What a fabulous book! I love science books that are well-written, especially when the author is a practicing scientist with a big story to tell!
Laura What a fabulous book! I love science books that are well-written, especially when the author is a practicing scientist with a big story to tell!
Laura Mersini-Houghton grew up in Communist Albania. Her story about life there is not a happy one. Her father, a mathematician, was punished for attending a conference in Western Europe. His punishment was internal exile -- and it could have been much much worse!
Houghton's life story is interspersed with the science in this book. She strikes me as a free thinker. She did not follow the crowd. Instead of following her friends and escaping from Albania at the first opportunity, she continued with her undergraduate studies. She was rewarded with a Fulbright scholarship to attend the graduate program at the University of Maryland (my alma mater!) where she earned a Masters degree. She got her PhD from University of Wisconsin, and after some other prestigious academic positions she became an assistant professor of theoretical physics and cosmology at the University of North Carolina.
In the first part of the book, Houghton lays down the background of cosmology, quantum mechanics and string theory. These various topics become central to her own hypothesis, which she describes in a build-up step by step. First, she describes her theoretical physics research. She explains how her research into the birth of our universe strongly deviates from previous research. For example, Roger Penrose speculated that the probability of our universe existing is astronomically low. Houghton, on the other hand, computed a rather high probability -- so high that it may be possible for other universes to exist as well.
Then Houghton proposes evidence against the anthropic principle, which states that the fundamental physical constants are finely tuned; if any of these constants were slightly different, then the universe either wouldn't be stable, certainly not sufficiently for the development of life. She reasons that a pre-big-bang landscape would allow a vast array of different quantum mechanical wave packets. Those wave packets that occupy high energy states could evolve into a stable universe.
Well, this is a tad beyond me, but the real kicker is when Houghton and her collaborators, Tomo Takahashi and Richard Holman, published a series of papers in 2006 called “Avatars of the Landscape”. Their explorations predicted the existence of multi-verses, that is, multiple universes existing simultaneously. But how in the world could you prove such a thing??? She did! She and her collaborators made some a series of 9 predictions about variability in the CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background radiation field). She doubted though, that today's technology could observe with enough precsion to confirm or deny the predictions.
Then, the Planck satellite was launched in 2009. By 2013, data from the satellite confirmed their predictions! It is very unlikely that the observed variability in the CMB could be caused by behavior inside our universe! This is not 100% proof of the existence of other universes, but it is a big step in that direction!
I highly recommend this book to those who are interested in cosmology and the big questions about our universe! ...more
This is a short, easy-to-read book about cosmology. I would like to say that it is current--it was published in 2020. However, since then, new images This is a short, easy-to-read book about cosmology. I would like to say that it is current--it was published in 2020. However, since then, new images from the James Webb telescope have started to cast doubt on the standard model of cosmology. Some say, though, that the controversy is overblown, and that the standard model is still good. See for example: https://www.wired.com/story/no-the-ja...
Despite all this, the book is informative, entertaining and full of subtle humor. After all, when talking about the end of the universe, why not keep the tone light? As an example:
I dabbled in experimental particle physics in my misspent youth, playing with lasers in a nuclear physics lab (despite what the record might say, the fire was not my fault).
Or, another example:
Fortunately, the process is entirely painless; at no point will your nerve impulses be able to catch up with your disintegration by the [quantum] bubble. It's a mercy, really.
Cosmologists speculate among several possibilities for the end of the universe. One of the possibilities that really intrigued me, was the so-called "de Sitter state". The universe reaches a state of steady-state expansion, and reaches a maximum entropy. The temperature is 10^-40 degrees. Nothing exists but radiation. Since entropy cannot increase further, nothing can happen, and the arrow of time is gone!
Also, if you wait an infinite length of time, any arrangement of particles can occur again out of the vacuum, an infinite number of times. If you wait a trillion-trillion times the age of the universe, you can watch an entire piano spontaneously assemble itself in a seemingly empty box! (But it won't last long!)
I was particularly gladdened that a new observatory being built in Chile is named after the discoverer of evidence for "dark matter". The Vera C. Rubin Observatory will have an 8.4-meter telescope, and with a wide-angle field of view it will take images of millions of supernovae and billions of galaxies. The purpose is to better pinpoint the universe expansion rate and shed light on dark energy. Interestingly, it will also be well-suited to spotting early detections of potentially hazardous asteroids. So, by better understanding dark energy that will eventually destroy the universe, it could potentially help save Earth!
If you are interested at all in cosmology, this book is a good place to start. Informative diagrams and good writing will make this book a pleasant journey....more
Frank Wilczek is a theoretical physicist, mathematician, and Nobel laureate. I love reading well-written books about science by practicing scientists.Frank Wilczek is a theoretical physicist, mathematician, and Nobel laureate. I love reading well-written books about science by practicing scientists. They have insights into the issues beyond what you normally hear or read about in the literature. Also, they have the ability to speculate competently into the future of science and where future research is likely to go.
Scientists deeply understand how science progresses. So, I love this quote from his book:
"Science often resenbles the game of Jeopardy! where answers suggest what the right questions are."
