Rating: 
Summary: It is an accessible examination of quarks
Review: At the beginning of our knowledge of a nature of things there was a philosophy. Many years after from philosophy have passed the physics - science which wholly was allocated and completely should be checked by the facts of experience.However it is impossible sometimes to do check up only by facts. It is possible to make of the facts sometimes such conclusions, that is simple to mind is not conceivable. Let us admit that it so. But it is impossible, and to reject, and all received by human conclusions. We want it or we do not want - in the beginning there was a business, and then word. I think it is patience do necessary! Take the book and read it. The book - source of knowledge! vavivlad-rvc@mtu-net.ru
Rating: 
Summary: Anyone who enjoys thinking should read (and like) this book!
Review: Gell-mann is, quite simply, an expert in more fields than most people have a passing interest in. Added to this is a lucid, entertaining writing style, and the ability to knit together seemingly disparate concepts from the fields of physics, cosmology, genetics, information theory, evolution, behavioural psychology, sociology...you name it. It seems a few people have been criticising Gell-mann for overextending himself, boasting about his own achievements or simply writing a dislocated, jumbled book. My advice to these people is to 'look for the patterns behind the apparent randomness', as Gell-mann might have put it (because they are there, all right), give him his due for his own (considerable) contributions to physics and admire his courage in even attempting to connect so many ideas, let alone succeeding as well as does. I loved this book, and I think anyone interested in just about any aspect of science ought to like it too.
Rating:
Summary: A little bit of everything
Review: How do you file a book like "The Quark and the Jaguar?" I could file it with books discussing quantum physics. That would certainly be appropriate. Then, again, I could file it with books on evolution. That would be equally appropriate. But then I might decide to file it in the section on public policy toward the environment, and environmental protection. Certainly, that is an appropriate place for this book. But wait. It also belongs in the section dealing with artificial intelligence and complex adaptive systems. So, where would you put it? I'm still not sure. Murray Gell-Mann's "The Quark and the Jaguar" takes us on a whirlwind tour from the "simple" construct of quantum physics to the complex adaptive system in a coat of spots moving stealthily through the forest in search of game. Through all this, Gell-Mann ties the entire tapestry into the unifying concepts of complex adaptive systems leaving the reader in awe at the wonder and complexity that arises from the natural evolutionary processes governing the universe in which we live. The book is organized in four parts. The first is a general-purpose section that discusses everything from information theory to the scientific method and the power of scientific theories. It's always a pleasure to read a description of science and the scientific method from a leading scientist such as Gell-Mann. The sections dealing with falsifiability, selection pressure on the scientific enterprise, unifying characteristics of scientific theories, and the power of theory give a clear and illuminating explanation of the essence of science. The second part of the book deals with quantum physics. Here you will find Gell-Mann's own story about the (theoretical) discovery of the quark and how it fits into the standard model. Gell-Mann's discussion about the standard model is among the clearest I've seen for the general reader. I found his explanation of all the so-called quantum paradoxes especially well done. From the standard model Gell-Mann explains some of the ideas within superstring theory and the hope that this may provide the unification of physics that has been anticipated for so long. I always hesitate to differ with anyone of Gell-Mann's stature. Especially in public. It invariably leads to embarrassment. Still, I'm just as loath to read a book and find myself in complete agreement with all its points. On the subject of complexity I found myself out of sorts with the trend followed by Gell-Mann. He begins by describing complexity as algorithmic complexity. This is essentially the length of the shortest binary code that can describe the phenomena. Gell-Mann then points out some rather obvious deficiencies with this definition. For example, it is a maximum for a completely random string of bits, yet we don't typically associate complexity with randomness. From there Gell-Mann takes us to something he calls effective complexity. Yet Gell-Mann laments that this still seems inadequate because it would use the genomes of living things to assess their effective complexity, yet we know (or do we?) that humans are far more complex than apes, even though we share well over 90% of our genetic code. This apparent desire leads eventually to something Gell-Mann calls "potential complexity." Now, I cannot argue specifically against these definitions. They seem perfectly intuitive