The Invention of Air

Steven Johnson

Nominally, this is a biography of Joseph Priestley, the late 18th century English natural philosopher (scientist), theologian, politician. More accurately, it is the story of how science worked 250 years ago, using Priestley as a protagonist to walk us through the process. And more importantly, Johnson intersperses commentary throughout to highlight how "doing science" has changed, both for better and worse. So while this is a biography and presentation of the historical record, it is also an opinion piece and a persuasive essay. Mixing this all together is ambitious, but Johnson is up to the task and, at least from the point of view of this scientist, hits a home run.

The foundation for the story is the scientific life of Priestley and his experimental investigation of air. He, along with Ben Franklin and a group of intellectuals that refer to themselves as "The Honest Whigs", over the course of 10 years in the 1770's are discovering the physical properties of air. Before this time, air was invisible nothing, and therefore there was nothing to discover. But new equipment (accurate scales, air pump, etc.) make investigation possible. Priestley is credited with "discovering" oxygen, and recognizing that plants and animals affect "common air" differently.

What I love about this book is what Johnson refers to as "the long zoom view". The fact that plants and animals affect air differently could be just a scientific fact. But these intellectuals are not just scientists. They are theologians, politicians, industrialists, etc. as well, which allows them to see "fact" differently. In this case, Franklin takes the 'affect air differently' fact and posits a systems view of life on earth. That is, he suggests for the first time ever the idea of an ecosystem and the possibility of a necessary global homeostasis. This is astounding insight. But it is not just his. Johnson suggests that most of the discoveries and scientific epiphanies that occur during this time are really the result of two social artifacts:

1. the communal nature of science. The Honest Whigs did not have a proprietary sense of knowledge. Instead, they were acting proponents of open source knowledge, sharing everything with each other and even with their scientific and industrial rivals. So Franklin on his own never makes this ecosystem observation, and
2. the long term "leisure" life of the scientists. That is, Priestley had 20-30 years of a hunch about the scientific fact of air being different that the common understanding of air. During this time, the idea was percolating and bouncing around as he investigated other things, as he shared ideas with others, as he delved into theology. Were Priestley to be working on a government funded grant that demanded results in a few years, perhaps he never makes the discoveries and history changes (the oxygen idea leads to better gunpowder production by the French, which is sold to American revolutionaries, giving them a military advantage over the British). 

Today's scientific research has neither of these factors. However, you can see elements of them when looking at hot new scientific fields. Big change is happening where open source knowledge prevails, and we the interface between traditional specialties (fields of biophysics, biochemistry, materials science (chemistry + physics), medical physics, etc.) all revealing ground breaking discoveries.

The book is a super fast read, and a great combination of scientific biography and meta-scientific sociology.

Read