What do you think?
Rate this book
Scientific Discovery from the Brilliant to the Bizarre: The Doctor Who Weighed the Soul, and Other True Tales
In April 1902, Dr Duncan MacDougall, a physician at a small municipal hospital in Massachusetts, placed the body of a dying man on a set of platform scales. His aim - to determine the weight of the soul as it departed the body.
Throughout history, scientists have pursued ideas that seemed bizarre, peculiar, or downright daft. In this sharp and witty overview of the great - and not so great - moments of scientific experimentation, Len Fisher illuminates the true process of discovery, where the brilliant has often met the bizarre and only hindsight allows us to distinguish between the two.
Throughout history, scientists have pursued ideas that seemed bizarre, peculiar, or downright daft. In this sharp and witty overview of the great - and not so great - moments of scientific experimentation, Len Fisher illuminates the true process of discovery, where the brilliant has often met the bizarre and only hindsight allows us to distinguish between the two.
- GenresScienceNonfictionHistory
256 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2004
118 people are currently reading
236 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
September 29, 2016
Some very interesting stories and ideas about how scientists go about doing science, but overall a bit disappointing because of the writing. This is a book for a general audience that contains a lot of science, and he doesn't do a very good job when he explains the science, like not defining terms he should define for such an audience. Also, the writing itself is a bit sloppy. I too often had trouble understanding a sentence here and there because of clauses that seemed to modify a phrase they were not intended to modify, and, for example, in one sentence he says "no claim for such an effect has ever been substantiated except for the following three cases." Actually, it is the AFOREMENTIONED three cases.
December 25, 2016
An interesting read, but I wished that he were a little better at breaking concepts down for the reader who--like me--is not overly familiar with certain scientific concepts. The book also needed closer editing, as there were several instances where sentences seemed jumbled, as though edited in a hurry. His enthusiasm for the subject was engaging, and the ideas were compelling, though.
March 30, 2022
This is a highly readable exploration of the scientific process when new and old ideas conflict; how hard it can be for new ideas, even when confirmed, to be accepted. At the beginning of the preface, the author quotes Arthur Schopenhauer: “All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed; Second, it is violently opposed; and Third, it is accepted as self-evident.” This is a good summary of what the author sets forth in this book.
An intriguing aspect of the author’s presentation is his review of what he calls “necessary mysteries,” the “bizarre, anti-common sense beliefs that scientists have been forced to accept because they can’t make sense of their observations without them.” Unlike religious faith, the scientific brand of faith is “the belief that an answer is likely to be true if the results it predicts are in accord with experiment observation.” . . . “Scientific theories can never really be proved to be true; we simply have faith in them to a greater or lesser extent depending on the difficulty and number of tests that they have passed.” As shown in some of the author’s examples of conflicting ideas, some scientists strongly opposed the new concepts, often not changing their views and sometimes their denial was an obstacle to progress. The opposition to Galileo is an example.
While the conflicts presented by the author are interesting, this reader finds the Appendix, “A Brief Catalogue of Necessary Mysteries,” to be the best part of the book. Here the author reviews nine “anti-common sense beliefs” in a clear an engaging style that we non-scientists can understand: (1) gravity, (2) electric & magnetic forces (which introduced this reader to a new phrase, “quantum chromodynamics”), (3) fields, (4) waves & the Ether, (5) energy, (6) atoms & molecules, (7) momentum, (8) relativity, and (9) quantum mechanics. This appendix is worth reading by itself.
An intriguing aspect of the author’s presentation is his review of what he calls “necessary mysteries,” the “bizarre, anti-common sense beliefs that scientists have been forced to accept because they can’t make sense of their observations without them.” Unlike religious faith, the scientific brand of faith is “the belief that an answer is likely to be true if the results it predicts are in accord with experiment observation.” . . . “Scientific theories can never really be proved to be true; we simply have faith in them to a greater or lesser extent depending on the difficulty and number of tests that they have passed.” As shown in some of the author’s examples of conflicting ideas, some scientists strongly opposed the new concepts, often not changing their views and sometimes their denial was an obstacle to progress. The opposition to Galileo is an example.
While the conflicts presented by the author are interesting, this reader finds the Appendix, “A Brief Catalogue of Necessary Mysteries,” to be the best part of the book. Here the author reviews nine “anti-common sense beliefs” in a clear an engaging style that we non-scientists can understand: (1) gravity, (2) electric & magnetic forces (which introduced this reader to a new phrase, “quantum chromodynamics”), (3) fields, (4) waves & the Ether, (5) energy, (6) atoms & molecules, (7) momentum, (8) relativity, and (9) quantum mechanics. This appendix is worth reading by itself.
