Rating: 
Summary: huh?
Review: Five hundred pages of extremely dense technical exposition leading up to a somewhat disappointing sixty-page argument. If you already know advanced physics and discrete mathematics at an academic level, you can probably follow his explanations. But then you wouldn't need them - you could just skip to the end. If you don't already know this stuff, you're in for a real battle. To keep from giving up in despair, I recommend additional web research on the topics as you go along to complement the book.
Rating: 
Summary: Highly Recommended
Review: As opposed to what the title suggests, the bulk of this book is devoted to describing the foundations of the modern physics and computing. I was immensely fascinated by the accounts on the important subjects like classical mechanics, special relativity, general relativity, Turing machines, introductory quantum mechanics, artificial intelligence, etc. A fundamental difference between 'A brief History of Time' (Hawkins) and this book is that while the former skims over the theories needed to build the case of the book, this does a very thorough job of describing them. Of course this approach has its price, namely the mathematical complexity. Even though the author suggests skipping the mathematics and reading on if the reader is unfamiliar with the subject, I feel such reading will hardly do the justice to this fine book. The recommendation: If you know basic mathematics like interpreting a simple equation (involving exponents, logarithms, etc.), a bit of probability, etc. and the willingness to learn more, this is an excellent book for you. However, if you simply cannot withstand equations among text and are determined to avoid them at all costs, perhaps this is not the book for you. The ultimate message of the book, namely the proposition that the process of human thinking is related to quantum mechanical effects of matter did not sound very convincing to me. Perhaps this is not an accident, for the author state facts in the parts dealing with various scientific principals and is speculating at the stage of this proposition. My advice: Don't worry about this part. If you understand and are convinced -- good! If not: Still you've got your money's and time's worth by understanding the basics of modern science, in a comprehensive manner.
Rating: 
Summary: A superbly organized and written book.
Review: Roger Penrose, a renowned mathematician and physicist, has put together a highly readable account of some of the most significant and yet perplexing ideas of modern mathematics and physics. His writing is more detailed and more understandable than the popularizations of his colleague, Stephen Hawking. This book renewed my interest in modern science.
Rating:
Summary: Just Read the Good Parts
Review: As other reviews have mentioned, Penrose attempts to demonstrate the impossibility of strong AI's thesis. In the end, Penrose presents two core arguments: (1) a well-reasoned, deductive, and logical proof based on Godel's incompleteness theorem, and (2) a complete conjecture about quantum gravity that has little to no supporting evidence.
Thus, please save yourself the time and just read chapters 1-4 and 9-10. The 225 pages that are chapters 5-8 give the background for Penrose's second argument. These pages are mostly filled with erudite, technical physics. The first four chapters, on the other hand, give an enlightening review of artificial intelligence and outline the mathematics needed to follow his first core argument.
Personally, I find both arguments unconvincing. Not being a mathematician, I won't embarass myself by trying to show why Godel's incompleteness thereom is not entirely appropriate for a discussion on artificial intelligence. As for the second argument, neither you nor I need worry; it is entirely useless.
Rating:
Summary: Stimulating but unconvincing.
Review: I will be quick in this review.
First, the physics are stimulating, the brain science lacking, the speculation interesting. But the aruments are absolutely and completely flawed. Its not just that quantum effects almost certianly have no effects on consicousness, or cognition for that matter, and the argument implicitly made: "quantum is mysterious, consciousness is mysterious, so they are interrelated" is ridiculous. It all starts with the church-turing thesis. Any algorithmically computabele process, can be carried out by an universal turing macine (for our purposes, a computer). Now the idea is too figure out if computers can have a mind like a brain has one. Penrose holds that it is not posible, so he asks the right question: "is the human mind algorithmically computable?". Penrose says "no", and his reasons are simple: humans can see the truth of godel propositions, and human mathematicians have sudden "insights" that are, well, supposedly non-computable. The first thing one can do, is, well, hold that in fact the human mind is indeed computable. The truth is that this is a pretty fair bet. Just look at the neural-network progress made in PDP. Actually it is on Penrose to prove us that the essentials of mind and consciousness (not godel propositions)are non-computable. But at the end, Penrose seems to beg the question. Now the Godel argument is a little bit more straightforward, but wrong nontheless. If anything, Penrose argues that a computer could not do certain kinds of math, not that they couldnt have a mind . I doubt knowledge of Godel propositions add a mind to a system. But even if we agree with the claims that the mind can do certain things non-computably, it does not follow that consciousness is one of these (remember at the end the book is about consciousness). Now quantum processes are certainly non-computable, so Pernose's claim is that consciousness arises from quantum processes. The problem is that none of this follows from any other discussion before! The quantum is only one non-computable process that could exist in the brain. Also,remember that quantum effects are probably inexistent in such a noisy and hot system like the brain. One even can doubt Penroses claim that there exists mathemathical insight of any kind not explainable in some other way than the quantum. Hammeroff and Nancy Wolf are much better quantum-consciousness theorists, and this review still applies to an extent to Penrose's Shadows of the Mind. I would argue quantum-consciousness is still considered as a real option because it is popular outside the academia. This book was a best seller. But on real scientific terms, it is a no starter. I'm sure some philosophers and physicists might embrace Peroses attempts, but there are still scientists and philosophers that deny the theory of evolution.
