books and arts The history of cool A look back at pioneering studies of quantum effects at low temperatures.

Cold Wars: A History of Superconductivity by Jean Matricon & Georges Waysand Rutgers University Press: 2003. 304 pp. $65 Philip W. Anderson This book, translated from the French, is a history of the field of cryogenics and of the two specifically quantum forms of matter in bulk — superconductivity and superfluidity (although only the first is mentioned in the subtitle). The authors clearly express their enthusiasm (which I share) for the field and its history: the fascination and mystery that it held for the icons of the quantum revolu- tion, from Albert Einstein through Werner ARCHIVES VISUAL EMILIO SEGRE ONNES LAB./AIP KAMERLINGH Heisenberg to Richard Feynman; the slow and uneven advance of science as it was impeded by personality conflicts, the sav- agery of the Stalinist regime, and the politics of the real Cold War; the clashes of conflict- Super stars? Researchers at Heike Kamerlingh Onnes’ lab in Leiden discovered superconductivity. ing ways of doing research in disparate fields; and even, most recently, a case of the died too early to catch the breakthroughs in University of California, Berkeley, a labora- deliberate manufacture of scientific results high-temperature superconductivity made tory that the authors condemn to ‘also-ran’ on an unprecedented scale. There is a lot of by his followers and students. status in a parenthetical note.) And the rich material here that has been, on the Having said all that,throughout the book authors ignore Matthias’ continuous con- whole, neglected. I kept encountering historical blunders and nection to Bell Labs from before he began This history has more than its share of misapprehensions that left me wondering studying superconductivity. fascinating,larger-than-life figures.It begins how sound the rest of it was. For instance, in The book also provides a false impression with the Dutch entrepreneur Heike Kamer- the space of two pages there are three dubi- of the discovery of the Josephson effect. lingh Onnes, who discovered superconduc- ous historical judgements. To begin with, Brian Josephson’s paper predicting tunnel- tivity. In order to liquefy helium, he created “The history of physics was indelibly marked ling supercurrents was not ten years after in Leiden the Cryogenic Laboratory, the first by WWII,primarily because of the ...Bomb,” BCS theory — a fact that is given some sig- industrial-scale lab for pure scientificresearch write the authors, but more physicists nificance — but five. He was also unable to and the true precursor of today’s CERN, worked on radar than on the bomb, and put his own predictions into experimental Fermilab and Kamiokande. much more technology resulted from it.“Los practice, and had a public argument as to Then there were the Russians: Pyotr Alamos made no contribution to low-tem- their validity with Bardeen in the summer of Kapitsa, Ernest Rutherford’s favourite, who perature physics,”the book says,but research 1962; this was shortly settled by experiments was kidnapped by Stalin from Cambridge, on helium-3 originated at Los Alamos, and done by John Rowell and me at Bell Labs. UK,to carry on his helium research in Russia; Matthias’ laboratory there played an impor- But Josephson makes a late arrival (in Lev Shubnikov, who founded the great tant role later. And the authors declare that, chapter 18 of 22) in Cold Wars,which focuses Kharkov lab but was murdered by Stalin in in contrast to the experimentalists, “it was mainly on the period before and immediately 1938, some 15 years before his wonderful essentially the great pre-war figures who after the Second World War. It is almost experiments demonstrating ‘type II’ super- continued to hold center stage among the worth reading the book just for the distress- conductivity in alloys — the phase that makes theorists.”But the immediate post-war gen- ing story of London, whose books laid out possible high-field magnets such as those eration of theorists was arguably as strong the problems that the post-war generations used in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and as numerous as any in history:Feynman, were to solve but who died just before the — were understood; and the brilliant figure Tsung-Dao Lee, Chen Ning Yang, Julian solutions were to become clear. There is also of Lev Landau,Russia’s greatest theorist. Schwinger, Murray Gell-Mann and, among an excellent view of the prickly personality We also meet Fritz London, the