The Best American Science Writing 2012: Mind-Expanding Essays on Astronomy, Physics, Genetics, and Cognition

by Michio Kaku, Jesse Cohen

The Best American Science Writing 2012 is yet another endlessly fascinating and mind-expanding installment of the popular science series that Kirkus Reviews calls, “Superb brain candy.” Edited by renowned theoretical physicist and bestselling author Michio Kaku, co-founder of string field theory, this collection contains the most engaging and provocative science writing of the year—gathering in one volume enthralling and eye-opening essays about the latest developments in biochemistry, physics, astronomy, genetics, evolutionary theory, cognition, and more.

Genres: Science, Nonfiction, Physics, Essays, Anthologies, Popular Science, Stem

301 pages, Paperback

First published September 4, 2012

About the author

(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.

Reviews

[H (trying to keep up with GR friends) Balikov · Rating 5 out of 5]

Most of the real science writing isn't accessible for readers without serious science credentials. Thus, I was delighted to get this book as a gift.
Michio Kaku is a very talented scientist and science writer. As editor, he selects a great collection of recent layman-suitable science articles that both excite and astound.

Now I might start his book on Hyperspace

[Caitlin · Rating 4 out of 5]

These books are always awesome. A couple of the articles became really hard to understand but most of them were written in an interesting and accessible way. I love how good science writers use imagery and metaphors to explain complex ideas (e.g. Douglas Fox explains: "Isolate a single ion channel on the surface of a nerve cell using a microscopic glass tube, sort of like slipping a glass cup over a single ant on a sidewalk."

I appreciate the range of stories included (from quantum mechanics and the Many Worlds theory to genetic domestication of foxes to Fukushima to the Kepler space telescope). There were some stories that highlighted such novel, beautiful and unimaginable ideas about the world that I could only be stunned.

Absolute must-reads if you pick this up: Evan Ratliff's "Taming the Wild," Charles Petit's "Stellar Oddballs," Alan Lightman's "The Accidental Universe," Jackson Lears' "Same Old Atheism," and Jeff Goodell's "The Fire Next Time."

One major criticism is that less than a third of the stories are by female writers. In a book showcasing the best science writing of the year and purporting the serve the larger goal of promoting science education for all, I expected more.

[Veach Glines · Rating 3 out of 5]

The final essay, detailing the current measure of 'Insight' as today's means of determining mental health was - far and above - the most informative. Also helpful was the explanation about how we, as a society, got here from the day of mental health institutions that helped; thru those that housed and experimented in brutal ways; to how mentally impaired now are the responsibility of prisons, cause of more homelessness than every other cause, and the "right" to refuse treatment and refuse medication.

The many-worlds-theory article was helpful and interesting.

The critique of Sam Harris was well intentioned but written with such a heavy hand I doubt it was understood (or even finished) by many who would want to learn about the "new atheists"...I certainly would like to see it re-written with the layman in mind with a heavy editorial hand (VERY heavy editorial hand).

And I loved learning more about the genetic "domestication" gene.

[Matt · Rating 3 out of 5]

A strange collection of articles this year, some quite impenetrable, a characteristic which I have not come to expect from this series. In particular, every single article on astrophysics and quantum theory was too general for experts, too full of jargon for us laypeople, and too diffuse for just about anyone. Also surprising was the inclusion of Jeff Goodell's sensationalist screed from Rolling Stone on the Fukushima disaster. I'm on his side, but this temper tantrum of an article is not helping. The biology & psychology articles in the collection are really exciting, though, and make the book quite worth it!

[Patrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

It casts a wide net, including as many topics as possible and as such - it's only natural that some should interest me more than others. However, all are at least engaging or interesting on some level - even if they're not exactly one's proverbial cup of tea.

And, happily enough, the topics covered are arranged by their scale. I found myself drawn to the large-scale topics covered towards the end of the book, more so than the microscopic ones in the beginning, so this arrangement is nothing if not convenient.

A big cheers to the editors and authors of this book - good anthologies are tough to compile. This, It's an engaging salad bar of accessible science writing.

Cheers!

[Kristin McPhillips · Rating 3 out of 5]

It is a little physics happy but I like that. I think my favorite articles were the physics ones. I particularly liked the one about the quantum universe--they talk to this one particularly quirky physicist who explains the implications of a quantum computer on the nature of time and the universe and whatnot but he does it in a way that is understandable and also interesting both because of the science and because this guy is so weird

[Toni Moore · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed all the articles in this anthology, except for the one by Steven Weinberg on symmetry. It's a difficult concept, but he didn't explain it well. Way too many particles! The more I read, the more I was confused. His article was too complicated for the general public. Most people would have quit reading after a couple of pages. So I don't understand how it ended up in an anthology like this, which is FOR the general public.

[Stephen Dorneman · Rating 3 out of 5]

A somewhat below average edition of this usually excellent annual anthology. Too heavy on the physics side without much general reader appeal, and too many shorter pieces that, at their length, had little or no non-fiction narrative arc to keep my interest, were the main detractors. Here's hoping the 2013 collection is back to the usual standard of this series.

[Ron · Rating 3 out of 5]

If this was the first "Best American Science" book I read I would have given it 4 stars. But since it's the 5th or 6th and it wasn't as consistently good as the others I have to drop the rating to just 3 stars. That being said these books are still fantastic ways to read a lot of articles on a lot of different subjects.

[Paul]

I enjoy these annual collections of science topics from popular sources--mostly magazines. The topics in this are wide ranging from those related to the human brain, space, symmetry, and religion. The discussion of symmetry by Steven Weinberg was not easy for me to follow.

[Fraser Kinnear · Rating 3 out of 5]

A gift from a close friend, it was a fun read. Essentially a collection of science long-form articles chosen by Michio Kaku. Honestly, I get the same caliber of science articles on a weekly basis from my various RSS feeds on the internet, but these articles were interesting in their own right.

[Allison Jaynes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent flow of articles from all ends of the scientific community. My favorites were the particle physics and space exploration ones, of course. But I learned quite a bit from the bioscience discoveries too.

[Regine · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bland. Best are by historian Jackson Lears, "Same Old New Atheism: On Sam Harris," a slashing critique of religio-political neuroscientist; Alan Lightman, "The Accidental Universe," on the multiverse; and Charles C. Mann, "The Birth of Religion," on a 1200-year-old monument in southeastern Turkey.

[Rachael · Rating 5 out of 5]

love me some science, even though particle physics makes my head hurt real bad.

[Grace · Rating 4 out of 5]

Definitely too many physics articles that were also too long.

[Melissa · Rating 5 out of 5]

I try to read this every year- fascinating blend of natural history, chemistry, psychology, evolution, biology, ecology, archeology. love it. My favorite annual december/january treat.

[Kate M · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very good selection of science articles from 2012 and an introduction that made it all coalesce.

[Ben · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quite good! I enjoyed all the articles save for the fiction piece which did not belong in a curated collection of science writing.

[Heather Schwartz · Rating 3 out of 5]

Skip the intro it is a spoiler. Blah.

[Jenny Larsen · Rating 4 out of 5]

So fun to read good writing. I loved the biology essays in the beginning, especially the teenage brain essay, and the last one about psychosis.

[Eric Lesch · Rating 2 out of 5]

Poor selection of articles this year.

[Dee · Rating 3 out of 5]

This series is usually enjoyable but there were too many baffling essays on quantum physics in this edition.

[Holly]

As interesting and informative as ever.