Scan barcode
graciegrace1178's review
3.0
Solid first few chapters, gradually became just a bit too much for me. Too much repetition. I actually just skimmed the last few chapters instead of fully reading them, which I almost NEVER do, just to be done with it. Good resource tho and shoutout to the authors for being referenced in one of my reference papers on biophilia and child development last week. Good going, lads!
nikkimunson's review
informative
slow-paced
3.5
Interesting book and concept, complete with fascinating figures and charts. As a reader I found the author condescending, which distracted from his theory/message, and makes me question his biases as a scientist.
Content Warnings
Minor: Racism and Xenophobia
justusky's review
1.0
What a crock of shit.
It's a 250 page advertisement for the repackaging of well-known physical and mathematical relationships into an admittedly successful microscale heat transfer design principle which the author has not-s0-humbly deemed to be a "law". This is followed by the dubious application of this "law" into virtually every physical, social and biological system imaginable. If we just squint our eyes, announce that everything is a "flow design" and plot a few things that look good on a logarithmic scale, the "constructal law" is pretty much the unifying theory (sorry, "law") and can explain everything from why Michael Phelps is fast and how ejaculation works (seriously). Isaac Newton famously said "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." Instead of following the same approach, the author decided to just drape those in giants in a shirt reading "constructal law" and call it a day. This book is the scientific equivalent of trying to make "fetch" happen. Stop trying to make "fetch" happen.
It's a 250 page advertisement for the repackaging of well-known physical and mathematical relationships into an admittedly successful microscale heat transfer design principle which the author has not-s0-humbly deemed to be a "law". This is followed by the dubious application of this "law" into virtually every physical, social and biological system imaginable. If we just squint our eyes, announce that everything is a "flow design" and plot a few things that look good on a logarithmic scale, the "constructal law" is pretty much the unifying theory (sorry, "law") and can explain everything from why Michael Phelps is fast and how ejaculation works (seriously). Isaac Newton famously said "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." Instead of following the same approach, the author decided to just drape those in giants in a shirt reading "constructal law" and call it a day. This book is the scientific equivalent of trying to make "fetch" happen. Stop trying to make "fetch" happen.
heather01602to60660's review against another edition
2.0
I fully admit, science is not my strongest area of study, so take it with a grain of salt, but I struggled a lot through this book. The idea of the "constructal law" seems pretty simple - basically everything that moves is a flow system and all flow systems evolve over time to best support that movement, where the flow system can be anything animate or inanimate, and the movement can be physical or something like moving ideas from person to person.
Honestly, it started out as a fairly interesting idea, but then became very repetitive, and the supposed examples that gave proof to the constructal law being the basis for, well, everything seemed to get thinner and thinner. I found myself skimming more, though, so I'm not sure if the issue was with the writing (not all that engaging for this non-scientist, at least) or the examples themselves.
Honestly, it started out as a fairly interesting idea, but then became very repetitive, and the supposed examples that gave proof to the constructal law being the basis for, well, everything seemed to get thinner and thinner. I found myself skimming more, though, so I'm not sure if the issue was with the writing (not all that engaging for this non-scientist, at least) or the examples themselves.
michielstock's review
2.0
Like some people before me, I was was somewhat disappointed in this book.
First of all, Bejan is very arrogant. He is not the first, nor will be the last popular science author to be this, but it quite insufferable of him to keep repeating that he has surpassed Darwin and can make every (important) thing in nature clear by performing his subfield of thermodynamics. Of course prof. Bejan keeps reminding us that it is only natural that the ignorant masses can't recognize his genius. (And he doesn't like Communism).
The so-called constructal law is extremely vage. Design in nature arises to maximizes a 'flow'. What kind of flow? Would it prefer a flow of 100 l of water per second or of 100 l of air? Is there some theoretical derivation of this law, based on the laws of thermodynamics? Why don't I know this if I have read the book?
No formal discription of the law is given. Every chapter contains a couple of (rather badly structured) examples. Though some of them are quite interesting, I fail to see any need for any constructal low. Trees are tree-shaped because they need to keep a flow of water (to transport nutrients, keep their cells turgid and keep their floem moving). This could be predicted by the principles of evolution, same for the animals' movement.
In short, this book could be really interesting but should have been better (and more critically!) edited.
First of all, Bejan is very arrogant. He is not the first, nor will be the last popular science author to be this, but it quite insufferable of him to keep repeating that he has surpassed Darwin and can make every (important) thing in nature clear by performing his subfield of thermodynamics. Of course prof. Bejan keeps reminding us that it is only natural that the ignorant masses can't recognize his genius. (And he doesn't like Communism).
The so-called constructal law is extremely vage. Design in nature arises to maximizes a 'flow'. What kind of flow? Would it prefer a flow of 100 l of water per second or of 100 l of air? Is there some theoretical derivation of this law, based on the laws of thermodynamics? Why don't I know this if I have read the book?