under- the condensed-matter types, David Pines, of Landau and of the terrible dangers that recognized genius who was denied recogni- Philippe Nozieres and Walter Kohn. threatened him, Kapitsa and Shubnikov as tion for his great contribution to superfluidity There are also errors in personal details they laboured well in advance of their West- — the realization that it was a Bose–Einstein that in many cases subtly alter the emphases ern colleagues from 1935 to 1955. condensate — by Landau. There is John in the story. Bardeen was not a “student of In describing the controversies about the Bardeen,who,with Leon Cooper and Robert Slater”, he was a junior fellow at Harvard, theory of liquid helium’s superfluid phase, Schrieffer, proposed the BCS theory of and no other source has him seriously influ- the authors include the contributions of superconductivity, but only after first win- enced by John Slater. Ted Geballe was not an Feynman but not the penetrating insights ning a Nobel prize for the transistor. And “early student” of Matthias; rather, Geballe from the early 1950s of Lars Onsager, which finally we come across the charismatic Bernd was his department head and mentor at in my opinion are of equal status. The Matthias, the ‘alchemist’ guru of what the Bell Labs, and the relationship was two-way. story of Bardeen’s “relentless pursuit” of the authors call the “age of materials”.Matthias (Geballe was, incidentally, trained at the solution to superconductivity is well told,

NATURE | VOL 426 | 6 NOVEMBER 2003 | www.nature.com/nature © 2003 Nature Publishing Group 17 HELLIO & VAN INGEN/NHPA books andarts 18 in theirhorizon. thephysiology prize,from of subject MRI,the already noted theabsence of Ihave isbarely mentioned. Tony Leggett, to yet asecond physics Nobel, source of now the helium-3, of history the intricate But Vitaly Ginzburgand Alexei Abrikosov. thephysics to prizes for thebackground of itisanexcellent source On theonehand, thebook. strengths andtheweaknesses of valuewhenithappens. enormous butadds where hittingthejackpot isararity tensions between research andtechnology, of inthehistory means auniquestory superconductivity —by no applications of andother theMRIindustry the valueof isnever balanced observation against critical But this tions thatcharacterized thisperiod. applica- thehopesforpractical overselling of authors make sometelling pointsaboutthe inthesefinalchapters the Still, is apity. which so hard to dispelisnotexplored here, chaos andcontroversy inthisfieldis sion of reasons why themisleadingpopularimpres- The hasnotbeenpointlessandfutile. theory andthat superconductivity isnotamystery, high-temperature thatthe source of namely, wasmeantto convey,sage thatthearticle misreading ormisunderstandingthemes- context, Nobel are quoted symposium outof my words fora ina2001article this field, motivated agreat discovery. Columbus conceptChristopher thatawrong Thisisfarfrom thefirsttimesince be wrong. that to thought isnonethelessgenerally theory by theway), Benoy Chakraverty, of concept (notanoriginal bipolaron theory cuprates wasunquestionablymotivated by high-temperature superconductivity inthe although Alex Müller’s great discovery of failure to note that let passtheauthors’ time seemedmore important? And Icannot so much relative to many thatatthe things butdoesthiswork standout to itscredit, theBCSideas detailedapplicationsof ber of able collective num- ethosandasignificant itsremark- inFrance,with de Gennes’group There isemphasisonPierre-Gilles coverage. here begin the to warp weakness intheory, andtheir world, theanglophone with arity relative unfamili- suggest thattheauthors’ might missesmany points.I vital indeed,and whose explanation isquoted). adebthere to (with theory Victor Weisskopf, theBCS thenature of of as isthedescription oeo hs eeofby alittle or,occasion- thesewere off some of even if socio-scientific history, trends of refreshing to find judgementsasto thebroad But Ifoundit or injustwho did what. you’re interested inwhatactuallyhappened emptor But layman aswell asscientist. tion of theatten- andthebookisworth elsewhere, Cold Wars h nrgigpeeo scientifichistory piece of The intriguing This year’s Nobels outboththe bring in theory thestate of In thediscussion of thereafterThe story becomes sketchy : the real inside story isnothere thereal if insidestory : has notbeenaswell presented caveat mings and his1942book Biology Experimental Journal of a1924publicationinthe cycles with population study of forthemodern form Charles Elton whobuiltthescientificplat- But