I also appreciate a term that Wilczek uses, the "Interpretive Ladder". It uses our understanding to design and interpret new experiments, one stage at a time.
A year ago, I greatly enjoyed reading Wilczek's book, A Beautiful Question: Finding Nature's Deep Design. It was a hard act to follow, but Wilczek followed it up with this book in excellent style. This is a very short book, and not difficult to follow. Wilzcek covers a lot of topics, each one rather superficially but in enough depth to give some historical and technical background, and some speculation about where future research i is heading. Don't read this book for amusement--read it for a deep appreciation about the boundaries of physics, and where the future might lead....more
I initially had some misgivings about this book, since I had read at least one other book by Stephen Hawking. I wasn't looking for a dry book about phI initially had some misgivings about this book, since I had read at least one other book by Stephen Hawking. I wasn't looking for a dry book about physics and cosmology. But as soon as I started listening to the audiobook (which is excellent, by the way!), my opinion did a 180. This is a marvelous book. I had not realized, either, that Stephen Hawking had a wonderful sense of humor!
I had not realized how many discoveries about cosmology were made by Hawking. He mentions these discoveries in a humble manner, almost in passing. But he does show the importance of some of these discoveries in shaping our understanding of the cosmos, and the origins of our universe.
Hawking also dipped into politics a bit, and the existential crises facing humanity. He strongly recommends that people start thinking seriously about space travel, at least for the purpose of diversification. He throws in all sorts of humor. If Columbus had not had the exploring spirit, today we might not have McDonalds and KFC. Our nearest star is 4 light years away. So, if there are inhabitants on planets orbiting that star, they are still blissfully ignorant of Donald Trump.
People often ask the question, "if the universe started with a Big Bang, then what was there before the big bang?" Hawking shows why this is not a valid question, as time did not exist before the Big Bang. It is sort of like asking, how do you go south from the south pole?
I highly recommend this book. It is totally approachable, it isn't flooded with any sort of jargon, and it's a lot of fun, too!...more
Every chapter is interesting, but this book seems to go in circles. I just cannot figure out what the author intended for the overall theme. Brian GreEvery chapter is interesting, but this book seems to go in circles. I just cannot figure out what the author intended for the overall theme. Brian Greene is a well-known author and physicist. He delved into so many different subjects--it was hard to keep track what he was ultimately driving at.
The beginning of the book was about the beginning of time, about the laws of thermodynamics and entropy, and the structure of DNA. So far so good. Then the book diverges into religion, philosophy, consciousness, and all sorts of other subjects. The final chapters return to physics and what will happen in the very very very distant future.
Perhaps the book could have been improved by just making it into a collection of essays. Then there would be less need to try to make it into a coherent story.
I didn't read this book--I listened to the audiobook, narrated by the author. Brian Greene reads his book rather well, and his voice, at least, is not distracting. ...more
Randall Munroe is the author of the web site xkcd.com, The web site is a collection of science-oriented absurdist cartoons. If you have never had the Randall Munroe is the author of the web site xkcd.com, The web site is a collection of science-oriented absurdist cartoons. If you have never had the opportunity to visit this web site--do so immediately! It's a lot of fun!.
This book follows closely on the web site's approach, and that of his previous book What If?: Randall Munroe Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions Summary & Takeaways. This is obviously a "How To ..." sort of book. Some of the questions it asks, like "How to Throw a Pool Party", "How to Dig a Hole", "How to Play the Piano", or "How to Play Tag" sound like normal How-to questions. At the beginning of each chapter, you might get a standard sort of answer. But it never> stops there. Each answer quickly segues into an altogether absurd approach. The answers often use physics and simple mathematics to illustrate the answers, along with a liberal sprinkling of stick-figure illustrations.
The book is hilarious. The physics/mathematics approach is especially appealing to nerds. The book is highly entertaining. You never know--you might someday have a real need to know how to catch a drone, or how to power your house on Mars. [image]...more
This book is about the "Many-Worlds" hypothesis of quantum mechanics. It is a deep description of the hypothesis, and its context in quantum mechanicsThis book is about the "Many-Worlds" hypothesis of quantum mechanics. It is a deep description of the hypothesis, and its context in quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics does not violate logic; its precise predictions are correct, and among the most accurate of any scientific theory. But its foundations are still quite controversial, especially when it comes to understanding the role of gravitation.
The Many-Worlds hypothesis is a simple way to explain some of the seeming paradoxes of quantum mechanics. There are alternative hypotheses, and the book covers these as well.
I can't say that I learned anything (I am a physicist), but the book did focus my attention on a few key ideas. First, it is incorrect to say that atoms are made up mostly of empty space; particles are not tiny points, but are wave functions that are spread out in space.
Another example: The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle does not say that the act of measuring a quantity disturbs the system. In addition it does not say that you cannot simultaneously measure position and momentum perfectly at the same time. Instead, it says that a definite position and momentum (velocity) do not even exist simultaneously. The wave function solution to the Schrodinger Equation acts as a wave, and so it can be analyzed like a Fourier Transform. Think of a sudden audible transient--like a click. The click occurs at a definite point in time, but it has no specific pitch because its spectrum is broadband. Likewise, a pure audible tone must occur over a span of time; it does not occur at a specific, definite time.