and obvious. Still, I cannot shake the feeling that I'm seeing the same process that led scientists in the 19'Th century to define characteristics for the human skull that led to conclusions that whites were more intelligent than blacks. The entire scheme was ultimately based on subconsciously working toward a desired conclusion by manipulating definitions. Are we more complex than apes? I'm not so sure. Especially when one considers the next effect of humanity on the earth. True, for what it's worth we have an extensive and (is it really?) complex culture. Then again, we are the cause of the greatest mass extinction since the K/T boundary. If you add it all up, I wonder if we really are responsible for more complexity than random destruction. Sections three and four differ fundamentally from the first two parts. The first two parts deal with what Gell-Mann would call simple systems. Things like quantum physics and the general theory of relativity. The really complicated stuff is in biology. Part three deals with that and more, including general discussions about how complex adaptive systems learn. I found the part on creative learning especially interesting. This section purports to explain how to enhance one's ability to think creatively. The section is only ½ page long. Interestingly, creative thinking correlates with what often appears to be random thought processes. I couldn't help wondering about the conclusions regarding algebraic complexity and randomness. The book ends with section four, which is really Gell-Mann's views on various social issues, particularly those associated with the environment. I could not help wishing, as I read these last few pages, that our species could not have a few more men like Gell-Mann. What a difference it would make if his level of intellect, honesty, compassion, and logic could be brought to focus on more issues. It left me with a renewed determination to follow his lead in doing more to preserve biodiversity on earth for the earth, and for future generations. If you find wonder in the world, and excitement in a journey of discovery, then I recommend Gell-Mann's book wholeheartedly. Duwayne Anderson
Rating:
Summary: A Masterpiece from a Polymath
Review: I agree with Mr. Leonardo Motta, Mr. Charles Aschbacher, and the Editor of the Kirkus Review. Please read their reviews.
Rating: 
Summary: good book
Review: I did not find the author ignorant or anything in this book. I wanted to read it because I wanted to learn about quarks. Not all of the book was about quarks and I found some of these parts boring (specifically the stuff about how economics works and computers). The book talked about characterics that all complex adaptive systems share (computers, economy,living things). He does not tie this in with the quark. He does make some interesting points. It is a good book but not a great book.
Rating:
Summary: What a disappointment
Review: I might also have entitled my review, "See Carlos Camara's review of April 11, 2002." Camara captures my own thoughts to a tee. Where Gell-Mann is strongest, namely, on particle physics, his strengths shine through. Though hardly a rigorous survey of the field, the second section of Q&J is a compelling introduction to it -- and certainly whets one's appetite for further reading. The book's first section (an overview of the notion of complexity) is decent (though far better popular treatments can be found elsewhere). The book's third and fourth sections, however, are pretty much a total wash. I could tolerate them only insofar as they reflected the obvious integrity of the author. He is a political kindred spirit. That said, having purchased Q&J and had high expectations of it, I was surprised and not a little frustrated at how bereft of substance it was on matters "Jaguarian". More than a little disconnected, I found the second half of Q&J rambling, pedestrian, and even sophomoric. Certainly not what one expects of a Nobel prize winning physicist and of one of the founders of the Santa Fe institute. My respect for Gell-Mann, as a scientist and a humanist, is in no way diminished by Q&J, but I cannot help but feel that he (and his publisher) faltered with this effort. My advice: read the first half of Q&J for a cursory -- but well-written -- survey of complexity and particle physics. Skip the second half altogether.
Rating: 
Summary: A tough slog that's more about quarks than jaguars
Review: I picked this up because I thought it was going to have some information about Ecuador (the Jaguar section) in it. It does--about one whole pages worth. The rest of the pages concern Gell-Mann's ideas on the inter-connectedness of things. Gell-Mann, for those of you who don't buy the Nobel prize-winning scientist collector cards, was the identifier of the Quark, that object that is smaller than what had previously been thought of as the smallest element (electrons are made up of a collection of quarks). This book is interesting but rough slogging at times as Gell-Mann tries to give you an instant understanding of the last ten years of modern physics. This should appeal to fans of Richard Feynman and Douglas Hofstadter, although the style isn't as smooth as either of them.
