ARCHIVES
Put general comments about this blog here:
Click to leave your thoughts.
A blog by someone who doesn't like or understand blogs.
A major theme of this blog is the love affair between the blogger and the city of New York.
Email me at david [at] danzig [dot] com.
Bloggers with whom I am personally acquainted, in real life, in alphebetical order by first name:
Caren L.
Dav C.
David D.
Eva J.
Jessica D.
Joclyn G.
Lauren P.
Sean S.
Steph T.
If you know me in person, and I forgot to put you here, definitely, please email me, and also please accept my apology!
Take a look at some of my nearby neighbors by clicking this button: 
.
Wednesday, November 27, 2002
BOOK REVIEW: THE SCIENCE OF SUPERHEROES * 1/2 (1 and a half stars out of 4).
External link:
After reading the excellent books, The Physics of Star Trek, and its sequel, Beyond Star Trek, which examine what about Star Trek is impossible, and what could conceivably be discovered in the future, I was very excited about The Science of Superheroes. But the book was a terrible disappointment. The authors go into mind-numbing detail about the most boring details of each hero's life and adventures, only to ignore those details, and then just talk about whatever they want to talk about. For example, an obscure Spider-Man story from the 60s is used as a pretense to talk about cloning for the better part of a chapter. Similarly, almost the entire Green Lantern chapter is taken up with a long and trite discussion of black holes, based on the throw-away speculation that a black hole could be the power source for Green Lantern's power battery. I took only one semester of physics in college, and no other science classes, and I guess I've read about science a little in popular books and magazines, and despite this modest background, the level of discussion of scientific issues seemed far beneath me. So, don't read this book, and read The Physics of Star Trek instead.
link to this item: http://www.creamy.com/blog/2002/11/book-review-science-of-superheroes-12.html
Check for older comments: Archived comments on item #85721121
