Basic Sciences Books

This is another in the fabulous Scientific American Library Series that touches on almost every scientific topic. This particular book, ON SIZE AND LIFE, is not as technically challenging as some of those that succeeded it and in many ways that is a blessing.

For here is a subject that one thinks about only in passing - the shape and size of living objects. We've all heard (and maybe even were taught) things like, "If you could jump as high as a grasshopper could proportionally, you could spring 84 feet in the air" or "If you had the strength proportionally that an African Beatle has you could carry 500 pounds." This book shows why those statements are not true.

We start with a chapter called "The Natural History of Size" in which he examines the evolution of size and notes that some species have grown (the horse) while others have shrunk (the cat family). He observes that the larger the animal, the more complex it will be, something that affects morphology. Then he follows with a chapter on proportions that necessarily includes some mathematics. Following that are essays on physical and biological dimensions with the observation that all animals live approximately 1.5 x 1,000,000,000 heartbeats except... man who should not live past 33.

Two more chapters deal with the specific properties of being large and small. Finally an essay on why biological entities are the size they are. The authors are a biologist and an engineer.

This is a delightful book to read ! I found many answers to puzzling questions, and really there were many more riddles than I had previously thought of.

The book is far more than informative. It made me think deeper on how life on earth is organized.

I always wondered if animal shapes where subject to any pattern. Did evolution follow any rules or was it a haphazard process ? Was there any relationship between size and velocity ? Could an organism grow to any size ? Giants can be expected to appear, can I believe unbelievable tales ?

Well, maybe the answer to all above questions is not in the book's scope, but it helps a lot. Actually, I found that top of the scale animals routinely departed from the rule set for the rest of their group. They had simply overrun possible competitors.

Reading it is a pleasure. Even though you'll find some math's in it, this is not a technical book. I wasn't disappointed. It stands as a reference book in my library.

This book provides a wonderful brief history of the transition in the USA between the end of World War II and the beginning of the USA-USSR Cold war in terms of national policy for supporting scientific research. Professor Stokes masterfully leads the reader through an elegant train of thought that provides a paradigm for simultaneously addressing "basic" and "applied" research without the oft seen excess baggage of which is "real" research.
I have used the paradigm and exceprts from this book in numerous seminars in the U.S. and other countries when presenting seminars to graduate students and undergraduates. Many of today's students want to conduct research that makes a difference for pressing societal needs but also do not wish to be subjected to the criticism of not being enough of an "academic researcher" when conducting their thesis research. This book and the explained paradigm provide the framework for guidance for these students and their advisors/mentors. I highly recommend it and have given away nuemrous copies to colleagues wordlwide.

This book is not about antiscientism, it is about accountibality of science funding. There are several economical myths related to the state policy of basic science funding. Two of them : "..basic research is performed without thought of practical ends" and "...basic research is the pacemaker of technological progress" as well as famous Baconian "linear model",( a sequence extending from basic science to technology: basic science - applied research - development - production and operations) are dramatically reevaluated and critizied in the reviewing book. The most important implications of agruments presented in this well written book are: a) Basic science must be accountable as any other state funding activities and based on "informed judgments of research promise and social need"; b) Progress of science and technology have "semiautonomous trajectories", therefore state investment in basic research does not provide progress in the technology and economical growth. It looks like it is a good time "to end" so-called "endless frontiers" of unaccountable spending of taxpayer's money for funding useless basic science research. Everybody who is interested in the basic science funding policy must read this excellent book. It demonstrates a difference between the economical reality and propaganda of illusions.

This may be one of the best-documented historical studies of life for science professionals in the former Soviet Union. Sadly, it is sickening!
I frankly came away with the feeling that there is very little demonstrable difference between fascism and communism at this level. It also answered a question that had always haunted me: why was Soviet theoretical science so advanced while the practical application of that science and engineering failed so miserably under communism in Russia? This book answers that question.
I think anyone who is concerned about the relationship between scientists and government should read this excellent work by Vadim J. Birstein.
One shocker for me: I had no idea that such violent anti-Semitism existed at so many levels in the former Soviet Union. Hitler and Stalin had a lot more in common than even I could have guessed!
(...)

