College English professor who loves classic literature, psychology, neurology and hates pop trash like Twilight and Fifty Shades of Grey.
Brevity is always a disadvantage when it comes to articles about complicated scientific principles or complex theories or syndromes, and thus such articles much be compelling and well-written to be effective. This is definitely one of the better issues of this magazine, as the articles are such, especially the one on synesthesia, co-written by the brilliant neurologist Ramachandran.
and this was the best of the lot, even though it's all pretty much beginner layman stuff. Old Einstein relativity retreads and kind of obvious "insights" about how perception and emotion determine the "feel" of time. Nothing terribly probing. The article on the history of timepieces may have been the best.
For science lovers, this can be a good subscription. I'm interested by discoveries in science, which is exactly what this periodical is about--imparting the latest in scientific discoveries from the world of computers, astronomy, medicine, biology, and more. It's thorough and educational, but not captivating.
The main problem is that there's only one narrator, and though he seems knowledgable, he speaks with little excitement. This leads to a science recording with more than one slow spot. I think it would be better if they had more than one narrator (like a newscast) or at least something to break up the monologue. It just keeps going from one story to the next like a ticker tape.
If you like science, however, I think you can overlook this problem. It's just something to be aware of.