Physics on the Fringe: Smoke Rings, Circlons, and Alternative Theories of Everything

by Margaret Wertheim

For the past fifteen years, acclaimed science writer Margaret Wertheim has been collecting the works of "outsider physicists," many without formal training and all convinced that they have found true alternative theories of the universe. Jim Carter, the Einstein of outsiders, has developed his own complete theory of matter and energy and gravity that he demonstrates with experiments in his backyard,-with garbage cans and a disco fog machine he makes smoke rings to test his ideas about atoms. Captivated by the imaginative power of his theories and his resolutely DIY attitude, Wertheim has been following Carter's progress for the past decade. Centuries ago, natural philosophers puzzled out the laws of nature using the tools of observation and experimentation. Today, theoretical physics has become mathematically inscrutable, accessible only to an elite few. In rejecting this abstraction, outsider theorists insist that nature speaks a language we can all understand. Through a profoundly human profile of Jim Carter, Wertheim's exploration of the bizarre world of fringe physics challenges our conception of what science is, how it works, and who it is for.

Genres: Science, Nonfiction, Physics, Popular Science, Stem, Biography, Audiobook

336 pages, Hardcover

First published November 1, 2011

Reviews

[Patricia · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read what I thought was a glowing review of Margaret Wertheim's Physics on the Fringe in The New York review of Books and I was hooked.

"We honor them because science is only a small part of human capability. We gain knowledge of our place in the universe not only from science but also from history, art, and literature. Science is a creative interaction of observation with imagination. “Physics at the Fringe” is what happens when imagination loses touch with observation."

The review had hooked me and I was sure that reading Wertheim's book would reel me into a world of dissident scientists who use what the see and know to explain the world around them. I was sure to be entertained and fascinated by the lives of these "noble" men searching for a truth they could understand.

Turns out, however, that what I was attracted to was Freeman Dyson's writing. His review is ten times better than what Wertheim produces. His writing is beautiful and powerful and finds a connection between science and art. I thought Werthiem's book was slow and plodding and boring. She managed to take a highly imaginative and interesting human and bore me to sleep with his life. Shame. There was such promise.

[Mishehu · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting topic, strange book. Author seems to hold that theoretical physics (variations on strings, branes, etc.) is, for its non-empirical grounding, no more or less valid a kind of 'storytelling' than the many outsider physics theories she has reviewed, and one in particular she spent years, off and on, immersed in studying. It's a facile analogy she draws, though, and although not altogether wrongheaded, an ultimately unsatisfying critique she offers. Roughly a third of the book -- the author's reflections on the phenomenon of outsider science in relation to insider science -- is quite interesting. A lot of the book -- too much of the book -- is devoted to profiling one particular outsider whose science nor whose life are especially compelling (save, evidently, to the author). There's no shortage of padding in this material (what do I care, e.g., that said fellow panned for gold or dove for abalone, much as I understand the author's intention to draw parallels between her subject's life and his mind). This stuff, and there's a lot of it, I found a bore. The book aside, I can only marvel at how much time the author has dedicated to collecting, reading, and thinking about outsider science, and the time she has spent getting into the life and mind of the one outsider scientist at the center of this book. I can't help but feel she might have devoted that time to wiser or more interesting pursuits...

[Zoe Jackson · Rating 2 out of 5]

No. I had a large number of problems with this book (many of which are covered in the reviews of others), but my main problem is the author's drawing of an equivalence between physics and pseudo-physics. Even granting the myriad problems with string theory, mainstream theoretical physics is not merely a form of 'storytelling'. The demarcation problem *is* a real problem, but this book is incapable of throwing any real light upon it. Instead, in its small way, the book reinforces the destructive but increasingly popular idea that science is merely a 'discourse' which is no more truth-conducive than any other discourse. No.

[Tom]

If this book is half as interesting as Freeman Dyson's review in NYRB, it should be fascinating. In discussing the relationship between observation and imagination in the scientific method, Dyson quotes physicist Hermann Weyl: "I always try to combine the true with the beautiful, but when I have to choose one or the other, I usually choose the beautiful." (now that's beautiful!)

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archi...

[Brian · Rating 2 out of 5]

More than half of the book is about Jim Carter, who is an interesting and sympathetic character. Ms. Wertheim is very clear-eyed about the limited scientific value of outsider theories while still being interested in their inventors.
The book is well-written but felt somewhat aimless.