Vadim Birstein has captured the sad and evil essence of Soviet Science. I always was mystified why theoretical science and math were so advanced in the former Soviet Union while APPLIED science/math and engineering failed so miserably. This book explains the reasons why.
The other revelation is that experimentation on political prisoners was commonplace in the former Soviet dictatorship. I guess Nazi Josef Mengele had his communist counterparts in Russia.
But throughout this madness I was shocked to find violent anti-Semitism running rampant throughout the State Organs, which controlled all science, engineering and medicine in Russia. It turns out that Hitler and Stalin had more in common than even I had ever suspected!
Required reading for those concerned about big government influence on scientific and medical research.

Was fast and easy. Book came in condition is was described. Would buy from seller again.

This is a great introduction to physics for medical majors. The book has been around over 20 years, so it has to be good.

I am greatly enjoying this book as it has a very broad scope on drilling but will get down to the nitty gritty if need be. The equations are laid out in easy to read format and the images are quite good too. However, professor Castor, has really blown me away (and the rest of the class) by not explaining anything. This subject is hard to understand and it doesn't help by reading slides verbatim from the book.

Written in a simple language, this book is accessible to readers who are not specifically familiar with oilwell drilling. Numerous photographs and drawings make it a very accurate description of the equipment and activities on and around a land rig floor. Easy, enjoyable and very informative to read throughout.
Does not tackle offshore rigs or directional drilling.

I am very happy with service I recieved from amazon. This book was my 1st purchase but I am planning on making more purchases, because its relible, cheap and most importantly secure. I recommend using amazon to all the people out there.
Thanks

If you are in that business or you are studing to get into that profession these are your fundations of knowladge. Great book new edition is updated, however don't discard old one.

I read the earlier edition of this book, and have now read the update. The author's premise is that morphology (anatomical similarity) links people and orangutans, despite genetic and molecular studies that say that chimps (and, more specifically, bonobos) are our closest relatives. What to make of this? The most likely answer is that we are most closely related to bonobos and chimps, but Schwartz's arguments cannot be dismissed without consideration. The morphology is certainly relevant, and the question is how it competes with the molecular evidence.

To argue Schwartz' point from a slightly different perspective, all genetic and molecular measures of relatedness are really tests of hypotheses against data. When you test hypotheses against data it is possible that none, one, or more than one hypothesis is consistent with the data. This is often lost in a claim that one hypothesis is the best match to the data. The best match needn't be the only hypothesis consistent with the data, and the difference between the best and the second (or third, or ...) best match need not be statistically significant. Further, the result can depend on the assumptions made.

Suppose, for example, that a rigorous, molecular, test of relatedness between creatures says there is a 50% chance that critter a is the closest relative, a 30% chance that critter b is, a 15% chance that critter c is, and a 5% chance that some other critter is. The best bet would be on critter a, but there would only be even odds that that was the correct answer. If other evidence not considered in the statistics supported critter b, that should be a serious consideration.

Schwartz objects that the approach taken in most studies is tainted because the molecular comparisons tend to assume that the orang is a more distant relative, and set up the molecular tests based on that assumption. He argues that molecular tests should be done with an assumption of an old world monkey as a known ancestor, and all ape/human relationships uncertain. To do otherwise biases the results against a orang-human link.

A molecular survey done with a wider range of options, and a morphological overlay on that, might result in an answer different than the accepted story. The odds are currently against it, but the theory deserves fair consideration. Schwartz's argument is not trivial or silly. It is a serious argument of the sort that forces science to answer the right, hard questions before accepting a particular theory as likely to be true. The most likely result is vindication of the prevailing (chimp-human) theory. But there is still the possibility of an upset!

And that's why I'm a scientist ...

This is a tremendously thrilling, rewarding book to read. This book will make you think.

We are told that chimpanzees are our closest relatives. We are not usually shown how the software that 'keeps confirming' this conclusion sometimes generates alternative trees that split the great apes in three: the chimps, the gorillas, and then a particularly bright and flexible clade that split into humans and orangutans. These alternate interpretations are 'obviously wrong', so the researcher finds the 'wrong assumptions' that can be changed to make it come out right, with chimps and humans side by side.