December 22, 2017
I know some things. I have an idea. I want to write a book. I don't want to go through the effort of writing a good book. So... I'll put together a book of notes, introduce that with a lengthy appendix where I will tell folks about the idea for my book, and introduce that with the 3 hours of actual book writing. There I'll throw in a few facts, but since I don't want to do a lot of research I'll tell a number of anecdotal, often unrelated stories about my own life that I find fascinating, like the time I weighed my own testicles as a teenager. Lastly I'll assume that people will want to shell out $14.95 for my book because I hired a B grade college student to design the cover.
...harsh I know, but fairly close to the mark.
...harsh I know, but fairly close to the mark.
February 24, 2017
I very much enjoyed this book and was disappointed there wasn't more when it ended. After reading some of the comments about the book, I think I might not be the best judge of it because I worked in a research lab at a university for many years and none of the concepts were new to me.
December 26, 2017
Really good science book for non-science readers. My only issue is that as it went on the author was clearly very into his subject and sometimes it got a little difficult to understand for someone with no science background.
June 19, 2018
Un Libro de ciencia bien ligero, pero bastante explicativo y muy entretenido
July 25, 2018
I got this book on sale for a couple of bucks, and considering that it seemed like it would be the kind of book that would fit in well with my interest in further understanding the history and philosophy of science, I figured it would be worth reading. Other reviewers have noted how the poor writing quality, and the need of an editor, distracted from the quality of the book. At first, I didn’t have an issue with the grammatical errors and disorganization of the book, because I was under the impression that this was a self-published book. I’m usually willing to give self-published books a little bit of slack, considering that I know there was no professional editor proofreading it. However, the copyright page for this book lists an actual publishing company: Arcade Publishing. I suppose that it’s possible that Arcade Publishing is a pay-to-publish company, and therefore could explain the lack of editing, but I don’t know that makes it any more excusable.
Anyway, I did appreciate the fact that there were a few stories about some scientists in this book that I had never heard before. I especially liked the story about how Galileo had been commissioned with the project of figuring out the location and size of hell. However, much of the organization of the chapters is so haphazard that it never felt like I heard a complete story about any particular concept or person. In one chapter you’re reading about Edison, and all the sudden you’re reading about Thomas Young, and then there’s a jump cut back to Edison. I didn’t have any trouble following the scientific concepts that Fisher is trying to describe, but then again, I was already familiar with them. I could easily see how someone without a science education would become lost, since they tend to be short and kind of choppy.
When I got the chapter 7, What Is Life?, is about the time that this book really started to unravel for me. Fisher talks about the mystery of how and why cells could differentiate into different body plans. He tells of how Erwin Schrodinger postulated that there had to be some kind of information that was retained in every cell, and even went so far as to imply that it was Schrodinger’s book that inspired Francis Crick to work on the molecular structure of DNA. This whole story misses out on around 60 years of history surrounding this idea. Gregor Mendel did his research on this very topic all the way back in the 1860s. And while the significance of what he discovered was all but lost to the scientific community until the 1920s, that was still way before Schrodinger’s 1944 publication of his book What Is Life.
The thing that really bothered me though was that at one point in this last chapter concerning the idea of vitalism, Fisher commits an equivocation fallacy by stating that scientists have faith in everything they do, much as religious people have faith. It’s a common misunderstanding, and one that I’m sure even many scientists hold. However if you’re going to research and write a book about the history of science, especially one that should be highlighting aspects of the the philosophy of science, I feel like you should know better than make a statement such as this. There are many good reasons to trust the scientific method and it’s development through time. It returns solid consistent results. That “trust” in the system and institution is not at all the same thing as the “faith” that religions talk about. His implication is that there could be some as yet unknown explanation as to why vitalism could still be true. Sean Carroll's book, The Big Picture, gives a case as to why virtually nobody believes this anymore.
I’m sure Fisher is a great guy, and maybe even a good scientist, but I’m thinking he should leave the writing to other people.
Anyway, I did appreciate the fact that there were a few stories about some scientists in this book that I had never heard before. I especially liked the story about how Galileo had been commissioned with the project of figuring out the location and size of hell. However, much of the organization of the chapters is so haphazard that it never felt like I heard a complete story about any particular concept or person. In one chapter you’re reading about Edison, and all the sudden you’re reading about Thomas Young, and then there’s a jump cut back to Edison. I didn’t have any trouble following the scientific concepts that Fisher is trying to describe, but then again, I was already familiar with them. I could easily see how someone without a science education would become lost, since they tend to be short and kind of choppy.
When I got the chapter 7, What Is Life?, is about the time that this book really started to unravel for me. Fisher talks about the mystery of how and why cells could differentiate into different body plans. He tells of how Erwin Schrodinger postulated that there had to be some kind of information that was retained in every cell, and even went so far as to imply that it was Schrodinger’s book that inspired Francis Crick to work on the molecular structure of DNA. This whole story misses out on around 60 years of history surrounding this idea. Gregor Mendel did his research on this very topic all the way back in the 1860s. And while the significance of what he discovered was all but lost to the scientific community until the 1920s, that was still way before Schrodinger’s 1944 publication of his book What Is Life.