No formal discription of the law is given. Every chapter contains a couple of (rather badly structured) examples. Though some of them are quite interesting, I fail to see any need for any constructal low. Trees are tree-shaped because they need to keep a flow of water (to transport nutrients, keep their cells turgid and keep their floem moving). This could be predicted by the principles of evolution, same for the animals' movement.
In short, this book could be really interesting but should have been better (and more critically!) edited.
davidr's review
2.0
In this book, Adrian Bejan hypothesizes a principle that he names the "constructal law". It states that everything in nature configures itself and reconfigures itself to increase flow, or to make flow more efficient.
What does Bejan mean by flow? Any concrete object or abstract concept can flow. Water can flow, air can flow, blood, heat and electricity can flow. Also, knowledge, concepts, memes, ideas, and data are things that flow.
By "design", Bejan does not mean that somebody designed the flows. He means that the flows configure themselves into a design.
A prime example of the constructal law is the flow of rainwater. It falls everywhere, and drops of water coagulate into millions of branchlets, which combine into thousands of tiny streams, hundreds of large streams, creaks, and a smaller number of rivers. This hierarchy is "designed" to maximize the flow of water. The circulatory system in animals and humans is similarly configured into capillaries, small and large arteries. The trunk of a tree is divided into a few stout branches, more thin branches, and many very thin branches and then to leaves, a structure that helps to maximize the flow of water through the tree and into the atmosphere.
A road system starts out with lots of narrow dirt roads, fewer paved side roads, fewer major roads, and fewer main highways. This system maximizes the flow of traffic. The diffusion of knowledge follows a similar pattern, as does the flow of athleticism through high schools, colleges, and on into professional sports.
Bejan uses mathematical formulas to back up his claims that these designs help to maximize the various flows in nature.
But I have a few complaints about the book. First, it is very repetitive. This type of book, where a major claim of a new idea is made, seems to fit a pattern where the author self-aggrandizes the importance of his new idea or theory.
I always thought that the "purpose" of an organism is to reproduce its own genes. But Bejan claims that the purpose of all organisms is to maximize flow. The purpose of a tree, for example, is to maximize the flow of water from the ground into the atmosphere. The purpose of a fish is to undulate and churn the water in the ocean, to mix it and to make it flow more rapidly. This seems so bizarre to me.
Many things in nature organize themselves by some power law. The book is filled with graphics that demonstrate these power laws over a diverse variety of "flows". Bejan claims that this is evidence in favor of the constructal law. He claims that the constructal law is a law of physics, but when he claims that the fact that the frequency of words in language obeys a power law is evidence of a law of physics, I have a hard time agreeing.
There is a core of genius in the constructal law. But it is buried in some tedious, repetitive language. Perhaps the author could clean it up. At the same time, he could demonstrate not only what but also how these structures configure themselves to obey the constructal law.
What does Bejan mean by flow? Any concrete object or abstract concept can flow. Water can flow, air can flow, blood, heat and electricity can flow. Also, knowledge, concepts, memes, ideas, and data are things that flow.
By "design", Bejan does not mean that somebody designed the flows. He means that the flows configure themselves into a design.
A prime example of the constructal law is the flow of rainwater. It falls everywhere, and drops of water coagulate into millions of branchlets, which combine into thousands of tiny streams, hundreds of large streams, creaks, and a smaller number of rivers. This hierarchy is "designed" to maximize the flow of water. The circulatory system in animals and humans is similarly configured into capillaries, small and large arteries. The trunk of a tree is divided into a few stout branches, more thin branches, and many very thin branches and then to leaves, a structure that helps to maximize the flow of water through the tree and into the atmosphere.
A road system starts out with lots of narrow dirt roads, fewer paved side roads, fewer major roads, and fewer main highways. This system maximizes the flow of traffic. The diffusion of knowledge follows a similar pattern, as does the flow of athleticism through high schools, colleges, and on into professional sports.
Bejan uses mathematical formulas to back up his claims that these designs help to maximize the various flows in nature.
But I have a few complaints about the book. First, it is very repetitive. This type of book, where a major claim of a new idea is made, seems to fit a pattern where the author self-aggrandizes the importance of his new idea or theory.
I always thought that the "purpose" of an organism is to reproduce its own genes. But Bejan claims that the purpose of all organisms is to maximize flow. The purpose of a tree, for example, is to maximize the flow of water from the ground into the atmosphere. The purpose of a fish is to undulate and churn the water in the ocean, to mix it and to make it flow more rapidly. This seems so bizarre to me.
Many things in nature organize themselves by some power law. The book is filled with graphics that demonstrate these power laws over a diverse variety of "flows". Bejan claims that this is evidence in favor of the constructal law. He claims that the constructal law is a law of physics, but when he claims that the fact that the frequency of words in language obeys a power law is evidence of a law of physics, I have a hard time agreeing.
There is a core of genius in the constructal law. But it is buried in some tedious, repetitive language. Perhaps the author could clean it up. At the same time, he could demonstrate not only what but also how these structures configure themselves to obey the constructal law.
More...