Here's the problem with the book. Like many technical books that are aimed at non-specialists, it gets deep into jargon and concepts that are totally unfamiliar. The non-specialist can understand all the words, and maybe even entire sentences. But it comes off sounding like a foreign language. And, there is an additional problem with this book. Much of the book focuses on the Schrodinger Equation, which is a typical type of partial differential equation. But unless you have studied similar equations, you cannot really understand the physical concepts described in this book. A general form of the equation is written in the book, but it is so simplified, that to a mathematician it doesn't convey much of anything, and to a non-mathematician it is gibberish.
This book is an excellent attempt at explaining some of the deepest mysteries of quantum mechanics. But the fundamentals are not covered well enough for a general reader to grasp all the arguments presented here....more
James van Luik is a professor of philosophy of science. His book is a collection of lectures given at Amherst, Massachusetts, covering a very wide varJames van Luik is a professor of philosophy of science. His book is a collection of lectures given at Amherst, Massachusetts, covering a very wide variety of topics. It is essentially a collection of essays, each one ranging from one to three pages in length. Each essay, individually, is very good. Collectively, though, there doesn't seem to be a central theme. The topics shuttle back and forth with whiplash rapidity. There doesn't seem to be any attempt to organize the essays into a coherent whole.
That said, there are a lot of interesting discussions, and many fascinating philosophical speculations. I especially liked the summary of writings by William Drees, a physicist-turned-theologian. He recognized that science provides no evidence for the existence of God. Instead, he writes that God is a postulate more motivated by human desires than by scientific facts. He admits that theology, not science, carries the burden of proof. He asks, "Can one worship a hypothesis?"
Quantum theory is a major topic in this book. In this vein, the concept of quantum coherence is discussed, but not really explained. It sounds intriguing to me, but I never heard of it, so I am still bewildered. Coherence seems to be used to explain certain paradoxes of quantum theory, bu the discussion is not helpful.
There are no crackpot theories in this book. It is based on what is considered to be accepted scientific theories, with occasional forays into heated controversies in science. For example, van Luik makes some diversions into what might be called "holistic philosophy". He rants against "quantum theory consciousness"--quite justified in my opinion. He also rants against New Age pseudo-science. He also remarks on the inappropriate application of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle to the behavior of objects on everyday (human) scales. I agree with him in all of this.
One essay talks about how modern relativistic quantum science is the only current system of ideas that permits free will. Deterministic fate prevents free will. Quantum mechanical effects are too small in scale to matter in the brain. However, fluctuations in brain currents could cause non-deterministic non-compatible decisions. Random fluctuations could trigger what complexity theorists call "bifurcation" when a system moves from one quasi-stable state to another.
This book contains many interesting tangents into modern science and philosophy. It is perhaps the most poorly-organized book I have ever encountered. But it does contain many gems, and could be worthwhile for those interested in this subject....more
It was with some trepidation that I started to read this book. It is such a lengthy book, and I didn't anticipate enjoying it very much. I thought thaIt was with some trepidation that I started to read this book. It is such a lengthy book, and I didn't anticipate enjoying it very much. I thought that it would be emphasize mundane details about the Manhattan Project. But, I was happily surprised by the scope of the book. The Manhattan Project actually takes up less than a third of its pages.
The first third of the book is about the discovery of modern physics, and the lives of scientists who played a major part in the discovery. The book examines the peeling back of the onion of modern physics, much in the way of a detective story. Modern physics involves the structure of the atom, quantum mechanics, and relativity. Both the physics and the personal lives of the revolutionary scientists are described, in great detail. Richard Rhodes has a talent for weaving together the threads of a complex story. These threads follow lines of reasoning, experiments and theoretical work.
The second third of the book describes how scientists came to the realization that fission is possible, using a chain reaction with neutrons. This portion of the book also describes the darkening of Europe due to the rise of the Nazis. Some of the book was devoted to the rise of Antisemitism in Germany, and the resultant flight of Jewish scientists out of the continent. This phase of the book is important, as it helps explain the number of Jewish scientists who worked on the atomic bomb.
The last third of the book described the Manhattan Project; not so much the project itself, but the realization in Great Britain and the United States, that it was necessary to develop an atomic bomb. It was known that Germany and Japan were working on the bomb, and if either country beat the Allies to its development, that would spell out a very bad ending to the war.
I learned a tremendous amount from this book, and there were several aspects of the book that truly stick in my mind. The role of serendipity played a part in the discovery of Enrico Fermi and his colleagues. The found that slow neutrons increase radioactivity more than fast ones, while doing an experiment on a wooden table. Then the repeated the experiment on a marble table and noticed a marked reduction in radioactivity! This led to a greater understanding that neutron speeds, inhibited by the presence of hydrogen in the wooden table, were an important factor in creating chain reactions.