The thing that really bothered me though was that at one point in this last chapter concerning the idea of vitalism, Fisher commits an equivocation fallacy by stating that scientists have faith in everything they do, much as religious people have faith. It’s a common misunderstanding, and one that I’m sure even many scientists hold. However if you’re going to research and write a book about the history of science, especially one that should be highlighting aspects of the the philosophy of science, I feel like you should know better than make a statement such as this. There are many good reasons to trust the scientific method and it’s development through time. It returns solid consistent results. That “trust” in the system and institution is not at all the same thing as the “faith” that religions talk about. His implication is that there could be some as yet unknown explanation as to why vitalism could still be true. Sean Carroll's book, The Big Picture, gives a case as to why virtually nobody believes this anymore.
I’m sure Fisher is a great guy, and maybe even a good scientist, but I’m thinking he should leave the writing to other people.
July 6, 2020
I absolutely love this kind of book - one that details the evolution of scientific thought for a given problem. The social and psychological influences on scientific thinking fascinate me as much as the science itself. It's all in this book. The bonus was finding a few nuggets that I will absolutely be teaching to my high school students.
I don't know if this is a Kindle issue or if the problems I encountered were also present in the print version, but there were missing punctuation marks and typos all throughout this book. The myriad missing periods made me have to back up in my reading almost every time I encountered one. Extremely frustrating. Also, there were no hyperlinks to the notes within the text. I actually didn't know there WERE any notes until I encountered them all at the end of the book. I read them, but not being able to read them concurrent with the related text made them less meaningful. I found that I could not always remember the details of the story they were referring to. That's a shame because this was otherwise such a wonderful book.
I don't know if this is a Kindle issue or if the problems I encountered were also present in the print version, but there were missing punctuation marks and typos all throughout this book. The myriad missing periods made me have to back up in my reading almost every time I encountered one. Extremely frustrating. Also, there were no hyperlinks to the notes within the text. I actually didn't know there WERE any notes until I encountered them all at the end of the book. I read them, but not being able to read them concurrent with the related text made them less meaningful. I found that I could not always remember the details of the story they were referring to. That's a shame because this was otherwise such a wonderful book.
June 17, 2025
I read the author's previous book and found it interesting. This book was more than just interesting, it laid out a well researched history of some important foundational scientific principals. The book is only 164 pages but the appendix and notes add another 78 pages! It is well done but may not be a suitable fare for those only mildly interested in the history of scientific discovery. One thing the author drives home is that one should be as skeptical of science as one is of religion or philosophy.
August 16, 2020
Meh. There were some interesting things here. Cool Fact: Galileo was tasked with determining the size and location of hell. The scientific discoveries he mentioned just were not that interesting. Galileo saying that the earth was not the center of the universe, while cool and all, is not what I wanted with Brilliant or Bizarre. I stopped about a quarter into this book. Since I got it for a buck I may or may not pick it back up.
January 9, 2026
Thought this was going to be a quirky book at quirky experiments and it was for like 10 pages then we got into detailed tests of quantum mechanics and developmental biology????? I barely passed biology or chem and actually had to drop physics so way out of my league on this one. Wish I could rate it 0 stars for lying to me.
July 10, 2017
Nice overview of scientific discovery.
An interesting read on scientific discovery including some of the more interesting facets of the process in the last centuries.
An interesting read on scientific discovery including some of the more interesting facets of the process in the last centuries.
May 22, 2020
Interesting, but did not keep my interest for long and I kept falling asleep while I was reading it, maybe I will try it another time
August 28, 2023
Enjoyable book with anecdotes of scientific discovery, mostly pre-1900. I particularly liked the stories about electricity. Aimed at highschool level but informative for everyone.
December 9, 2008
Len Fisher ist spätestens seit seinem Buch 'Reise zum Mittelpunkt des Frühstückseis' in aller Munde. Der gebürtige Australier studierte Chemie, Physik und als Dreingabe noch Biologie, wie er in diesem Buch erklärt. Er arbeitet im Bereich der Food Science an der University of Bristol und schreibt als Kolumnist für den Guardian. Wie nur wenige andere beherrscht er es Naturwissenschaften auch für den Laien leicht verständlich dazustellen.
In diesem Buch nun wendet er sich der Wissenschaftsgeschichte zu und erzählt über besondere Ereignisse; Fehlschläge ebenso wie Erfolge, die häufig so knapp beieinander liegen. Und er erzählt über die Konkurrenz unter Wissenschaftern, wie sie sich bekriegten und wie es bis heute nicht besser geworden ist.