[Terry Tonon · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a really interesting look at physics from a human perspective. The suggestion that physics has some special place in human inquiry is challenged and the adoration we too often give people who suggest that they have some exclusive insight into reality is pointed out for the nonsense it is.

[Bill Leach · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a science writer, the author had received numerous works proposing new scientific theories that are inconsistent with current science. The author examines some of these fringe scientists in this book, talking especially about one in particular - Jim Carter, who has developed a theory that subatomic particles are made up of circlons.

Wertheim tries to characterize the people who develop these ideas, without being critical. However, their ideas tend to resist testing, and can therefore never be brought into the true realm of science. Rejected by mainline scientific conferences, many of these people aggregate as the National Philosophy Alliance (NPA). However, a great deal of ownership prevails with each person being aware that there is no evidence supporting other persons theories.

Modern physics has progressed beyond a purely mechanical and intuitive view of the universe. Many of the fringe physics are uncomfortable with this, often lacking the basic science and mathematical eduction needed to understand them. Such people are often driven by the feeling that modern science is too esoteric and simpler mechanical models of the universe must exist.

Augustus De Morgan was a prominent scientist in the late 1800's who also received many such proposals, which he collected and were published in the book "A Budget of Paradoxes" [1872]. De Morgan was quite tolerant, spending time to hear them out.

The author attended the national meeting of the NPA (U.S.) in 2010, and relates how similar it was to a mainline scientific conference with speakers, discussions of papers, exhibitions and published proceedings. Toward the end of the book, she describes attending a conference on string theory in Santa Barbara, which was attended by many of the most famous names in science. She relates: "Whoever I talked with assured me that everybody else's theories were unsupported by evidence and based entirely on arbitrary assumptions". As it is not known how to test current string theories, the assemblage had a bizarre parallel with the NPA conference - one being mainline science, while other being fringe.

[Clora · Rating 5 out of 5]

-somewhere between pop science, philosophy of science, and history of science. i argue the fringe theoretical physics theories contained herein should be considered science fiction to a degree.
-this book obliterated my worldview and opened not only my 3rd eye, but also the 4th and 5th ones.
-i love reading about theoretical physics and cosmology but i've always been alienated by the fact that i can never fully understand them without at least a phd in topology or quantum physics. the author makes a really good point: to the average person, a science crackpot's alternative physics theories on spring-shaped atoms is functionally no different from stephen hawking's theoretical physics theories on black holes.
-lots of excellent philosophical musings on the philosophy of science. specifically:
- 1) is science a field that advances through linear progression towards a greater truth, or is it more nonlinear and creative like art?; and
- 2) should science and modern physics experiments be kept only to a small group of very well-educated "elite", or should science be democratized so that any person with a theory to test can be allowed to conduct the experiment and to receive peer feedback?
-along with great summaries of current physics theories and alternative physics theories, the author offers a tasteful selection of summaries of superseded science theories, including my favorite, the vortex atom theory.

[TomAmazon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great

I’m excited by the book, as it’s one I’ve wanted to write (almost). As a personal plus for me, I have zero faith in modern theoretical physics, so it resonates in many ways.

It’s also a different topic than so many physics ‘worship’ books.

Things are improving, though, as more writers question our emperors clothing.

[Nilo De Roock]

While watching a YouTube video channel on physics it was advised to definitely NOT read this book. It is considered to be extremely "crackpotty". - If you still intend to read it you can't say that you weren't warned.

[Elizabeth Rains · Rating 3 out of 5]

This story about wacko therories of the universe failed to pull me in. But maybe itvwas because I was reading too many other books. I could give it another try sometime.

[Magdalena]

I was drawn to Physics on the Fringe: Smoke Rings, Circlons, and Alternative Theories of Everything because of it’s rather extraordinary title. There’s just a hint of magic there, grounded in what seems like a very sophisticated form of science. What I found, however, was a very humanistic and sociological book, rooted in the universal need that we all have to make sense of our lives. The book ostensibly follows the work, in some detail, of “outsider physicist” Jim Carter, who has come up with a rather odd, but extensive, theory of everything. Carter's theory is rooted in his observations and pioneering style desire to DIY. Wertheim puts Jim’s work into a broad historical context, seamlessly presenting the impetus for this kind of work, and indeed the sheer magnitude of the effort that underpins it. Carter’s work is presented in full colour plates, and is indeed artistically, if not intellectually, appealing. But it’s the larger implications of what Carter and other outsider “physicists” are doing that Wertheim teases out with both compassion and great intelligence in Physics on the Fringe that makes it such a fascinating book.

