Rating: 
Summary: Great science book for the layperson
Review: "A Hole In The Universe" is certainly not a book for everyone.
Obviously it is for ordinary, intelligent people who are interested in
the latest developments and "breakthroughs" (quotes because who knows if
they are correct) in physics, but it is most certainly not for physics
majors or even physics minors. Therefore I much appreciated the reviewers
who provided their backgrounds, particularly the person who said that he (?)
was already familiar with the latest concepts in physics, and that this
book was not for such a person. I will say that I am not very familiar with
a lot of modern physics, though I have read a lot on quantum physics and the
supposed parallels with metaphysics. I have not studied relativity and E-mc2
quite enough to understand them, but this book helps a lot, at least with
the latter. Overall I would give Ms. Cole a great deal of credit and appreciation
for very clear, intuitive, even profound explanations of most of the topics
covered in the book. She takes on some very hard concepts and makes
them as understandable as just about any book on physics for the
layperson I've read. As other reviewers have written, at times her
fragmented writing style is annoying, but to me only when I don't care
for the topic she is discussing, most particularly string theory. Yet
the problem might not be with her explanations, but rather with anyone
attempting to explain subjects that must require a multitude of assumptions
and math that even Ph.D.'s would balk at to comprehend! I give the author
a lot of credit for trying to teach the reader to do a kind of spatial
thinking required to see the "whole," by which I mean that science cannot
stand alone, verified only by mathematical equations of "objective" reality.
Clearly the reality of sub-atomic physics, for example, is weird and often
inexplicable anyway. Ms. Cole lays a marvelous foundation for discussing how nothing has become certain stage in particle physics. In the first chapter she
tries to get the reader simply to ponder what nothing is. Nothing
might be the number 0, or the supposed missing matter related to big
bang cosmology, or the missing neutrinos from the sun, or even the potential
force of gravity in motionless objects. Nothing is also the fact that all
properties of matter emanate from "nothing," which as she explains quite well
throughout the book is the "resurrection" of the ether, which is called the
quantum vacuum today. In this excellent first chapter and later the author
reaffirms the unmistakeable parallels between the "nothing" in physics and the
no-thing in Eastern religions like Buddhism, the idea that mystics perceive
the ground that underlies all being, and that a person who wants to advance
spiritually (and maybe in contemporary physics) must verse him/herself in the
void to be open/aware of the big picture. This first chapter alone is like
a book in itself becase of its wealth of ideas. My other favorite chapter by far is Chapter 4, "Nothing Takes
Center Stage." We learn that what was proven by Faraday and further
substantiated by Einstein and other physicists is that nothing, the
vaccum, spacetime, etc,, along with the fields that emanated from
this nothing, is (to physics) *the* reality. One of the topic headings
in this chapter is "Matter As Metaphor" - again, what counts is not
particles but rather the fields that emanate from the particles and
the spaces between them. I totally enjoyed her explanation of the
particle-antiparticle phenomenom, which I had read before but didn't
understand. On p. 82 is an excellent diagram of P. Dirac's explanation
of how when a particle is created from nothing (the vacuum), there is
a hole (anti-particle) created at the same time. When these two entities
collide they destroy each other, given by E = 2 * mc2, since there
are 2 particles. I feel Einstein's famous equation can be understood
quite well from a careful read of this chapter. As I mentioned above I did not care for the chapter(s) on string
theory. I cannot grasp the value of strings, which make protons look
like planets (or larger), and exist in at least eleven dimensions.
Until I do further reading on this topic I must wonder if physicists
have taken the amazing discoveries of quantum physics too far in their
reductionist quest for the ultimate "nothing." And the author herself
states that there is no one ground in current string theory.
The short bios and bibliography at the end are very commendable
points to recommend the book, and show that the author has made a
gallant attempt to summarize an amazing variety of books on physics
and other disciplines that (she believes) are related to the topics
she discusses. I really look forward to reading at least 3 books from the
bibliogrpahy and returning to "A Hole In The Universe" to
see how well the author aided my understanding of these topics.
Rating:
Summary: Something for Nothing
Review: A lot of books try to be about something, but turn out to be about nothing. This book says it's about nothing, which reveals everything. Well, at least something. This book starts from zero and goes nowhere fast. But the concept of zero is very important, as well as very funny for some reason. Or maybe none at all. Nothing itself turns out to be something. For example, sometimes nothing is equilibrium, which is the sum of opposing somethings. Then again, sometimes there's nothing until you look at it. Only then it is something. Or something like that. You would think nothing and emptiness have nothing in common, but it turns out they do have something, and maybe everything. K.C. Cole is a columnist and teacher, and uses those skills to create a book you can read a little or a lot at a time. Wit and a good ear also help move things along. This book goes from zero to the speed of space. It's a fast laugh track around physics, quantum mechanics, string theory--life, the universe and...nothing. Yes, it's everything you ever wanted to know about nothing but were afraid to ask. Lovers of games, paradox and cosmic concepts with everyday implications should find this a relatively painless way to understand why humans makes so much ado about nothing. I can see Einstein and Groucho Marx reading passages to each other and laughing hysterically, while Buddha smiles and nods. To most people physics has been sounding crazier all the time, with its quarks of color and raspberry flavored gluons, as if maybe making the Bomb unhinged them all, so it's worth listening to what a knowledgeable and articulate non-scientist makes of it. Sometimes the metaphors don't quite work, and sometimes such a big universe in such a small space means it simplifies maybe a bit too much. But what we may lose in sophistication we make up in a refreshing respite from scientific self-importance. Besides, it's not easy to express complexities simply--I suspect some of these painless paragraphs cost blood, sweat and tears to write. So if you have zero interest in boring explanations, you'll find this book quite something. Prepare your mind for quite a ride-if you don't get dizzy, you missed something-or maybe nothing. And if you've suspected that science and the absurd are like two parallel lines about to intersect, this book may confirm it. Which is not to say that science is wrong, although it's clear that even now with everything we've learned, we know next to nothing for certain about anything. At one point Cole asks us to imagine the universe as the scum on the surface of a pond. Sounds reasonable to me--pond scum explains a lot. After reading Cole I'm confirmed in my belief that this is the most ridiculous universe I've ever heard.
Rating: 
Summary: Not much ado about nothing
Review: Despite its grandiose title, Cole's concise volume focuses less on "everything" (or a theory thereof) and more on historical and contemporary concepts of "nothing" and of "zero." In the first paragraph of her introduction, the author admits the difficulty of writing such a book and claims she avoids the temptations of "following [nothing] wherever it leads, getting lost in the semantic thicket of nothing puns, or simply bouncing the idea around on one's knee, string together curious facts and ancient history." In fact, this perplexing book succumbs to all three faults. After an introductory, overlong, and (yes) pun-packed overview, Cole gets to the meat of the book. A history of zero and nothingness from the Greeks to the nineteenth century precedes a chapter on mathematical concepts, three chapters on physics (fields, quantum theory, spacetime, black holes, string theory), and two chapters on cosmology (big bang, inflation, the cosmological constant, repulsive force). The penultimate chapter, on how visual perception and psychological factors influence the concepts of nothingness, seems noticeably out of place. Yet this outline of the book is deceptive, since the vaguely structured chapters seldom confine themselves to the topics at hand. A lack of transitions, a fondness for rhetorical questions, and an excess of tangents further confuse Cole's rambling banter. A symptom of the book's lack of organization is the unjustifiable frequency with which the author interjects that there will be "more on this topic later." And then there are the puns. In spite of the author's preemptive reassurance to the contrary, there are so many quips along the lines of the one I've used to title this review that it's occasionally difficult to know how seriously a statement or observation is meant. Cole is quite capable of hitting her targets: there are a number of mind-expanding images, genuine bursts of witticism, and sharply described concepts, but, just as often, the discussion falters in linguistic limbo. Granted, Cole has an unenviable task, since even scientists haven't yet developed the language to discuss many of the concepts she describes, but her prose isn't aided by the preference for clever wordplay and winking asides over straightforward exposition and unambiguous definitions. The book is not entirely without merit; one's reaction will surely depend on one's interests and background. Some readers, especially those who enjoy works of popular metaphysics, might regard the ideas presented here as mind-expanding, even satisfying, but fans of science writing are likely to be disappointed. Those readers should investigate instead the significant number of books listed in Cole's bibliography, most of which discuss these topics far more clearly.
Rating: 
Summary: Fabulous
Review: I expected nothing, and got nothing. Isn't that something? If you have meditated for many years and fringed on dharmakaya this book is a delightful dance with that from which everything comes. Ken Wilber too confusing, or too long? K. C. Cole waterskis some of the same territory, and , frankly, I'm not sure why he isn't a reference. This is a book a Buddhist could love. But zen that isn't saying much. Would have liked even more diagrams, and more pictures.
Rating: 
Summary: A smirk and a wink do not a good science book make
Review: I read Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe before The Hole in the Universe. No doubt, the scientific depth of Greene's near-masterpiece bolstered my negative reaction to Cole's rather light-weight book. A serious science reader should avoid "Hole": it is superficial, contains a bizarre digression, and is too clever for its own good. One could argue that Hole's relatively short length is a benefit. Undoubtedly, some short science books are very good. (Short works by Martin Rees, John Barrow, and Paul Davies demonstrate this point.) Hole's short length, however, is not evidence of the author having synthesized mind-bending and mathematically challenging material into clear, tight prose. Hole is so short because it's so superficial. In fact, I would argue that the book is too long. The bizarre digression I mentioned above occurs at the end of the book where Cole discusses how the human brain perceives (or misperceives) the world. The connection to her main subject -- "nothing" -- is tenuous, at best. The only plausible explanation I can come up with for Cole's wierd digression is that it allowed her to briefly discuss two books she likes (one of which -- Phantoms in the Brain -- I have read and was shocked to find mentioned in Hole). Finally, I was extremely annoyed by the clever word play and frequent interruptions in Hole. The word play got old very quickly. Nothing, something, and anything -- yes, these words can create cute sentences when the subject is nothing, but not past the first chapter. Thankfully, the word play decreased after the third or fourth chapter, but my irritation with the author never left me. As for the interruptions, I dislike headers and quotes every 2.5 pages of a book. It gave Hole the feel of a very long Newsweek article. If I could, I would put a sticker on the jacket advertising Hole as a MTV Book Club selection, "catering to short attention spans." Hole isn't useless, but I didn't find it particularly enlightening. Several contemporary physicists have written popular science books that cover the topic of nothing more deeply and more satisfyingly.
Rating:
Summary: A smirk and a wink do not a good science book make
Review: I read Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe before The Hole in the Universe. No doubt, the scientific depth of Greene's near-masterpiece bolstered my negative reaction to Cole's rather light-weight book. A serious science reader should avoid "Hole": it is superficial, contains a bizarre digression, and is too clever for its own good. One could argue that Hole's relatively short length is a benefit. Undoubtedly, some short science books are very good. (Short works by Martin Rees, John Barrow, and Paul Davies demonstrate this point.) Hole's short length, however, is not evidence of the author having synthesized mind-bending and mathematically challenging material into clear, tight prose. Hole is so short because it's so superficial. In fact, I would argue that the book is too long. The bizarre digression I mentioned above occurs at the end of the book where Cole discusses how the human brain perceives (or misperceives) the world. The connection to her main subject -- "nothing" -- is tenuous, at best. The only plausible explanation I can come up with for Cole's wierd digression is that it allowed her to briefly discuss two books she likes (one of which -- Phantoms in the Brain -- I have read and was shocked to find mentioned in Hole). Finally, I was extremely annoyed by the clever word play and frequent interruptions in Hole. The word play got old very quickly. Nothing, something, and anything -- yes, these words can create cute sentences when the subject is nothing, but not past the first chapter. Thankfully, the word play decreased after the third or fourth chapter, but my irritation with the author never left me. As for the interruptions, I dislike headers and quotes every 2.5 pages of a book. It gave Hole the feel of a very long Newsweek article. If I could, I would put a sticker on the jacket advertising Hole as a MTV Book Club selection, "catering to short attention spans." Hole isn't useless, but I didn't find it particularly enlightening. Several contemporary physicists have written popular science books that cover the topic of nothing more deeply and more satisfyingly.
Rating:
Summary: This book drove me nuts
Review: I think that Cole is trying to explain something big here. The book tackles a lot of big subjects under the heading of "nothing" and tries to prove that what Cole refers to as "nothing" is really where everything in the universe comes from. And I think it really hits the mark sometimes. But 95% of the book is semantics and wordplay. And I think the book really stretches to fit some things into the "nothing is everything" theory. You'll wait at least 50 pages before you start learning real science. It must have been fun for Cole to play with the idea of nothing in riddle-like prose, but it really takes away from the science of the book. I say skip to the bibliography and read the books cited. They may be more concise.
Rating:
Summary: Hole in the Universe fills a hole in science literature
Review: K.C. Kole is perhaps not the deepest science writer on the block, but maybe she's deeper than her lighthearted musing sounds at first. After all, what subject could be deeper than the Hole in the Universe? She chose one of the least-represented subjects to write about, and she really covered it well. The subject of "nothing" is something we fall into from time to time. After all, what was there before there was "something?" Who hasn't peered blankly into that void? Science afficionados will quickly realize what we're talking about here: the spontaneous origins of forces from which have sprung such beautiful oddities as String Theory. Don't mistake this book for a Sienfeld episode. This is a book about Nothing, with a capital N. The Nothing from which everything came. My only criticism is that I wanted about another 100 pages to go deeper into the mysteries, but truthfully I suspect that the material is just not there yet. We simply don't know enough yet. But if you're a novice and looking for exposure to the more esoteric beauties of scientific exploration, this book really does take you on a wonderful trip. I fully recommend it. I was going to give it four stars, but I really can't think of a reason why not to give it 5. Kole's style is engaging, witty, and she brings up very thoughtful insights and clues into this journey through Nothing. Five stars it is, then! Jump into the hole in the universe. Let Nothing distract you from everything around you for weeks to come! Shooshie
Rating:
Summary: good explanations but too many tangents!
Review: Overall, I enjoyed this book although a few sections did require skimming and skipping because they were a bit too tedious. The book had a tendency to diverge into tangents. And some tangents were interesting and some were not. For one thing, the coverage on the history of the number zero seemed extremeley tedious. I can see how it relates to the book but I simply had no interest in reading it. Other tangents were more interesting. I really enjoyed the ones that described the inconsistencies in human perception and how it's easier for us to notice the presence of something than the absence of something. Also, it described links between quantum physics and Buddhism as well as delving into oddities like strange disorders where people who have lost a limb still feel as though it is there. *phantom limbs*..oooh spooky! :P The book didn't just focus on the scientific zero, it explored many aspects of zero. Some were appealing and some were not. The scientific portion of the book was fairly good :) The explanations were clear enough and the analogies were helpful in understanding stuff. Generally speaking, the book focuses on how the universe began (out of nothing) and how it will end. Perhaps, my favourite part was its theoretical dive into what happened before the big bang. It does an excellent job in explaining all the recent developments in science (the book was published 2001) from super string theory to the connections between space and time (the classic space-time fabric). Worth noting is the description of the creation of something (anti particle and particle) out of nothing. And how nothing is actually something and we only perceive it as nothing because nothing changes. And of course, the 'frozen' vacuum that we live in today. Frozen so we can recognize different forces and particles and melted before as one blob of nothing (pre-bigbang). It's twisted but the book gives you an edgy grasp to a very edgy piece of science. The book speculates and questions and drags you in along with it :). So many questions still remain, from what triggered the big bang to what kept anti-matter and matter from anihilating each other to whether our universe was accident or formula. It questions whether we need to remodel our understanding of the universe. Just as Einstein changed the view of the universe with his conception of spacetime, perhaps we need another Einstein to come along and change our view of the universe and replace it with something even more bizarre and inexplicable than before. I will complain of the cryptic table of contents. The author uses metaphorical and 'witty' chapter titles which are nice and pretty but they tell you nothing of what the chapter is about. It can be really frustrating! It takes away the wonderful freedom of jumping around to sections of interest but the book is worth skimming. Skip sections that aren't interesting but read some sections because they are truly enlightening :) The book also has many quotes nicely dispersed throughout. Quotes are fun :) The book even contains a few cheesie jokes (Bills, Monicas and puns)
Rating:
Summary: This Nothing Is Everything
Review: The Hole in the Universe is everything promised by those raves from Oliver Sacks and Brian Greene and Dava Sobel -- and much more! It is a deep look at an elusive, yet centrally important subject, presented with eloquence, originality and charm. It amazes me that Cole has been able to take us to the frontiers of physics, exploring questions that physicists sstill puzzle over, and yet still make it entirely accessible (and, yes, even fun) to a complete novice like myself. I have read about ideas like string theory and the strange "repulsive force" that seems to be expanding the universe, but never before were these ideas so clear and appealing to me. Her writing is so fresh and lovely, it takes your breath away. And I love the connections between the notion of "nothing" in perception -- the holes in our heads, as Cole calls them -- and the nothings of mathematics and physics. Buy this book and give it to all your friends. They will thank you.
|