Rating:
Summary: El matraz escéptico
Review: I recommend the reading of the interview of Gell-Mann with J. Horgan published in the book: "The End of Science". The Quark and The Jaguar replicate the "excellence" of its author (GM). Following the "profile" of GM, we can say that the book is pretentious, very "ignorant", archaic, wrong and partial. PRETENTIOUS because present the world as completely known. For example, he says that a quantum physicist could solve anything problem on chemistry! This is stupid! "IGNORANT" because he recites about some aspects of science and philosophy that he does not know. My search-tool ONLY found 40 significant works of GM on scientific databases! ARCHAIC because some aspects of GM discourse were discarded 50 years ago! WRONG since he ignores works published in scientific journals. PARTIAL because he only shows own unusual ideas or others imported as if they were originated on Santa Fe Institute (The "revolutionary" SFI idea of studying the simple and the complex is well known in usual physical chemistry and statistical physics. One studies the "simple" (the particle) and the "complex" (collections of molecules and aggregates). The book has some good points (see others reviews) but I don't recommend it. I suggest other books by Prigogine, Weinberg, Wolfram, Hawking, etc. Really, there is only one great contribution and knowledge of GM: quarks theory (QCD). The contributions on biology, geology, neurology, physiology, chemistry, philosophy, linguistic and others are easily summarized: none. Moreover, some aspects of GM dissertation are completely wrong for the expertise. What are the contribution and knowledge on chaos, thermodynamics, cosmology, atomic theory and chemical physics, fluctuations and critical phenomena or on dissipative structures? The response is none, and all this is well observed in the book! I'm sorry, but the supposed "Polymath" is not an expertise on quantum physics. He WAS a great expertise on quarks theory but his contribution and knowledge of electronic and nuclear structure theory, GUT's, and others are in fact nulls. In no doubt, the ideas of the book on quantum chemistry are completely wrong. For instance, chemistry has not been reduced to QED. See the chapter on electroweak chemistry of the book "Chemistry for the 21st century". I know that the quantum chemist Brändas develops (since 1971!) more advances theories than standard QM. The book reflect the ignorance of GM on crucial aspects of standard or generalized quantum mechanics as CSM, Austin-Brussels theory, AIM, TFD, etc. The contribution and knowledge of the author on non-equilibrium quantum statistical mechanics (ESSENTIAL for our knowledge of nature) and its presence on the book is zero. In the limits of my knowledge, nobody in elementary particle physics use his "genial" ideas or "seminal" theories, except the excellent quark model. For example, I do not find references to GM work on superstrings in my copies of CERN seminars. Already in 90's, particle physicists disbelieve of the questionable point of view of GM on the "last formulation" of physics and they began the "M-theory". Even in particle physics the book is incomplete and/or wrong! The contribution and knowledge on mathematical-physics or foundations of physics are very deficient and it is reflected on the book. The "multiple-histories" formalism (a basis for "trivial" quantum, ecological, cosmological and biological deliberation of GM on the book) is NOT used by scientific community. The most of his supposed "rationalization" of evolution, of life's origin and self-organization are useless in scientific "serious" literature. His irrelevant insights to the dynamical sources of the second law or to cosmology are completely wrong (See the excellent Prigogine's criticism on his last book "The end of certainty"). Some of the philosophical points of view appointed in the book about the ontological structure of science are invalid! The knowledge of the author in epistemology is also shocking for us. For example, elementary courses of physical chemistry show that theories never are "correct" or "incorrect". Philosophers like to say that theories are "applicable" or "inapplicable". The value of the book on "hot" topics of information theory is very questionable and here GM deliberate about strange and vague concepts as Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) no well accepted in current scientific literature. For a scientific criticism of the very wrong ideas of the book on information theory and entropy, I recommended the article "Science of Chaos or Chaos in Science?" (In: The Flight from Science and Reason, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 775, 1996, pp.131-175) by J. Bricmont (the coauthor of the book "Intellectual impostures"). CAS is only a "sound" name without physical or biological signification outside of the Santa Fe Institute (In chemistry, CAS signifies Chemical Abstract Service!). Moreover, the book fails in the scientific details and then it is internally INCONSISTENT in several points. It is impossible sustain the standard model (dynamical groups) of QM in one hand and natural selection in the other (See "The End of certainty"). It is impossible sustain in one hand "archaic" quantum wave theory and quantum chaos in the other, or CPT symmetries of particle physics in one hand and the arrow of time in the other (see the book "The Direction of Time" by Zeh). It is inconsistent the standard view of quantum postulates and the old unresolved problems of measure theory (still today, there are investigations about the "Schrödinger cat problem" and the "parallel universes" in the more prestigious journals of physics), etc. However, the Polymath ("The Polymath Who Knows Everything") must ignore all this. Translated by J.R. González-Ãlvarez.