Several characters played a very central part in the book; of course, General Leslie Groves, Leo Szilard and Robert Oppenheimer played central roles in the story. But, the most interesting character was the Danish scientist Niels Bohr. He won the Nobel Prize for his work in understanding the strucutre of the atom and quantum mechanics. Besides this, he was politically active. He went to President Roosevelt and to Prime Minister Winston Churchill, to try to convince them to share the atomic bomb with the Soviet Union. He was concerned about the political balance of power after World War II. His ideas were dismissed by both leaders. He also played a key role in saving thousands of Jews in Denmark, by persuading the King of Sweden to allow them to escape into Sweden, to avoid capture by the Nazis.
Some readers question why this book needs to be so long, so detailed, and sometimes describing events that appear to be so tangential to the main story. But this epic book brings the various threads together, and in retrospect these threads all seem vital to the story line. He weaves together the personalities of the scientists, their experiments and discoveries, and the politics on national and international scales, that were so important at the time. Richard Rhodes explains why both the United States and Great Britain found it necessary to develop, and finally to drop the atomic bombs on Japan.
The book brings so many anecdotes with important messages to the main story line. The making of the atomic bomb did not occur in a single place at a single time. It evolved over continents and half a century. The technical problems were formidable, and the political issues perhaps equally difficult.
This book contains memoirs of a mathematician, Cedric Villani, a recipient of the Fields medal. Originally written in French, I read a version that haThis book contains memoirs of a mathematician, Cedric Villani, a recipient of the Fields medal. Originally written in French, I read a version that has been translated into English. The translation seems to be excellent. VIllani collaborated with Clement Mouhot, to derive and prove a theorem related to Landau damping. This is not a pure-mathematics theorem. It is based on a real physical phenomenon that occurs in plasmas. So, it is of great interest to physicists, as well to mathematicians.
The main problem with this book, is that the author does not know who its reader should be. Should the reader be a professional mathematician? Perhaps, but then why would half of the book be devoted to an exploration of how a mathematician works day-to-day? Mathematicians already know that.
Should the reader be an informed layman, with some interest in mathematics? In that case, why are there so many pages scattered throughout the book, filled with very esoteric formulas that only a true expert will understand. Many full pages in the book are filled with equations like this: [image] The words that accompany these pages are not of any help in understanding the equations.
The book also contains many pages of e-mail correspondence, mostly between Villani and Mouhot. This correspondence sheds a little bit of light on how a mathematician might operate during a collaboration. But again, unless you are a professional mathematician, you don't stand a chance in understanding most of the correspondence.
And besides all this, the author makes no effort at all to explain Landau damping, let alone its relationship to his theorem. Landau damping is a real physical phenomenon, with applications in several areas of physics. But having read the book, I still have no idea what it is all about. A quick glance at Wikipedia helps to understand it. But, the book does not even devote a single paragraph to explain what it is about....more
This book is really about the history of the idea of time travel. James Gleick traces the history of the idea of time travel, through literature and fThis book is really about the history of the idea of time travel. James Gleick traces the history of the idea of time travel, through literature and films. The earliest stories about time travel paved the way, for they first exposed people to the whole concept. Later stories expanded on the concept, showing the possibility for paradoxes. Gleick also explores the concept of time; it is actually rather difficult to define in a non-circular manner. What is time? This becomes a rather philosophical discussion.
While I loved James Gleick's earlier books, this one just didn't seem to engage me. Much of the book simply recounted the plots of various books and films, and that didn't seem very interesting; if I had read the book or seen the movie, then the recap was not needed. If I hadn't read the book, then what is the point? And, the philosophical parts of the book just didn't keep my interest....more
This is a fantastic book about scaling laws and how to understand them. Geoffrey West is a theoretical physicist, who has spent a lot of time at the SThis is a fantastic book about scaling laws and how to understand them. Geoffrey West is a theoretical physicist, who has spent a lot of time at the Santa Fe Institute, deriving theoretical scaling laws, and applying them successfully to biology, cities, and companies. He derives the theories from the structure of networks; arteries, capillaries in organisms, social networks and city infrastructure, and companies.
The scaling laws themselves are fascinating. In the very first chapter, Geoffrey West hits the reader with an astounding set of scaling laws that certainly surprised me. As to biology, there are about 50 different metrics that have interesting scaling laws--and West touches on a few of them. The scaling of metabolism, heart rates, brain matter, growth rates, life spans, aorta lengths, tree heights, and on and on; you get the picture. These scaling laws pertain across organisms, from the tiniest microbe to the blue whale; over 20 orders of magnitude.
But the really surprising aspect is that almost all of the scaling laws are factors of 1/4! For example, metabolic rate scales as Mass to the 3/4 power. Doubling the mass of a mammal increases its time to maturity by 1/4, its lifetime increases by 1/4, and its heart rate decreases by 1/4. And, these laws apply over the entire range of mammals, despite their diversity. Mitochondrial mass, relative to the total mass of an organism, goes as Mass to the -1/4 power. And, Geoffrey West describes how he and colleagues have derived theoretical scaling laws and growth curves from first principles. He shows how remarkably well the data fit his theoretical predictions.