Das Buch enthält folgende Kapitel:
* Das Gewicht der Seele (Wie MacDougall versuchte festzustellen ob die Seele physikalisch nachzuweisen ist und warum ihm niemand glaubte obwohl es nicht gelang seine Experimente zu widerlegen).
* Bewegungen am Himmel (Die Geschichte Galileis)
* Applaus für Newton (Der harte Kampf des Thomas Young, der es wagte Newton zu widerlegen)
* Wenn der Blitz ins Korsett einschlägt (Der Disput zwischen Franklin und Wilson ob ein spitzer oder runder Blitzableiter vernünftiger wäre)
* Katzengold (Über Alchimisten und Robert Boyle der sie als unwissenschaftlich verdammte aber in seinem ganzen Streben in Wahrheit ein Alchimist war)
* Frankenstein lebt (Wie und warum man seit der Entdeckung der Elektrizität versucht Lebewesen unter Strom zu setzen und der Streit zwischen Galvani und Volta)
* Was ist Leben? (Über den Streit zwischen den Mechanisten und Vitalisten)
* Mythen und Hypothesen der modernen Wissenschaft (Ein Kapitel das aufzeigen soll, wo unser heutiger Wissensstand scheinbar dem gesunden Menschenverstand widerspricht)
Alle diese Kapitel sind kurzweilig gefasst und leicht lesbar geschrieben. Es ist ein Vergnügen sich durch die Anekdoten und auch ernsten Erzählungen durchzuwühlen. Ein Buch also, das man gerne weiterempfehlen kann.
In diesem Buch nun wendet er sich der Wissenschaftsgeschichte zu und erzählt über besondere Ereignisse; Fehlschläge ebenso wie Erfolge, die häufig so knapp beieinander liegen. Und er erzählt über die Konkurrenz unter Wissenschaftern, wie sie sich bekriegten und wie es bis heute nicht besser geworden ist.
Das Buch enthält folgende Kapitel:
* Das Gewicht der Seele (Wie MacDougall versuchte festzustellen ob die Seele physikalisch nachzuweisen ist und warum ihm niemand glaubte obwohl es nicht gelang seine Experimente zu widerlegen).
* Bewegungen am Himmel (Die Geschichte Galileis)
* Applaus für Newton (Der harte Kampf des Thomas Young, der es wagte Newton zu widerlegen)
* Wenn der Blitz ins Korsett einschlägt (Der Disput zwischen Franklin und Wilson ob ein spitzer oder runder Blitzableiter vernünftiger wäre)
* Katzengold (Über Alchimisten und Robert Boyle der sie als unwissenschaftlich verdammte aber in seinem ganzen Streben in Wahrheit ein Alchimist war)
* Frankenstein lebt (Wie und warum man seit der Entdeckung der Elektrizität versucht Lebewesen unter Strom zu setzen und der Streit zwischen Galvani und Volta)
* Was ist Leben? (Über den Streit zwischen den Mechanisten und Vitalisten)
* Mythen und Hypothesen der modernen Wissenschaft (Ein Kapitel das aufzeigen soll, wo unser heutiger Wissensstand scheinbar dem gesunden Menschenverstand widerspricht)
Alle diese Kapitel sind kurzweilig gefasst und leicht lesbar geschrieben. Es ist ein Vergnügen sich durch die Anekdoten und auch ernsten Erzählungen durchzuwühlen. Ein Buch also, das man gerne weiterempfehlen kann.
August 13, 2022
I don't even remember how this book ended up in my to read pile because it's not my usual genre, but it did so there was only one way it was going to leave it.
Interesting, but hard work. I 'enjoyed' the information but I'm not sure how much of it I retained. The book's gone back in the to read pile for a second reading.
My take away message from this book is that you might be clever and right, but unless you can persuade other people of your rightness then it doesn't mean much.
Interesting, but hard work. I 'enjoyed' the information but I'm not sure how much of it I retained. The book's gone back in the to read pile for a second reading.
My take away message from this book is that you might be clever and right, but unless you can persuade other people of your rightness then it doesn't mean much.
June 12, 2008
A breezy sort of review of the most controversial scientific discoveries, focusing mainly on things we cannot see, but can prove exist, like energy, electricity, and so on. It was a fun style, but random in the things he chose to write about. I wasn't really sure what the theme tying all these things together was supposed to be. Still, fun for science types.
April 4, 2013
Disappointed. The author gave lots of background on scientific development in general, but did not address the main title of his book. Very little was discussed with regards to the soul or what has been/is being done scientifically about (disap)proving the existence of the human soul.
October 13, 2012
Wish I had read this before taking any science classes starting in high school!
August 8, 2013
Ein super Buch über die Wissenschaft und ihre skurrilen Seiten
October 1, 2017
not such good as first book
December 28, 2018
Here is to hope for something after death.
January 8, 2019
Well researched and well written. Just not as interested in the subject t matter. But very readable.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews