ISBN: Rating: 4. Languge: English. Users who have this book I have the Ebook I have the Paperbook. Users who want this book I want the Ebook I want the Paperbook. User: Icarus Rating: 1 Thanks! What readers are saying What do you think? Write your own comment on this book!
What do you think? Write your own comment on this book Please Login or Register to write comments or use smm accounts Log in Log in Log in. Write a comment. The first edition of the novel was published in and was written by stephen hawking. Time looks back on our interview with the scientist on a brief history of time.
A brief history of time. Hawking wrote the book for nonspecialist readers with no prior knowledge of scientific theories.
Pin On Book Covers. Stephen Hawking A Brief History Of Time Hawking believes its success is down to giving people access to great philosophical questions but acknowledges human interest boosted sales.
To find the utmost concept, we have to consolidate basic relativity and quantum auto mechanics, nevertheless the 2 theories are inconsistent oftentimes. However Hawking masterfully utilized each of them to nice voids, and likewise acquired the end result.
The physicist, L. Smolin regards his discovering as a starting issue in the direction of one of the best concept. That we are able to try a book the place Hawking himself explains regarding his idea for primary readers is thrilling. As I mentioned above, that is my 2nd studying of the book. But this concept has been neither validated neither negated by experiments till now.
It is not clear to me who is in the target audience for this book. At times it tries to explain basic concepts of modern physics in simple language, and at other times it assumes a familiarity with the same subject.
For the first time I think I "understand" why absolute time is not consistent with relativity theory or that space-time curvature supplants the notion of gravity, and for that I thank the author. There are a few other things I believe I have a glimpse of having finally slogged through the book. On the other hand, there are many places where he writes as if it were clear what he is talking about even though it would require a good deal of background knowledge.
To give but one example, he starts talking about summing up over possible world histories I cannot locate the quotation without explaining what that would mean. Trained in statistics, I have some idea that he is talking about mathematical expectation in the context of quantum mechanics, but I don't know how another reader might make any sense of it and I certainly don't have more than a vague notion. There are irritating writing practices that could have used some editing, e.
My biggest complaints, however, are about his philosophical opinions. Obviously he is entitled to think as he wishes about the ultimate questions, but his assertion that his hypothesis of a finite world without beginning or end would leave no place for God seems beside the point.
The classic divide has not changed: some folks look around and say stuff just is, and other folks say there's a power behind the stuff that has at least as much going for it as we do.
That argument hasn't changed with his theories. At one point in the book he claims that the late John Paul II told gathered scientists that they mustn't inquire into the Big Bang because that was God's territory. I would wager with anyone reading this comment that such an assertion is just plain false. JPII was a flawed mortal, to be sure, but he was no dope; it certainly sounds to me like someone hearing what he thinks the pope would say. And the Galileo jokes are pretty dumb -- does anyone think that JPII, who apologized for the embarrassing Galileo fiasco, would go after this guy?
It must be all that influence the Vatican has had in Britain over the last years that has him scared. Other philosophical complaints involve his use of entropy he defines it first within closed systems and then uses it to explain why the "thermodynamic arrow of time" and the "personal arrow of time" must run in the same direction -- leaping from a box of molecules to the entire universe!
His opinions may be very rich, deep, though-provoking, but how would I or most general readers know? You can't really evaluate a judgment unless you know something in the field. And so that is why I ultimately cannot recommend this book: if you know physics inside and out, you might find his opinions interesting. If you don't, you can only walk around parroting what he says about black holes as if you had a clue what you were talking about.
What we all really need is a remedial course in physics! Ahmad Sharabiani. It was first published in Hawking wrote the book for nonspecialist readers with no prior knowledge of scientific theories. In A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking attempts to explain a range of subjects in cosmology, including the Big Bang, black holes and light cones, to the non-specialist reader. His main goal is to give an overview of the subject, but he also attempts to explain some complex mathematics.
In the edition of the book and subsequent editions, Hawking discusses the possibility of time travel and wormholes and explores the possibility of having a Universe without a quantum singularity at the beginning of time. Jason Koivu. Author 6 books followers. Isn't it amazing that a person can read a book like A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking and come away feeling both smarter and dumber than before he started?
What a universe we live in! It's quite short and generally a quick read. Some of it is just history, say on Newton and such.
However, there were a few pages worth of passages where my wee brain felt like it was getting sucked into a black hole I came away with a better understanding of the Big Bang theory and why it's plausible Not the tv show. Its existence is not plausible. That's going to require a reread Surprisingly, I also came away with the idea that God and science can coexist. I didn't expect that. I figured someone like Hawking would be like, "God? Pssh, whatever. A Brief History of Time was written with accessibility in mind, knowing full well idiots like me wouldn't buy it, read it or recommend it if it were impossibly dense.
Hawking's sense of humor even comes through on occasion, which is always appreciated in these sciencey texty thingies. So, I'll probably move on to his Briefer History
0コメント