It is a good read, and everyone serious in consciousness studies should try to read it, if only for historical reasons. This book is probably a popular science classic allready.
Rating:
Summary: The Emperor's New Mind
Review: The Emperor's New Mind by Roger Penrose is thought provoking and absorbing. Not being a physicist, I thought this work was going to be daunting, but to my surprise the author made the subject readable and understandable. The physics and mathematics within this book is not hard to understand, but as a layperson quantum mechanics and quasicrystals were rather complex concepts. There are mathematical formulae in this book, but as the author points out read the words and the formula will play out...in other words if you understand the concept the formula only confirms the logic. But as I understand, Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle also tells us that when we try to measure both position and momentum of a particle, not only are we incapable of measuring both simultaneously, but far more incomprehensibly, both the position and momentum cannot exist at the same time. Now, the implication here is that such properties, which we are inclined to think of as inherent properties of the particle, do not exist until they are measured, the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics. Particles are really nothing more than probability wave functions that expand infinitely across the universe. So, in the terminology of quantum mechanics, the act of measurement collapses the wave funtction... counter intuitive. Artificial intelligence will some day match a human mind... awareness and understanding, but to understand the human mind first is what Penrose is trying to explain. If you have a serious interest in physics, mathematics, philosophy, and artificial intelligence you will like this book.
White and black holes, the structure of the brain and understanding the physicial processes of consciousness all come into play. This is not light reading, but read it. To understand the mind, is to understand mankind
Rating:
Summary: A good account of Modern Science
Review: The book is about Alghorithm, Modern Mathematics, New Physics and limitations on making a thinking computer. Half of the book provides necessary background in Mathematics more precisesly Turing Machines thamn author goes into fundamentals of Classical and Modern (Quantum Physics, Cosmology, Arrow of Time, Quantum Gravity, Brain and conciuosness. Although it is one of the best seller it is not for faint heartedly. There are no hard mathematics but a lot of hard logic. Turing Machine, summary of summary of Godel's Proof is all in there. Certainly requires a good knowledge of new Physics to understand what Penrose is saying.
Rating: 
Summary: Brilliant physicist, flawed reasoning
Review: The book covers a lot of ground, but the grand tour of physics and mathematics is designed primarily to support the author's argument that machines will never be capable of matching human intelligence. The author's main argument for this is based on Godel's Incompleteness Theorem. Unfortunately, this argument is just plain wrong. It assumes (without explanation) that human intelligence bypasses the limitations of the theorem in a way that computer intelligence cannot - as if humans somehow know it's better to be incomplete than inconsistent. The presentation of 'alternative' theories about the physical nature of intelligence seem unnecessary when the central argument falls down.
Rating:
Summary: Verbose, Pretentious and Great
Review: It is probably his use of the Weyl tensor in cosmology that most sets this book apart. Some of it is a wing and a Prayer and not much more... like his fractals and Chaos parts, but he covers so much and gives so much light that it is a classic of popular physics. No one can say Penrose is not the man he thinks he is: he proves it over and over....
Rating:
Summary: Emperor's New Mind
Review: As a self educated, high school graduate I thoroughly enjoyed this book. I have read and re-read sections many times. While I do not agree with everything Penrose says here, I do agree with his position on AI. What I most enjoyed however, was his frank and enlightening discussions of relativity, QM and cosmology (and the problems thereof). Unlike many authors, Penrose is very honest about what science does and DOES NOT know. For me, the exaustive substance and clarity of the presentation makes this an excellent resource book, regardless of what one might think about AI. This is a book for the educated layman (or beyond) and as such, a high level of mathematical skill is not required. I give it three thumbs up!
|