As a physicist, West felt that this universal 1/4-power scaling tells us something fundamental about the dynamics, structure, and organization of life. These laws suggest dynamical processes that constrain evolution. And there are some surprising constants among all mammals. Blood pressure is approximately the same, and the number of heart beats in a lifetime is about the same, among all mammals!
But the discussion of scaling laws don't stop with biology. West finds fascinating scaling laws that apply to cities and to companies. The most perplexing question he addresses is, why do most cities live forever, while companies have short lifetimes? Cities are the prime drivers of economic development, not the nation state. And, most of the scaling laws associated with cities are either to the 0.85 or 1.15 power. That is to say, comparing two average cities, one twice as big as the other in population, the larger city will not have double the number of gas stations, but only 85% more than the smaller one. The larger city will have 115% higher wages, more doctors and lawyers, patents, GDP, number of cases of AIDS, crime and pollution. This scaling applies within all countries, but not across from one country to another.
The average half-life of companies is 10.5 years!And in any given year, the risk of a company disappearing (through bankruptcy, or merger, or acquisition) is the same, regardless of a company's size!
While cities become more diverse as they age and grow, companies do the opposite; they lose diversity, as they become more supportive of tried-and-true products in order to guarantee short-term returns. As companies grow, so too does their bureaucratic control. And, this is at the expense of innovation and R&D (Research and Development).
At times, the narrative deviates from scaling, and goes into various qualitative aspects of cities and companies. The author is rather opinionated in these areas, but his conjectures are interesting, though open to controversy. My only complaint about this book is that, while theoretical scaling laws in biology are developed and tested successfully against data, the book does not offer theoretical scaling laws for cities and companies. To some extent, these are more difficult to develop, because they depend on socio-economic structures and social networks. Data for these, especially for companies, are more difficult or expensive to obtain. Nevertheless, this book offers a wealth of information, and is endlessly fascinating. Highly recommended!...more
I am a physicist, and I love jazz (and try to play it occasionally), so this book strongly appealed to me! Moreover, my officemate knew the author perI am a physicist, and I love jazz (and try to play it occasionally), so this book strongly appealed to me! Moreover, my officemate knew the author personally, so that made the book doubly attractive to me.
The book is not well organized by topic; it reads very much like the author's memoirs. Which is fine; his anecdotes about his interactions with physicists and with jazz musicians are entertaining. In fact, it is the personal interactions that made the whole book worthwhile for me.
Unfortunately, the subtitle of the book is completely misleading. The book does not unveil a "Secret Link Between Music and the Structure of the Universe." My guess is that the publisher added the title and the subtitle, but in doing so, the reader is done a misservice. I expected something that just wasn't there.
Yes, there are plenty of analogies between music and physics. But nothing like "a secret link", and nothing that I haven't read, elsewhere. It's not until the final chapter that the author states that the book is not about analogies between jazz and physics; it is about analogies between what a jazz musician does and what a physicist does.
Now, there are a few interesting analogies between what a jazz musician does, and what a physicist does. But these analogies are not very deep; they break down quickly as soon as I understood what the author tried to convey. There are two half-decent analogies. The first analogy is between the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (the accuracy of one's knowledge of a particle's momentum is inversely proportional to that of its position) and jazz improvisation. A great jazz musician maintained that the less-well-clarified the following note would be, the better-known the following notes would be, and vice versa. But such a weak analogy! Nothing earth-shattering here.
The other analogy is between the Feynman path integral and jazz improvisation (again). The Feynman path integral will take as its input two end-points, and will integrate all possible paths that join them. In a sense, it gives an average value. A jazz musician has a starting note and an end note in mind, and subconsciously considers all the paths to get from one to the other. But then, the musician cannot choose "an average path"; he has to choose one particular path. So, again, the analogy breaks down.
I think that the book does describe some better analogies, but they seem rather mystical. For example, during a jam session, Alexander gets inspired to try a different approach to his theoretical physics problem. But, here he does not go very deep into analyzing from where this inspiration really derives. That would have been more interesting.
The book does throw some equations--even partial differential equations--at the reader. These did not phase me in the least, since I am very familiar with all of them. But they might phase the average, educated reader. Please, though, do not be put off by this. Alexander explains the equations pretty well, and if necessary, they can be skipped over. I thought that this was a nice touch for a popular book about physics....more
This is a wonderful book about the meaning of our universe, and of life. Sean Carroll is an active theoretical physicist, and he brings some fresh newThis is a wonderful book about the meaning of our universe, and of life. Sean Carroll is an active theoretical physicist, and he brings some fresh new ideas to philosophy. He coins a new term, Poetic Naturalism. It stems from a quote by Muriel Rukeyser,
The universe is made of stories, not atoms.
While naturalism is the idea that only natural laws and forces (not supernatural or spiritual) operate in the world, poetic naturalism says that the way we find meaning to life does not naturally emerge from a purely scientific approach. Poetic naturalism encourages extending discussions into what is right and wrong. It integrates scientific reasoning methods into our purpose-seeking and meaning-making, with emphasis on Bayesian techniques.
