any theme. The two mostly separate sub-plots involving a black man on the run after committing murder and Babe Ruth rising up to become a star were actually more interesting than the main plot because at least these characters knew what they wanted and fought for it (more in the former than the latter).

I plan to try one more Lehane novel, probably one of his earlier ones, and I'm hoping it's much more suspenseful. Lehane has a good style and can create interesting characters, but unless those characters do something that has an overall purpose, the books will be boring.

Pocket-47, by Jude Hardin

Pocket-47 was recommended by J. A. Konrath whose writing I like. Unfortunately, I did not like Hardin's writing. Sometimes the writing is clumsy, especially with the use of cliches, and this calls attention to the writer and takes the reader out of the story. The characters are also not very deep. We are allowed into the main character's head, but only just below the surface.

But the real problem with Pocket-47 is the structure. The first three-quarters of the book has the typical set-up, response, attack and semi-resolution, but then there's still a quarter of the book to go! The story then takes a three-month break and has the main character discovering that one of the bad guys is actually still alive. He proceeds to chase the bad guy into a white-supremacist military compound in order to expose them and their evil ways. But all the while this is happening we don't care because the girl from the first part is still dead.

It's very shocking to have to start a book all over again from the set-up stage when the reader is three-quarters of the way through. Hardin does tie the second story back to the first in the last several pages, but by that point we've given up caring. He has a few pages of exposition explaining how all the events were connected together--but we need to be figuring that out during the book, not at the end.

Perhaps Hardin thought he was doing something exciting with structure which would make his book more interesting. But for this reader, it backfired and made it more boring. Why is it so difficult to find a book with a standard structure which is well executed?