itwastheOxford zoologist in some years. forinstance, lemmings, populations of to explain theories own theburgeoning Scandinavia have northern their Sami of hunters peoplesuch asthe andotherrural And long agoasthefifteenth century. for wrote aboutthephenomenonas Uppsala, example, Thearchbishop of lynxes. hares and andpopulationsof lemmings one year to thenext intheabundance of centuries by theprofound from variations People have beenfascinated andpuzzledfor Nils Chr. Stenseth £19.95(pbk) £52(hbk);$29.95, $75, 456pp. UniversityPrinceton Press: 2003. by Peter Turchin Theoretical/Empirical Synthesis Complex PopulationDynamics:A of populations The riseandfall USA. New Jersey 08544-0708, Princeton, University, Princeton Physics, of Anderson isintheDepartment Philip W. attention to thematall. to bare facts—whenitpays confines itself science Far of too often thehistory lot. a ally, book thataimsto synthesize thisrather Soa been characterized by heated debates. lation cycles isvastandhasto someextent Thescientificliterature onpopu- the Alps. such asthelarch budmoth foundin regions, have forspeciesinother beenobserved butsimilarphenomena thenorth, of brates yTrhnadclege,butspecialists by Turchin andcolleagues, thework provides anexcellent synthesisof part Thetheory sixcasestudies. of a series dataandfinally theory, split into three parts: is by Russian-born ecologist Peter Turchin, outsiders isto bewelcomed. chaotic fieldandmake itmore accessible to made to explainthelemming’s act. disappearing Now you seeit…Many have suggestions been uho thiswork hasfocusedonverte- Much of Complex Population Dynamics have beenkey references ever since. ©

2 00 3

Nature oe,Mice andLem- Voles, Publishing . That paper That . Group written , British NATURE I btenpatadhrioe predator and (between plantand herbivore, interactions between different trophic levels forinstance inemphasizingfeedback tives, educational purpose. seem too biasedornarrow to ageneral serve both asthey themastextbooks, either of —Iwouldto notrecommend with disagree much tothe fieldwith think about—and provide activeboth bookswill scientistsin Although and well-planned experiments. needing to betested by specificallydesigned much dataandseveral plausiblehypotheses with population cycles isastimulating field, are to findthesolutionto thecycle puzzle. we balance thatIamconvinced isneededif regarding approaches methodological —a thisprovides agoodbalance Berryman, Together by thepostscript with analysis. approachexperimental over statisticaldata favour who the Moss andNigel Yoccoz, Robert Krebs, Charley Xaviergists Lambin, A concluding chapter by ecolo- iswritten population cycles whereas othersdonot. species andpopulationsexhibit extensive in attempting to understandwhy some display great enthusiasm andquality, form bothin somewhatvariable although ters, Thesechap- apopulationcycle. example of considering an by specialistsinthefield,each Cyclestion an openingchapter andapostscript, whocontributed Edited by Alan Berryman, which waspublishedlastyear. versity Press), the patterns to be explained, and end with andendwith the patterns to beexplained, aimedatdescribing statistical dataanalysis, with and similarphenomenashouldstart populationcycles investigationslogical of Turchin’s with agree conclusion thateco- Ifully work. solelyonexperimental relying than rather modelling andexperiments, theoretical statisticalanalysis, on integrating itsemphasis with inparticular the literature, that thisbookcontributes profoundly to think being thechapter ongrouse.However,I agoodexception other systems described, the shallow butisrather forsomeof himself, for thesystems thatTurchin hasworked on fully thantheformer. mechanistic modelling—thelatter more and (timeseries-based) phenomenological which covers both thebook, of part second Ipreferred the thefield. a synthesisof providing like ambitionsof inabookwith not cover theliterature might asfullythey on populationcycles may findthatitdoes elements as research to looklike. ought programme whata because heprovides examples of but Turchin’sbody with agrees conclusions, notnecessarilybecauseevery- on thefield, respect thebookmay have ahuge impact In this alternative mechanistic explanations. workexperimental to between discriminate | VOL 426 They bothexpressThey similarperspec- rather thesebooksshow thatthestudy of Both of The sectiononcaseexamples isgood Turchin’s thesame bookcovers many of | 6 NOVEMBER 2003 comprises seven chapters written Population Cycles | www.nature.com/nature (Oxford Uni- Popula-