The Nature of Space and Time

Rating:
Summary: SAH-WEET ...!!!
Review: After having read "A Brief History of Time", "Black Holes and Baby Universes and Other Essays", "The Cambridge Lectures" and "The Universe In a Nutshell" by the esteemed Professor Hawking, as well as Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe", I figured this book would be yet another great educational read!

It appears that my initial logic was somewhat flawed.

While the book states at it's outset that it requires an understanding of physics, I believe that it requires either the equivalent mind-power of a Einstein with the cocaine-induced flashes of Freud, or the equivalent computing power of everything Seymour Cray ever built...after several upgrades!

After (during?!) the first chapter, I simply couldn't keep my thoughts from blurring into obscure thoughts of the fact that GM is killing the Camaro after 35 successful years...the price of inkjet printer supplies... Bill...Gates keeps getting away with it...and essentially ANY OTHER TOPIC than that which I was "attempting" to read at the time!

While one of the girls at the coffee shop (I get wired on caffeine, and I read...) who, I must admit, was absolutely, captivatingly exotic, and her mere presence drew my eye more often that I care to admit, using her as an excuse for my distraction would really only be secondary at best.

The fact remains that the book simply isn't written for laymen; it's for scientists...and not just "good" scientists either, but the "truly rare" breed...unfortunately, that breed does not appear to include me. Sure, I can get into Mensa...but this book was almost completely beyond me! (I GOT THE INDEX!!!)

I'd very highly reccommend any or ALL (obviously my choice) of the books I've noted above for anyone with an interest, but as for this one...if you're not working for a PHD, Masters, or at least a Bachelor's degree, save your money, because this'll only make you tear your hair out...for many, it's probably falling quickly enough on its own already.

Not me, of course, as I'm just so pretty my face decided to annex surrounding territory for expansion purposes.

Well...theoretics are theoretics, right?

Rating:
Summary: Massive confusion among irreconcilable physical concepts..
Review: Apart from the elementary, undergraduate level errors in thermodynamics, e.g. the first law of thermodynamics on page 24 is NOT the first law, nor is it a combination of the first and second laws due to a sign error; the Helmholtz free energy on page 50 is NOT the Helmholtz free energy again due to a sign error; the statement on page 135 that all Einstein needed not to go fishing after 1925 was 'Stephen's discovery, fifty-five years later, of black hole radiation' is offensive! Hawking's great surprise, on page 43, that black hole radiation emission was exactly thermal with a temperature derived from the Bekenstein-Hawking expression for black hole entropy in terms of the area of the horizon is ludicrous because it has to correspond to the entropy of black body radiation, which it doesn't. The above are merely examples which serve to call into question the contributions of these two researchers and certainly raise grave doubts concerning the worth of this book.

Rating:
Summary: A DEBATE OF THE CENTURY
Review: I dug deeper into my sleeping bag and looked out into the universe. I was thankful for the Earth's attraction which held me close. The air was so thick with stars I was almost breathing them. Was there an end to the universe? How much stuff was really out there? How did it all begin? Why can't we remember the future or relive our mistakes? Well, these questions didn't keep me awake for very long that night, but "The Nature of Space and Time" is a step toward answering them. This book, covering several lectures and a final debate between Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose, provides insight into the prevailing wisdom. They are two of the greatest minds of our century. Stephen is interested in answers to the extent that they lead toward practical or predictable solutions. Roger is interested in answers to the extent that they lead to a more complete understanding of reality. This difference between them makes the debate a lively and at times amusing one. Copyright 1997 by Barbara Grant Ashton

Rating:
Summary: Interesting but not Great
Review: In spite of the errors mentioned in another review the discussion was fairly interesting but not as great a "debate" as I anticipated. I'd spend my money on Penrose's "The Emporer's New Mind" before this one. For those interested in Black Holes, Kip Thorne's "Black Holes and Time Warps ..." is exceptionally well written and rewarding for the reader. For the technically [mathematically] apt who wants an fascinating treatice on spacetime, try John Wheeler and Ignazio Ciufolini's book on Geometrodynamics (Princeton Univ. Press).

Rating:
Summary: A debate between two strong personalities in physics
Review: The current understanding of the physical structure of the universe is bipolar. There is Einstein's theory of relativity, which explains the macroscopic behavior of the universe to many places to the right of the decimal point. At the other end of the size spectrum, there is the quantum theory of fields, which explains the observed behavior of fundamental particles to many places to the right of the decimal point. Although one should always be very reluctant to state such a position, the resolution of this bipolar state into a unified one may be the last, great discovery of physics.
The purpose of this book is to present a debate between Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose concerning the possibility of the issue being resolved, and in what manner. It is a series of six short lectures, three from each man and ends with a brief debate between them. These lectures are not for the general audience, as each lecturer assumes a fundamental understanding of general relativity and quantum theory. Nevertheless, there is a great deal of explanation, including diagrams, in the lectures. Therefore, it is possible to understand the material if you have a basic understanding of the two main topics. Without that, don't bother opening the book.
Of course, the issue is not resolved, as that must wait for a later date. It is interesting that Hawking tends to emphasize the points of difference, while Penrose goes to some length to describe how similar their positions are. Penrose continues with the position of Albert Einstein, in that he argues that quantum mechanics is not a final theory, but only the "gross" appearance of much subtler events. Hawking believes otherwise, arguing that the probabilistic features of quantum mechanics is the way nature does things, and there is no underlying mechanism yet to be discovered that will remove them.
The arguments are strong, yet unconvincing. Not due to their lack of power, but because they are made by two equally strong and forceful personalities. When two such powers collide, there is rarely resolution. Nevertheless, the debate sheds a great deal of light on the current state of thinking in physics, and points out some ways in which it may be resolved.

Rating:
Summary: hold on for dear life
Review: This was an early attempt to capitalize on Hawking's commercial success with the Brief History. Roger Penrose, Hawking's PhD advisor, has also written some really fascinating books for lay readers on philosophical implications of physics such as on the nature of intelligence. However, combining the two in a debate, the form of this book, cancels out the reader-friendly accessibility of their solo works as their egos take charge and they try to outperform each other. It makes sense after the fact that if they're debating, they must be discussing matters on which they disagree, and since physics is so well settled and understood on all but the most esoteric and advanced questions, the subject matter of their disagreements must lie in that advanced realm. Of course, "advanced" is a vastly relative term to apply to physics, since many ordinary readers would balk at any physics material. But I have a degree in physics, albeit only a BS - and after the initial material I have to struggle to follow anything they're saying! They should stamp this book's cover with a caveat emptor; this is no "Brief History of Time" or "Elegant Universe." They even mention at the outset that they assume the reader has a basic understanding of physics, but these guys' idea of a basic understanding is a Ph.D. specializing in general relativity. Having said all that, the book still makes for heady reading from what I could pick up here and there, so it's a thrill if you're up to it.