Rating:
Summary: Description of many of the fundamentals of information
Review: Information is rapidly becoming the new currency of business and scientific advancement. To understand information in any area, it is necessary to understand what the fundamental units are, both of information and in the area in question. However, quantum mechanics is probably unique, in that movement to the fundamental level increases the complexity. The actions that occur at the quantum level are so counter to our usual experience that it almost becomes an act of faith to believe that this is indeed how nature behaves. Gell-Mann, a Nobel prize-winning physicist, spends a great deal of time explaining the fundamentals of quantum mechanics and does it very well.
He explains the fundamentals of quantum mechanics and then moves on to clear up some of the common misconceptions concerning what is allowed and disallowed. A chapter is dedicated to an explanation of superstring theory, which is a theory that may explain all the forces of nature, but is still speculative and may never be verified or refuted.
His chapters on information in biology and how it operates in natural selection are also very well done. Given the current controversy concerning the role of natural selection in education, it is refreshing to hear a firm voice of reason arguing in favor of natural selection. He also delves into some of the more dubious areas of science, that of ball lightning and fish and frogs falling from the sky. While there have been many eyewitness accounts to fish falling from the sky, some of the strongest evidence is biological in nature. Biologists doing surveys of fish in distinct bodies of water have expressed puzzlement as to how the same species of fish can be present in two lakes that have no connection. If there are occasional meteorological conditions that can extract fish from a lake and then deposit them elsewhere, then the problem is solved.
We have all read some of the outlandish claims made in tabloid newspapers regarding the abilities of some extraordinary humans. However, there are occasions when such abilities do exist. One such situation is described in the book and it deals with the ability of a person to read the contents of a vinyl record by examining the grooves. The individual passed several rigorous tests conducted by professional skeptics, verifying that the skill does indeed exist.
I found Gell-Mann's writing to be clean, understandable and unpretentious. His explanations of information as used by both humans and nature is an eye-opener for anyone who works in information technology and I recommend it to everyone with an interest in how information is used and occasionally misused.
Rating:
Summary: trying very hard to make progress in "complexity" theory
Review: The "reductionistic" scientific method, which seeks to reduce phonomena to simpler and more general underlying bludprints, has dominated the last three centuries. It works great in physics, as Newton domonstrated, but less well in other disciplines such as biology and psychology. For example, molecular biologists have isolated DNA, but have yet to adequately explain embroyonic development, protein folding and other riddles. To overcome these shortcomings, many are calling for a theory of complexity, which should focus on systems and the dynamics of development where order appears to organize itself from a bewildering number of interacting factors.
Gell-Mann argues that rather than replacing reductionist methods, complexity theory complements that approach. The quark is the simple and universal, the jaguar the complex. He suggests that between these two exists an unbroken chain.
Gell-Mann attempts to make his contribution with teh "complex adaptive system" that "acquires information about its environment" and indentifies "regularities in that information", which are then condensed into a "schema" or "model"; these latter are "non-static," and unlike a quark can evolve. Each complex adaptive system contains three strands: 1) basic rules; 2) frozen accidents; 3) a selection process. For example, language has genetically inherited cognitive capabilites with certain quirky attributes that persist and yet can change as the individual must describe new phenomena. A lot of the book is devoted to finding and explaining similar examples. It is a panoramic and entertaining excursion through human knowledge, if a bit cursory.
Gell-Mann also hopes to guide scientists into a more holistic and cross-disciplinary approaches. With its focus on historical development and links between the simple and complex, the study of complex adaptive systems, he argues, may be the spur required to stimulate such approaches, briging physics, chemistry, biology and even the social sciences. This is what he is doing at the Santa Fe Institute.
At its best, the book is a window into a great scientific mind, with fascinating mini-essays on state of the art science. Unfortunately, Gell-Mann is an uneven writer. Many passages are impenetrable to lay readers like myself. At a deeper level, he fails to critique the vague research agendas of the complexologists, who have been ridiculously popularised in such enues as Wired. Even the complex adaptive system may say too little about too much. Through it all, Gell-Mann maintains his pose as a total pedant.
REcommended. It is uneven, but this is one of the greatest thinks of the 20C.
|