But when you look at the morphology, feature by feature humans and orangs either share some aspect that chimps and gorillas don't, or we're both the 'most derived' members of the great apes. Fossil hominid teeth and skulls and fossil orang teeth and skulls are similar enough that many fossils now labeled as fossil orang were once labeled as fossil hominid.

Humans and orangs are the only great apes that grow long body hair, albeit in different places.

Gorillas and chimpanzees are obligate knuckle walkers. That means that they have a system of tendons and bone shapes that snaps the heavily callused knuckle to the ground when they walk on all fours (as they usually do). Gorillas and chimpanzees are born with knuckles predisposed to callus.

Humans and orangutans show no trace of this complex adaptation. We are not born with incipient calluses, we do not have tendons that snap our hands into a fist when we stretch.

Schwartz argues that if we weren't talking about human relatives, any trained morphologist would say it's us and orangs over here, and knuckle walkers over there.

Few people know that Elliot Richardson wrote many of Richard Nixon's speeches, and advised on others. Richardson was a man with deep analytical skills, common sense, and solid ethics, and he assumed his political allies observed the same high standard he did. He is known as a "Martyr of Watergate," but his sacrifice and misuse started a decade earlier and extended a decade beyond that shameful period. Through example and advocacy, Richardson believed he could influence the Republican Party to take the high moral ground.

When so many people agreed with Nixon's political point of view of the 1960's and 70's, they were actually agreeing with Elliot Richardson. Richardson was an up-and-coming hero, attorney, and political leader who was misled and misused by politicians who we now know to be dishonest. Richardson wrote what he sincerely believed, and people who were better-known but less sincere used his wise words to gain support for themselves. Richardson's final years were spent in frustration and depression, as he saw how his life's work had been hijacked.

Read his book, and see how Elliot Richardson influenced American political thought.

I really enjoyed reading Elliot Richardson's insights into government and politics. His book should be mandatory for all those involved in running the government today. The clowns in charge today (from both parties) could learn a great deal from someone who not only has a great deal of experience, but also possesses a great deal of integrity.

I'm a second year astrophysics student from Ireland.
Recently I've tried to learn the Mathematics of General Relativity in detail, outside of my course and have bought numerous books in the process.

In my opinion this book and "A First Course in General Relativity by Bernard F. Schutz" are perfect complementary texts to learn the main basis of General Relativity on your own.

The author has provided an unbelievable amount of questions and not a single one of them is pointless exercise.

The book is Divided into three sections:

Part 1: Metric description of Space-Time
Very well written intro to General Relativity which delves into Black Holes and Mercury's Orbit, without the full on Field Equation and Tensors.

Part 2: Cosmology
Still keeping to the metric description of space-time, cosmology is introduced. The mathematics of concepts like the closed and open universes are explained really well.

Part 3: Full Tensor Formulism
I was able to learn Tensors from this, using Chapter 3 from Schutz's book as a companion.

The questions at the end of each chapter really test your knowledge and after reading this you will be able to manipulate the field equation for simple cases and move onto more advanced books if you wish.

Intermediate level, with clear presentation, lots of graphics and exercises, ideal for self-study. In one word, excellent.

The Rise of Experimental Biology: An Illustrated History, is an entertaining and fascinating read for both scientist and nonscientist alike. In this richly illustrated book, Peter Lutz PhD, eloquently and humorously traverses the development of modern experimental physiology and medicine. Starting with the use of mythological and magical explanation for natural phenomena, the reader is taken through the triumphs, failures, and down right bizarre experiments and reasoning which has laid the foundation for the medical breakthroughs occurring today.

It was a pleasure to find such great breadth and depth in The Rise of Experimental Biology: An Illustrated History by Peter L. Lutz. The work takes the reader from prehistory and the first hints of descriptive biology, through the various schools of thought and inquiry that still shape many of our ideas today. Lutz's approach and explanations guide the novice through centuries of prevailing ideas, each of which had its own consequences to both progress in science and culture. Lutz describes clearly and cleverly how the history of science, and particularly experimental biology have been colored by the religious environments of different times, fears, limited education, language, politics, the power of individuals, and in some cases luck. His syntheses are truly fascinating and will appeal to the layman with an interest in history of thought to professional scientists and philosophers. This book is a first rate piece of work and a delight to read.