What do you think?
Rate this book
Splinters of Infinity: Cosmic Rays and the Clash of Two Nobel Prize-Winning Scientists over the Secrets of Creation
The riveting story of a modern age scientific feud between two Nobel Prize-winning scientists over the nature of cosmic rays and the universe.
Set in a revolutionary era of physics and science when a series of rapid-fire discoveries was upending our understanding of the universe, Splinters of Infinity by Mark Wolverton tells a little-known the tale of two of America’s foremost physicists, Robert Millikan (1868–1953) and Arthur Compton (1892–1962), who found themselves locked in an intense, often deeply personal, conflict about cosmic rays. Confirmed in 1912, cosmic rays—enigmatic forms of penetrating radiation—seemed to raise all new questions about the origins of the universe, but they also offered the potential to explain everything—or reveal the existence of God.
In engaging, accessible prose, Wolverton takes the reader through the twists and turns of the Millikan-Compton debate, one of the first major public examples of how heated the controversies among scientists could become—and the lengths that scientists would go to settle their disputes. What set them apart, at least in most cases, Wolverton shows, was their ability to concentrate finally on what the science. Along the way, Wolverton probes the forever elusive question, still unanswered today, about where cosmic rays come from and what they reveal about black holes, distant galaxies, the existence of dark matter and dark energy, and the birth of the universe, concluding that these splinters of infinity may not hold the keys to the secret of creation but do bring us ever closer to it.
Set in a revolutionary era of physics and science when a series of rapid-fire discoveries was upending our understanding of the universe, Splinters of Infinity by Mark Wolverton tells a little-known the tale of two of America’s foremost physicists, Robert Millikan (1868–1953) and Arthur Compton (1892–1962), who found themselves locked in an intense, often deeply personal, conflict about cosmic rays. Confirmed in 1912, cosmic rays—enigmatic forms of penetrating radiation—seemed to raise all new questions about the origins of the universe, but they also offered the potential to explain everything—or reveal the existence of God.
In engaging, accessible prose, Wolverton takes the reader through the twists and turns of the Millikan-Compton debate, one of the first major public examples of how heated the controversies among scientists could become—and the lengths that scientists would go to settle their disputes. What set them apart, at least in most cases, Wolverton shows, was their ability to concentrate finally on what the science. Along the way, Wolverton probes the forever elusive question, still unanswered today, about where cosmic rays come from and what they reveal about black holes, distant galaxies, the existence of dark matter and dark energy, and the birth of the universe, concluding that these splinters of infinity may not hold the keys to the secret of creation but do bring us ever closer to it.
280 pages, Hardcover
Published March 12, 2024
3 people are currently reading
1653 people want to read
About the author
Mark Wolverton
10 books14 followersMark Wolverton was a science journalist, author, and 2016-17 Knight-MIT Science Journalism Fellow. He wrote for various national and international publications including WIRED, Nature, Undark, Scientific American, and Air & Space Smithsonian and also worked with the NASA Ames History Project, Argonne National Laboratory, the Franklin Institute, and the NASA ISS Science Office. Mark was a member of the Authors Guild, the National Association of Science Writers and the Pen & Pencil Club of Philadephia. His last book was "Splinters of Infinity: Cosmic Rays and the Clash of Two
Nobel Prize-Winning Scientists over the Secrets of Creation". Previous titles included "Burning the Sky: Operation Argus and the Untold Story of the Cold War Nuclear Tests in Outer Space"; "Nuclear Weapons"; "A Life in Twilight: The Final Years of J. Robert Oppenheimer"; "The Depths of Space: The Story of the Pioneer Planetary Probes"; and "The Science of Superman." He lived near Philadelphia.
Nobel Prize-Winning Scientists over the Secrets of Creation". Previous titles included "Burning the Sky: Operation Argus and the Untold Story of the Cold War Nuclear Tests in Outer Space"; "Nuclear Weapons"; "A Life in Twilight: The Final Years of J. Robert Oppenheimer"; "The Depths of Space: The Story of the Pioneer Planetary Probes"; and "The Science of Superman." He lived near Philadelphia.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
April 9, 2024
Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists.
Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by religious beliefs, posing an ongoing creation in opposition to the decline of the universe into heat death championed by British physicists such as James Jeans and Arthur Eddington.
By contrast, Compton believed that cosmic rays were produce by atomic decay and consisted of charged particles, which he initially thought were primarily electrons, originating from the outer reaches of the atmosphere. In principle it was possible to distinguish between the two theories by checking whether there was a variation in cosmic ray levels as you headed from the equator to the poles: the path of charged particles would be influenced by the Earth's magnetic field, but photons would not.
Wolverton gives us chapter and verse of the many (many) expeditions to detect cosmic rays around the world, using increasingly sophisticated technology, and deploying the detectors on everything from round the world cruise ships to record-breaking balloon ascents. He also, more than is commonly the case in such books, brings in commentaries from (US) newspapers. As Wolverton points out, while today we may be more aware of Shapley and Curtis's debate, back then the cosmic ray debate garnered far more publicity and interest from the public, in part because it was spuriously tied in with the concept of nuclear power and the imaginary potential for practical use of cosmic rays as an energy source.