In 2003, a Dutch pediatric nurse was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of four children under her care. The case became a media sensation because, as it turned out, the case rested on the misuse of statistical reasoning. Infant mortality had actually been higher before she started working at the facility. The real cause of her conviction was psychological: People believe that infant deaths could not be random; someone must be to blame. Leibniz coined the Principle of Sufficient Reason: "For any true fact, there is a reason why it is so, and why something else is not so instead."
But this Principle of Sufficient Reason is not necessarily true. A cancer survivor sells empathy cards that read, "Please let me be the first to punch the next person who tells you that everything happens for a reason." And, by the way, I fully support the thought behind these cards!
Some things have reasons, while others do not. For example, the question, "Why is there an accordion in my bathtub" has a reason. But, "Why is a proton almost 2000 times more massive than an electron might not have a reason or an answer.
I rarely hear the true description of the big bang, but Sean Carroll writes that the big bang was a moment in time, not a location in space. It was not an explosion of matter into an empty void. It was the beginning of the entire universe, with matter smoothly distributed throughout space, all at once. The big bang really marks the end of our theoretical understanding. We understand what happened after it, but it is a label for a moment in time that we don't currently understand.
On Earth, there is an up and down. In space, all directions are equal. In the everyday world, time has a definite direction. But really, both directions in time are equal. It is just that we live in the aftermath of the big bang. Physical motions are reversible. Of course eggs break and never unbreak. The real question is why eggs were unbroken in the past. There is an interesting chapter on why we remember the past and not the future (very relevant to the recent movie, "Arrival"), that is why the arrow of time points toward the future. It is because of the increase in entropy since the big bang, and the second law of thermodynamics. There is a difference between reversible laws of physics and the concept of cause and effect. Laws of physics predict what will happen. They do not, however, dictate a cause as responsible for later events. Events are simply arranged in a certain order. No particular event is a cause.
Sean Carroll writes that it is okay to doubt everything. He writes about "planets of belief", which is a wonderful metaphor. Science does not presume naturalism. Science concludes that naturalism is the the best available picture of the world.
Sean Carroll wrote that no scientist working on the origin of life points to a particular process and says, "Here we need some supernatural intervention." And, some people say that evolution occurs too slowly for an experiment to observe. However, David Bartel and Jack Szostak performed an interesting experiment in 1993. They started with a random RNA molecule consisting of trillions of molecules in a random sequence of nucleotides. They picked out a fraction of them hat held higher rates of catalysis, and made copies of them. Random mutations occurred during copying. After ten iterations, the last pool of molecules was 3 million times better at catalyzing reactions than the original sample.
The key to life is the set of instructions for chemical reactions that gets copied. Mutations in the instructions allows life to evolve with natural selection. In an experiment in 1988, Richard Lenski grew E. coli bacteria in flasks, along with specific nutrients. Every day he managed six generations of the bacteria. Over time, over thousands of generations, the bacteria evolved to better use the nutrients in the flasks.
Michael Behe, a critic of natural selection, is an advocate of intelligent design. He introduced the concept of "irreducible complexity". And he used the example of a mousetrap. Every part of a mousetrap is essential; if any part is missing, it cannot work. However, Carroll points out that actual mousetraps were not designed overnight, but their design evolved over many years.
A very interesting part of the book discusses the so-called "Fine-Tuning" argument for theism. The argument states that since many of the fundamental physical constants seem to be finely tuned for the development for galaxies, stars, planets, and chemistry that can support life, there must be a creator who "designed" these constants for this purpose. Sean Carroll admits that fine-tuning is the best argument for God's existence. However, it is still not a very good argument. It uses what Carroll calls "old evidence." It uses evidence that life exists, that we know already is true. The argument is not predictive.
Carroll uses Bayesian reasoning to sort out how much credence one should give to naturalism versus theism, given that life requires the chemical reactions we observe in nature to occur. His argument against theism is that many aspects of nature are unnecessary for life. Two heavier families of elementary particles are not needed for life. All the billions of galaxies are unnecessary. Theism predicts that they should not exist.
Carroll has an interesting approach to understanding whether we have free will. He describes how the so-called paradox of free will is really just an incompatibility between the languages of quantum mechanics (atoms and physical laws) and the human-scale world.
When Carroll sums up his discussions, he writes that the majority of philosophers and scientists are naturalists today. But in the public sphere, religion and spirituality are most prominent. Our values need to catch up with science.
I enjoyed this book so much! It is beautifully written, and well thought-out. Sean Carroll has a lot of new, interesting philosophical and scientific arguments, and makes many analogies and metaphors that help to explain his reasoning. He boils down a lot of the uncritical thinking of the past to the incorrect application of Bayesian reasoning, or no application at all. To my knowledge, this is a new idea; the application of Bayesian reasoning to philosophy should be very prominent in the future....more
This is an amazingly ambitious book. It covers such a wide range of topics--I have never seen such a comprehensive non-fiction book. It starts out witThis is an amazingly ambitious book. It covers such a wide range of topics--I have never seen such a comprehensive non-fiction book. It starts out with a detailed description of theories of the origins of the universe. Here, John Hands is at his best, as he sorts out the various theories. He reasons why some of the theories are still in the running, while others are not borne out by the available evidence.
