Rating: 
Summary: Like nothing you've seen before
Review: This book is a little like Kaplan's book "The nothing that is; a natural history of zero," but different in significant ways. Like Kaplan, Barrow's book begins with ancient concepts about zero, and how different civilizations struggled with the idea that there can be "nothing." From the first few chapters in Barrow's book you get an appreciation for much effort has gone into making out counting system and numerical symbols useful, and how awkward earlier methods really were. And, you get an appreciation for how difficult the concept of nothing really is. Today, we are accustomed to thinking about nothing, and I'm not sure the average person gives it much thought. It's a testament to the power of early teaching/indoctrination that concepts that earlier were so profoundly considered are, today, so easily taken for granted. For example, figure 1.27 in Barrow's book shows a complicate diagram with 19 interrelated blocks illustrating how various concepts are associate with different aspects of nothingness in early Indian thought, ultimately culminating in the mathematical zero. Keep in mind that this is a book about nothing. And there is more than one nothing to consider. One view is the mathematical zero. Closely related to the concept of zero is idea of a vacuum. Aristotle defined the vacuum as "that in which the presence of a body is possible, although not actual." Aristotle believed that the vacuum was logically inconsistent with the universe, and his opposition strongly affected Medieval philosophers. One of the most interesting sections of Barrows book, for me, were the inventive methods examined by Medieval scientists in their attempts to create the vacuum. Barrow covers a wide range of ideas associated with the concept of nothing. Nothing is more than just space where there is no body. There are also interesting ideas in mathematics. For example, Barrow describes Godel's theorem, which proves that "there are statements of arithmetic that can be made using the rules and symbols of arithmetic which it is impossible to show to be ether true or false using those rules." In other words, the set of all mathematical systems in which every true or false statement made in those systems can be proven using the rules and symbols of the system is zero. Chapter three is a very interesting discussion about the search for the vacuum. This story begins in Medieval Europe, but it continues today with our evolving understanding about what a vacuum really is. Some of the instruments used in the construction of a vacuum are quite inventive, like Torricelli's barometer and different configurations with sliding plates. I have to admit, though, that some of the Medieval arguments about nothing are hard to follow. Consider this one, by Von Guericke: "everything is in Nothing and if God should reduce the fabric of the world, which he created, into Nothing, nothing would remain of its place other than Nothing (just as it was before the creation of the world), that is, the Uncreated." A very pleasant surprise in Barrow's book is one of the best short histories of the theory of relativity. It began, of course, with the Ether, and attempts to find it. The defining test was the Michelson-Morley experiment. In many text books this experiment is almost a footnote, but Barrow devotes many pages to it. It's easy to forget, in out modern day of lasers and such, how difficult some of these experiments were to do. The Michelson-Morley experiment was on the cutting edge of science, and was suggested, on the basis of testing the speed of light in orthogonal directions on a moving earth, by non other than James Clerk Maxwell. Accomplishing the experiment was monumental both as experimental science, and for the results - or, more accurately, lack of results - obtained by it. With the Michelson-Morley experiment, the Ether was dead. This is a free-wheeling book that touches more concepts and ideas than any short review can cover. There are short forays into pure mathematics, with a wonderful picture in figure 5.3 showing the structure of modern mathematics, and the "development of different types of structure." I felt lost. And there are important details like "there is ... a real and precise difference between the number zero and the concept of a set that possesses no members - the null, or empty set." And that's just the first half of Barrow's book. The second half deals mostly with issues of cosmology, the nature of the vacuum, and the origin of the universe. With the advent of quantum mechanics, we've come to understand that the location of matter is determined by probability waves. Modern ideas have evolved to conceive of the vacuum as the lowest possible energy level. But even here, there are interesting questions that lead to surprises. The concept I find most interesting is that the universe, itself, has zero net energy. That is, if you add all the energy in the universe (and energy comes in both positive and negative varieties) it sums to zero, leaving us with the rather profound possibility that nothing is all there really is. This is easily one of the most interesting, versatile, far-reaching, and thought-provoking books I've read in a long time. Thank you, Mr. Barrow, for writing such an interesting book about Nothing.
Rating:
Summary: A laymans guide to absolutely nothing
Review: This is my first Barrow book and I totally enjoyed it. I am saying this after coming to the conclusion that the minor errors, inconsistancies and British spellings in the American edition are due entirely to the lack of science expertise of the Random House editors who translated the book from UK english to American english. Physics is a big subject but the author found a narrow and well defined thread to follow that starts with the need for a zero placeholder in number systems and ends with the recently discovered expansion of the universe and zero point energy. He uses history, philosophy, mathematics and physics to move the reader along this thread. The delving into real physics concepts is so fearlessly done that it may turn off the Walter Mitty types who dream of Nobel Prizes. The math used is oriented toward logic rather than calculation. I can see where some new readers in physics might get lost in a very few places because names of theories are bandied about with no attached explanation of what or how. But this may be due to editor mishap rather then author intention. Stuff like this can be yet another reason to read another physics book. Like Roger Penrose's books, John Barrow's reflect an active researcher's ideas as well as accepted theory so don't be suprised that you may be reading about some things that no one else in the field supports. I think this is the reason why I like this book so much anyway.
| 
