Wulf C. Krueger
Randall Munroe’s “What If? Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions” certainly has a clever premise, and I recognise its appeal to the science-curious. Drawing from his background as a physicist and former NASA roboticist, Munroe sets out to tackle (mostly) nonsensical questions with rigorous scientific logic. While that might sound fun in theory, in practice I found the book trying far too hard to be clever, and as a result, it came off as more smug than smart.
Admittedly, some of the questions Munroe attempts to answer are genuinely imaginative, but his tone often feels too enamoured with its own geekiness. Rather than inviting the reader into a playful exploration, it too often felt like being caught in an endless lecture by someone who delights excessively in their own intellect. I couldn’t help but feel that the answers to these questions were taken far too seriously—so much so that any joy or playfulness quickly evaporated under the weight of equations and thought experiments.
But then, take my subjective opinion with a grain of salt: Despite its immense popularity, I don’t really enjoy Munroe’s XKCD either.
DNF at 78% and two stars out of five.
Ceterum censeo Putin esse delendam
Originally posted at turing.mailstation.de.
Randall Munroe’s “What If? Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions” certainly has a clever premise, and I recognise its appeal to the science-curious. Drawing from his background as a physicist and former NASA roboticist, Munroe sets out to tackle (mostly) nonsensical questions with rigorous scientific logic. While that might sound fun in theory, in practice I found the book trying far too hard to be clever, and as a result, it came off as more smug than smart.
Admittedly, some of the questions Munroe attempts to answer are genuinely imaginative, but his tone often feels too enamoured with its own geekiness. Rather than inviting the reader into a playful exploration, it too often felt like being caught in an endless lecture by someone who delights excessively in their own intellect. I couldn’t help but feel that the answers to these questions were taken far too seriously—so much so that any joy or playfulness quickly evaporated under the weight of equations and thought experiments.
But then, take my subjective opinion with a grain of salt: Despite its immense popularity, I don’t really enjoy Munroe’s XKCD either.
DNF at 78% and two stars out of five.
Ceterum censeo Putin esse delendam
Originally posted at turing.mailstation.de.