Wertheim's considerable experience as a science writer is obvious as as she incorporates the history of physics and its development, incorporating work from Bacon, Mendeleev, Rutherford, Newton, Einstein, Tait, Thomson, Hemholtz, Faraday, Maxwell, Feynman and many others, without ever becoming overly technical, dry, or losing the thread of her thesis. The book remains light hearted and accessible to a non-specialist reader and as I read I found myself following up on a number of interesting facts including Maxwell's zoetrope at the Cavindish Laboratory museum in Cambridge and Feynman's lecture on the motion of planets around the sun. What comes out of the reading above all, however, is that there is a legitimate imaginative response to life that may be classed as science but which is more akin to art. In other words, that there is a certain kind of legitimacy in lay-physics, even as academic physics has become increasingly mathematical, specialised, and above all, expensive:

I have come to think of this as the “cosmological problem.” Traditionally, the purpose of cosmology was to embed a people in a world—what happens to a society when its official cosmology becomes one that 99 percent of its population does not understand and very likely cannot ever hope to comprehend? (254)

In the unravelling of what draws people to cosmology, Wertheim shows us the poetic hunger for meaning that drives people like Carter to devote their lives to making a holistic theory. Wertheim makes no bones about the fact that much of this work, even Carter's, is poor science. This is clearly enunciated and explained in the context of the book, however, the case is also made that despite the fact that this is bad science, it is still valuable and in some (though not all) cases, aesthetically beautiful and meaningful. As with the work that Wertheim has done through her Institute for Figuring, Physics on the Fringe affirms that there is room in this world for knowledge seekers of all kinds, along the broadest of spectrums. Wisdom can evolve and present itself in many ways – through empirical, mathematically sound, proven processes, and through hands-on aesthetically rich intuitive processes. Wertheim’s ability to mediate and bridge these often disparate perspectives is part of what makes this book such a powerful and enjoyable read.

Article first published as Book Review: Physics on the Fringe Smoke Rings, Circlons, and Alternative Theories of Everything by Margaret Wertheim on Blogcritics.

[MJ · Rating 3 out of 5]

There were several good points the pros and cons of being an outsider to the field of physics.The author pointed out the reasons why most "outsider" physicist ideas and theories are rejected by the "insider" physicists. I especially enjoyed reading about Jim Carter and his experiments to test his theories. He did have a lot of creative ideas, give credit for that. His only problem was his unwillingness to read up on the history of physics and what was done in the past and what actually might need more researching and testing. It is a waste of time and energy to try to refute established theories that most insider scientist regards as scientific "truths". It is also interesting to note the author comments about artists and writers having credentials and that trend will continue which also is resulting in the explosions of artist and writers who are outside the mainstreams as is happening with the physics community. If one wants to pursue physics as a hobby I think they should at least read up on the subjects their interested in first and then learn to do the mathematics. There are used college textbooks at all levels that one could buy and study on their own. I think a lot more could be accomplished in the field if both groups of insiders and outsiders could design programs, and projects that would contribute to the advancement of the sciences rather than be the exclusive elite of one group over the other. Another idea would be to have an "insider" physicist become a mentor for those individuals who are genuinely interested in doing physic that would be useful to the scientific community. For the most part the book is a helpful understanding the difference between the two groups. Something to think more about.

[Joshua Buhs · Rating 3 out of 5]

A journalistic examination of fringe theories of physics, especially focused on those of Jim Carter. The overall argument is that fringe, or dissident, theories of physics are the equivalent of outsider art--outsider science, done because science has become so professionalized and adrift from the laity. She makes a number of subsidiary claims: these theories are mostly dreamed up by men. They tend to focus on the tangible. Cramer, for example, had no truck with field theories of physics and wanted, instead, a way of explaining atomic structure in a Lego-like fashion. Eventually, he came up with the idea that atoms are composed of circlons--circular tubes--which can be combined in a pattern that replicates the periodical table of the elements. There is the curiosity--which she does not draw out--too, that the theories want to replicate known physical laws, albeit by using unusual mechanisms. Hence, Cramer argues that there is no gravity--everything is just growing bigger and bigger.

Some dissidents have combined into a group, formed in the mid-1990s, the Natural Philosophy Alliance (NPA). She notes that the dissidents tend to have completely different theories. Incommensurable ones. But, she argues, this is not so different than the state of modern physics, in which string theory allows mainstream physicists to have very different ideas about the structure of the universe.

Suggestive. Unnecessarilly digressive (to reach book length, I suspect).

Introduced me to Augustus de Morgan's A Budget of Paradoxes.

[Priya · Rating 4 out of 5]

Continuing my sporadic (is that the word? or intermittent? or off and on? of all of these?) forays into updating Goodreads, this was one of my holidays gifts on 2011. I enjoyed it. A lot. However, my ongoing dilemma of trying to reconcile these two views: "well, people decide what counts as valuable in their society and if they want to revere a glowworm, that's fine with me" with "science is important and we can't let people go on about (for example) creationism being the same as evolution" continues and this book does nothing to help resolve that tension.

On the non-me front (since presumably you are here to read about the book and not about me), the stories gathered here and the people depicted are presented in a lovingly detailed light. There's no ridicule or even any hint of "ohhhh....aren't they odd?". Instead, it's the sceptics who are likely to find this book convincing--sceptics of the "oddballs", as it were as there are hints that people who are seen as "on the fringe" of physics and people who are seen as at the cutting edge of it both share assumptions about the world which are not supported (yet) by empirical evidence. By drawing these connections, the author makes us question what counts as physics (and science) in the first place. What makes something legitimate (and worth funding)? And who decides?

[Stephie Jane Rexroth · Rating 5 out of 5]

An interesting trek through the history of science, the worlds of outsider physics, the life of one fascinating outsider in particular and an overview of the mainstream. Margaret Wertheim presents underlying needs for knowledge that unifies the human race in the pursuit of scientific discovery and understanding.

The challenge she presents in one of the closing chapters, "A Reformation of Science," Wertheim describes the tension arising in our society: "If one of the purposes of science is to help us feel 'at home in the universe' and to give us a sense of where we humans stand in a wider cosmological scheme, then how are we to respond when the world picture endorsed by the leading institutions of our society alienates large sectors of our community. I have come to think of this as the 'cosmological problem.' Traditionally, the purpose of cosmology was to embed a people in the world – what happens to a society when its official cosmology becomes one that 99 percent of its population does not understand and very likely cannot ever hope to comprehend?" Wertheim refers to the degree that mathematical abstraction and theory predominates contemporary physics; divorcing physics from the empirical.

She presents an interesting case that the most layman outsiders and most prominent theoretical insiders are not all that dissimilar after all.

[Shozo Hirono · Rating 2 out of 5]

Maybe I'm narrow-minded, but I usually find canonical works and ideas from the academic establishment to be more interesting and valuable than those from the outsider fringe. This book confirms those opinions while trying to do the opposite. I find string theories to be much more interesting, awe-inspiring, mind-blowing, and philosophically Intriguing than any of the outsider theories that Wertheim tediously describes, even though she implies that they're equivalent in their lack of experimental evidence and estrangement from practical reality. However, string theories also differentiate themselves from crackpot theories by their rigorous mathematical framework, something entirely lacking from the lunatic fringe. Multiverse theories from the physics establishment also have deep resonances with philosophical explorations about why the universe, life, intelligence, and consciousness exist and how they came to be, whereas outsider ideas address these metaphysical questions in a more mystical, religious way that lacks deep resonance or credibility. Lastly, I was unimpressed by the author's writing style and I wished for more wit and insight.

[David · Rating 3 out of 5]

We might consider Jim Carter to be the dean of outsider physicists. Both hands-on and theoretical, he has devised a machine out of cast-off parts to make meter-sized smoke rings, and he renders the chemical elements as a gorgeous system of interlocking rings. Margaret Wertheim does a good job of making connections between Carter and mainstream physics, especially of the nineteenth century kind, some of which was as fanciful as Carter's. But Carter and his fellow "citizen physicists," for all his good humor, is still merely practicing recreational mechanics. His work doesn't make predictions, and it's that work that has a chance of survival. Carter's circlons are beautiful, but they don't explain.

[Eddie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I actually skipped through the book often. The backgrounds of physics "outsiders" weren't particularly interesting. One Jim Carter, has been working on an alternate physics for 50 years. The book's author has been fascinated by Carter's theories for quite awhile. Carter, though, hasn't had any backing by theoretical physicists. Wertheimer ends her book with a discussion of string theory. Are there 26 dimensions? Are there many universes (the Multiverse). What are branes? If there are an almost infinite number of universes, in some of them there would be another you reading the same book and scratching your head trying to understand what you're reading. The author ends by saying that as far as string theory (or other ideas) is concerned there isn't a shred of evidence to back them up.

[Phoebe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although stylewise this book dragged a little for me I'm glad I persisted to the end of this philosophical whimsy about the difference or not between string theorists and 'outsider physicists' with their alternate theories.
Dangerous territory politically to demonstrate any kind of support for "QUACKERY"!!! This genuinely could mean the end of your career as a scientist, but Wertheim is a reporter who is also a physics graduate as she repeatedly reminds us.
The text is so so, the subtext is mint.

[Val Delane · Rating 4 out of 5]

On one channel this is a charming story about one "outsider's" earnest, lifelong struggle to make a rational, approachable relationship with the universe. On another channel it's about anyone's right to make another theory and question the establishment when it has gone off into the weeds. After all, modern "insider" string theory is every bit as bizarre and untestable as any "outsider" physics. On yet another channel there is an aesthetic, philosophical, sometimes even visceral pleasure in observing _anyone_ find their way to the next level, where ever they perceive that to be.

[Zachary · Rating 3 out of 5]

An exploration of physics cranks, dissidents and paradoxers. This surprising large group of largely men who seem to obsess about creating their own unique theories of physics. These paradoxers have been around for centuries as documented in A Budget of Paradoxes by Augustus De Morgan 1872.
The book largely centers around one somewhat standout crank, John Carter. And draws parallels between tese cranks and cutting edge theory of the insider physics community. Overall a good read, though I found my self skipping large sections of the John Carter details.

[Dkolacinski · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm splitting the difference on this one. The artistic part of me rates this a 5and the scientific part of me rates it at a 1. I buy the essential premise that the basis of physics should be an awe of the physical nature, but frankly all view are not necessarily equal. Yes, historically non-credentialed individuals have contributed much to our understanding of nature, but just because you have a view doesn't mean you're right. Still, I really enjoyed the book.

[Dylan Horrocks · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating look at "outsider science" - its pleasures and poetry, and what motivates those who pursue it. Raises some interesting questions about the relationship between contemporary science and the broader public, of ever-greater relevance in this age of climate change deniers and "post-fact" politics. In the end, Wertheim doesn't go into such questions as deeply as I'd like, but there's plenty of good material here to feed an ongoing conversation.

[Naomi · Rating 4 out of 5]

"That Jim was aware of the reaction all this was likely to provoke among mainstream physicists was signaled by the name he chose to represent his system: He called it bluntly the Fieldless Universal Circlon Theory, or 'the FUCT explanation of reality.'"

It is very little to do with physics and very much to do with the story of a rather interesting man.

[Justin Boden · Rating 2 out of 5]

this book is relatively unsatisfying - I was hoping for something with a bit of bite, but the final chapters read more like a plea than a convincing argument. as a biography it's fine enough, but as a thesis on insider/outsider theoretical physics it's unsupported and underwhelming.

[Christy · Rating 3 out of 5]

4 for clarity and subject matter, ideas it provoked, 3.5 for conclusions she derived about the significance and practice of modern physics. Could have used Kuhn or Feyerabend's help maybe... I'll know more about that after reading them.

[Glitzy Babylon · Rating 3 out of 5]

Plagued with precious writing, only the premise is what saved it from me giving my copy to my dogs as a new chewtoy. The author does manage to paint a portrait of cargo cult fanatics, but her execution make the reading experience a trudging mess.

[LOL_BOOKS]

LOL I WAS JUST READING A BOOK TODAY THAT TALKED ABOUT GRAVITATIONAL WAVES AND HOW NO ONE HAD OBSERVED THEM YET. &SCIENCE;

BB

PHYSICS ON THE FRINGE. IT'S NOT ABOUT ACTUAL PHYSICS SO MUCH AS IT IS ABOUT CRAZY MEN INSISTING THEY KNOW BETTER ABOUT HOW THE UNIVERSE RLY WORKS!!!1! BUT IT'S LOLZY.

[Nate · Rating 2 out of 5]

I didn't finish this. I simply lost interest when the intricacies of the actual theory became the focus. Otherwise, this is a relatively intriguing overview of outsider science, both historical and contemporary.