John Hands continues to discuss the origins of life. He describes the prevalent theories, and gives his opinions about which theories are most realistic. He describes evolution from the earliest microbes to the present-day complex organisms. He considers the evolution of humans and the origins of consciousness. He points out the ways in which humans differ from all other animals.
Then, the book goes into a history of the human race. The development of science, technology, and philosophy are covered in some detail. He points out that many so-called "world-wide" philosophy books skip almost completely the philosophies of the East, and concentrate almost entirely on those of the West. While John Hands does devote attention to Eastern philosophies, he also spends much more time on Western ones.
This is not an entertaining book. There is not a trace of humor, and there is no effort taken to make it easy on the reader. However, the sheer scope of the book, and the intelligent unbiased descriptions of the science, history, and philosophy, make this a book deserving of one's attention. I recommend the book for people who are truly curious, and want an unbiased view of our understanding of human evolution....more
I really enjoy science books that are well-written, by a scientist who has personally contributed to the field. This book certainly fits into this catI really enjoy science books that are well-written, by a scientist who has personally contributed to the field. This book certainly fits into this category, as Lisa Randall is a good writer. This book relates some of the research that she and her collaborators have been doing. Much of the book sets the stage so that lay readers can understand her speculative new hypothesis, and put it into perspective.
Randall’s hypothesis is that dark matter is not exclusively arranged in a big halo around the Milky Way galaxy. There is a distinct concentration of dark matter in the central plane of our galaxy. As our solar system periodically oscillates up and down with respect to the central plane, it is especially perturbed by the concentration of dark matter. The period of this oscillation is about 32 million years. Comets in the outer reaches of our solar system are perturbed in their orbits. They are so far from the sun that a small gravitational perturbation can kick a comet into an orbit that intersects the inner solar system, in the vicinity of the Earth. One such comet collided with the Earth about 66 million years ago, creating a crater in Mexico’s Yucatan peninsula. The comet was 10 or 20 kilometers in diameter, and was responsible for the extinction of most of the living species on Earth, including the dinosaurs.
Now, this hypothesis might be totally wrong. But, Randall explains how she tested it, and how a future spacecraft mission (GAIA) will provide additional experimental tests. In fact, the GAIA spacecraft mission will measure the positions and velocities of billions of stars in our galaxy. It is very fortuitous that the spacecraft was being launched at just the right time, and with exactly the purpose that will test Randall’s hypothesis. She notes how very lucky she is in this regard.
The book reads a bit like a detective story. Lisa Randall takes the reader step by step through the process she and her collaborators took, to formulate and test their hypothesis. This is science writing at its best, because science is not a bunch of facts. Science is a process. And this book shows exactly how the process can work. Most notably, Randall shows how serendipity can often play a role in science. Fortunate coincidences can come together at opportune moments, guiding the research to productive results.
Some reviewers find this book to be somewhat dry. I disagree; it is written in a straightforward style, with none of the cutesy stuff that some science journalists stick in to dumb down their books and .to bring in mass readership. That’s not to say that the book is devoid of humor. I got a big kick out of the photograph in Figure 35. I won’t spoil your fun by giving it away—you will have to read the book to see it!
My only complaint about the book, is that its organization seems to be a bit strange at times. The full synopsis of the hypothesis does not appear until the very end of the book. I guess, that is how it was intended, sort of the denouement of a detective story. And, I was almost ready to write a scathing review, because a clear explanation of the hypothesis seemed to be missing from the book. But in the end, the full story is told, and it all makes sense. Also, I must remark that this book covers a broad range of fields; particle physics, astronomy, cosmology, and paleontology. I heartily recommend this book to everyone who is interested in learning about how modern science is really done these days. ...more
I really appreciate well-written books about science when they are written by active researchers in the field. And this book qualifies, as McFadden isI really appreciate well-written books about science when they are written by active researchers in the field. And this book qualifies, as McFadden is a research biologist, and Al-Khalili is a theoretical physicist. They are both actively engaged in researching evidence for quantum phenomena that are responsible for complex biological mechanisms.
The book focuses on several important and difficult biology problems; photosynthesis, respiration, magnetoreception (bird migration), consciousness, genetics, the sense of smell, and the origin of life. Each of these is still a mystery, and the authors find some--or a lot--of evidence for quantum mechanics being an essential component.
I found a couple of the issues to be particularly fascinating. Some birds that migrate thousands of miles definitely use magnetoreception to find their way. But the receptors are also connected with sight, and require light in order for the magnetoreception to work! And some butterflies also have magnetoreceptors on their antennae. It can take three generations for some butterflies to do a complete round trip of a thousand miles or more. How in the world is this possible?
I also found it fascinating that for photosynthesis to occur, plants may use a form of a quantum computer to perform the necessary catalysis. And the problem that the quantum computer solves is well known--it is the traveling salesman problem!
The authors frequently repeat a quote by physicist Richard Feynman; "If you cannot make it, then you don't understand it." In other words, you don't really understand a biological or physical process until you can duplicate it in the lab. Well, that is certainly the case for the biological processes that are discussed in this book. The origin of life is far from our understanding!
Research on this topic is proceeding rapidly, and the authors found that by the time they had finished writing the book, some parts were already dated. So, they added an extra chapter at the end, to include more recent results. But they recognize that by the time the book is published, it will still contain some out-of-date ideas. And that is wonderful, because science is a process, not an end result!...more
The beautiful question is, whether the laws of physics are based on beauty; are they simple, symmetric, proportioned and economical. Wilczek is a NobeThe beautiful question is, whether the laws of physics are based on beauty; are they simple, symmetric, proportioned and economical. Wilczek is a Nobel-Prize winner in physics. Regardless of whether physics is based on beauty, Wilczek has written a beautiful book. His style of writing is excellent, and the book is graced with plenty of engrossing diagrams and color illustrations.
The earliest astronomers tried to make the orbits of the planets simpler than they actually are. They tried to make their orbits fit into the so-called Platonic solids. Then they tried to make their orbits fit into circles. When observations did not fit this idea, they made circles upon circles, and unnecessary complicated the orbits. It wasn't until Newton saw that gravity affects both objects on Earth as well as the planets, that the orbits could be determined from a simple physical law. The law states that gravitation is proportional to the masses of the objects and inversely proportional to the square of their distance.
Wilczek traces the idea of symmetry into all of the realms of physics; special and general relativity, electro-magnetism, and quantum mechanics. He shows how Maxwell completed his famous set of equations by assuming a degree of symmetry, and correctly found that electromagnetic waves travel at the speed of light. To this day, Maxwell's equations serve as the basic laws of electricity and magnetism.
My favorite chapter is about Emmy Noether, a mathematician with deep insights into physics. She was discriminated against because she was a woman, so she worked without pay. As the Nazis came to power, she emigrated to the United States. She proved a remarkable theorem; each law of conservation in physics can be derived from a basic concept of symmetry. So, for example, she showed why there are a basic laws of conservation of energy and momentum; she showed that it these laws are equivalent to stating that the laws of physics are invariant in time and space. Wilczek calls this the most profound idea in all of physics. And many prominent mathematicians and physicists have said that Noether was the most important of all women mathematicians.
Toward the end of the book, Wilczek describes the alphabet soup of fundamental particles. He shows the symmetries in their existence and properties, in certain respects. However, many of the particles do not really abide by symmetries, though this may simply be because of our present-day lack of full understanding....more
Alan Lightman is the first professor at MIT to have a dual appointment in the science and humanities faculties. He has compiled a sampling of essays iAlan Lightman is the first professor at MIT to have a dual appointment in the science and humanities faculties. He has compiled a sampling of essays into a short book. The essays focus on the philosophical implications of scientific discoveries. The essays are written in a light, easy-to-read, engaging style.
In his first essay, titled The Accidental Universe, Lightman tackles the anthropic paradox. Why do the fundamental laws of nature and physical properties seem to be fine-tuned just perfectly for life to be able to arise? Lightman has a definite predilection for a solution to this paradox; I won't spoil your suspense by revealing it here!
In the second essay, titled The Temporary Universe, Lightman discusses the impermanence of life, of the Earth, and the universe. Then in the essay The Spiritual Universe, he tackles the relationship between science and religion. He writes that the address separate sets of questions; science addresses the questions that can be answered objectively, while religion addresses questions that can only be answered subjectively.
I enjoyed reading this book, but I must admit that I didn't learn very much. Even though Lightman is a theoretical physicist, one should not read this book to learn about physics. Read it to learn about how a philosophy is shaped by physics. ...more
This book is a wonderful introduction to history of predicting stock prices using mathematics and concepts from physics. It is basically a history of This book is a wonderful introduction to history of predicting stock prices using mathematics and concepts from physics. It is basically a history of pricing models; from the earliest mathematical models to the most modern ones. Of course, the best ones are maintained in secret by some super-secretive investment companies, for good reason. The only way a pricing model can be profitable is it to be better than most others being used.
The author, James Weatherall, has a PhD in physics, and is presently an assistant professor of logic and philosophy of science at the University of California, Irvine. He writes with clarity and an engaging style. His narrative follows a logical path, and does not take big diversions along the way.
Now, many of the subjects of this book are not physics at all, but applied mathematics. For example, the so-called "black box" model does not use any physics, but use purely statistical associations that are discovered algorithmically. Their name stems from the fact that they are opaque; they may make accurate predictions, but they offer no insight into the reasons for their predictions. Hence, it is difficult to judge how much confidence should be given to their results. But, for example, a model that predicts an investment strategy that returns a hundred times the S&P 500 over a fifteen-year period is nothing to be sneezed at.
Some of the models are definitely an application of physics concepts, such as the gauge theory model. I find if fascinating that this arcane physics concept has some practical applications in economics and predictions.
Some people blame these computer models for the disastrous economic downturns and stock market volatility that occur from time to time. While Weatherall sympathizes with this attitude, he wholeheartedly endorses the models, as they are simply tools. Sometimes, the assumptions and limitations of these tools are ignored, with dire consequences....more
Loading...