The very name 'cosmic rays' (coined by Millikan) has a wonderfully 1930 science fiction feel to it, but what makes the whole thing more interesting is the clash between two major scientists that did at times become quite heated. While Millikan was without doubt a significant scientist, he comes across as a major self-publicist who regarded cosmic rays as his domain - at some points even refusing to acknowledge the work of Compton and others, and clinging on to his theory long after it became unsupportable. If anything, Wolverton is rather kind to Millikan, toning down the negative aspects of his personality and self-centred view of science.
The biggest problem with this book is that for chapter after chapter the content can be summarised as 'more of the same'. We get lots of details of the various expeditions, pronouncements and how the newspapers covered them (with hilarious bias from the Los Angeles Times in favour of local boy Millikan). This detail is very welcome in giving a clear picture of the long, drawn out nature of this scientific argument, and how small incremental gains in data gradually changed the picture of what cosmic rays were - but it can feel a little hard work reading it all.
My other smaller complaint is that some of the references outside of the central characters and the US can seem a little adrift, particularly to a non-American reader. After mentioning J. J. Thomson, we are told that 'fellow Britisher Ernest Rutherford discovered...' - although New Zealand was not a fully independent country at the time, I wouldn't apply the term 'Britisher'. Similarly, it feels odd to describe James Jeans - a Lancastrian whose main academic ties were to Cambridge - as having an 'Oxford accent'. This does reflect a newspaperish approach to the writing style throughout.
This is a genuinely interesting dive into a little-remembered scientific debate, leavened by much reporting from US newspapers. The slow resolution of the nature of cosmic rays reflects the realities of many scientific endeavours in opposition to the 'sudden dramatic discovery' school of science writing. And the contrasting personalities of Millikan and Compton make for an interesting reflection of the human nature of science. All in all, a worthwhile contribution to the popular science canon.
Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by religious beliefs, posing an ongoing creation in opposition to the decline of the universe into heat death championed by British physicists such as James Jeans and Arthur Eddington.
By contrast, Compton believed that cosmic rays were produce by atomic decay and consisted of charged particles, which he initially thought were primarily electrons, originating from the outer reaches of the atmosphere. In principle it was possible to distinguish between the two theories by checking whether there was a variation in cosmic ray levels as you headed from the equator to the poles: the path of charged particles would be influenced by the Earth's magnetic field, but photons would not.
Wolverton gives us chapter and verse of the many (many) expeditions to detect cosmic rays around the world, using increasingly sophisticated technology, and deploying the detectors on everything from round the world cruise ships to record-breaking balloon ascents. He also, more than is commonly the case in such books, brings in commentaries from (US) newspapers. As Wolverton points out, while today we may be more aware of Shapley and Curtis's debate, back then the cosmic ray debate garnered far more publicity and interest from the public, in part because it was spuriously tied in with the concept of nuclear power and the imaginary potential for practical use of cosmic rays as an energy source.
The very name 'cosmic rays' (coined by Millikan) has a wonderfully 1930 science fiction feel to it, but what makes the whole thing more interesting is the clash between two major scientists that did at times become quite heated. While Millikan was without doubt a significant scientist, he comes across as a major self-publicist who regarded cosmic rays as his domain - at some points even refusing to acknowledge the work of Compton and others, and clinging on to his theory long after it became unsupportable. If anything, Wolverton is rather kind to Millikan, toning down the negative aspects of his personality and self-centred view of science.
The biggest problem with this book is that for chapter after chapter the content can be summarised as 'more of the same'. We get lots of details of the various expeditions, pronouncements and how the newspapers covered them (with hilarious bias from the Los Angeles Times in favour of local boy Millikan). This detail is very welcome in giving a clear picture of the long, drawn out nature of this scientific argument, and how small incremental gains in data gradually changed the picture of what cosmic rays were - but it can feel a little hard work reading it all.
My other smaller complaint is that some of the references outside of the central characters and the US can seem a little adrift, particularly to a non-American reader. After mentioning J. J. Thomson, we are told that 'fellow Britisher Ernest Rutherford discovered...' - although New Zealand was not a fully independent country at the time, I wouldn't apply the term 'Britisher'. Similarly, it feels odd to describe James Jeans - a Lancastrian whose main academic ties were to Cambridge - as having an 'Oxford accent'. This does reflect a newspaperish approach to the writing style throughout.
This is a genuinely interesting dive into a little-remembered scientific debate, leavened by much reporting from US newspapers. The slow resolution of the nature of cosmic rays reflects the realities of many scientific endeavours in opposition to the 'sudden dramatic discovery' school of science writing. And the contrasting personalities of Millikan and Compton make for an interesting reflection of the human nature of science. All in all, a worthwhile contribution to the popular science canon.
March 13, 2024
Stopped at 20%.
I decided to DNF this mostly because it feels very dry and isn't keeping my attention. Maybe the author is setting up a background to make it more fast-paced and less dry later but I felt that after 20% I had waited long enough. I think too it may feel less interesting to me because my husband is a chemist and I have taken multiple chemistry and physics classes so some of the lead up was already known to me.
The narrator seemed to be doing a well enough job but between them and the story I just couldn't seem to get into this story.
I decided to DNF this mostly because it feels very dry and isn't keeping my attention. Maybe the author is setting up a background to make it more fast-paced and less dry later but I felt that after 20% I had waited long enough. I think too it may feel less interesting to me because my husband is a chemist and I have taken multiple chemistry and physics classes so some of the lead up was already known to me.
The narrator seemed to be doing a well enough job but between them and the story I just couldn't seem to get into this story.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews