<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Carry-on concepts in modern physical theories for autodidact
Review: Many 'popular physics' books serve well for expanding the serious layman's autodidact pursuit in understanding physics. Newton offers intellectually satisfying handles for what I like to call 'carry-on concepts' in modern physical theories.This book is what some would call popular physics but I think is broader and deeper than such a simple categorization. From the outset of 'Thinking about Physics' (TaP), Newton offers that answers to issues in thinking about questions of physics are subject to debate and humbly advises us not to accept his word without question. He doesn't lie out the solutions offered over the years, with all the pros and cons (and yet he ultimately gives his 2 cents), but suggests we use his arguments as starting points for our own thinking.
I found a good overall summary in the beginning of this work: ?This book consists of more or less independent essays on various general topics found in physics, whose common thread appears in the pervasiveness of probabilistic approaches and the central role played by mathematics, with the quantum theory of fields as the most basic description of reality.?
In the Preface Newton admits a '...disagreement with a number of prominent physicists such as Feynman & Heisenberg, who, at the most fundamental level, give primacy to the particle concept.'
As in Philip R. Wallace's Paradox Lost, Newton makes the argument that the supposed paradoxes in interpretations of theoretical conceptions of physical phenomenon have a '...linguistic source, stemming from the use of the concept of particles and waves.' In contrast to Paradox Lost, he regards quantum fields '...as the basic entity, with 'particles'-possessing great intuitive appeal but circumscribed utility-appearing as phenomena produced by the field.'
His Introduction and Chapter 1-Theories can be seen as a condensed version of his book 'The Truth of Science' and, at the same time, an expansion of a great layman's treatment in similar chapters of his title 'What Makes Nature Tick?' (WMNT) The latter book is a less mathematically technical, more popular look at subjects conspicuously similar to TaP. It is in these two chapters where he addresses some challenges to a popular and historical philosophy of science. As an antidote to philosophical general assumptions, loose arguments and possible misinterpretations apparent in other popular publications, Newton places common sense definitions of experiments, theoretical understanding and explanation on solid ontological ground leaving us with a sense of complete logical satisfaction. He also discusses the necessity and great utility of using conceptual analogies in describing certain phenomenon in physical theory but makes the usual warnings of their limits and potential misleading.
The second chapter talks about the state of physical systems and phase correlations in classical & quantum mechanics. The state vector, density operator, and probabilities are nicely brought to light.
Chapter 3 is a sweet treatment of the role, beauty and & power of mathematics. This is an elegant and technical expansion of the chapter in ?What Makes Nature Tick?? (WMNT)
Chapter 4, Quantum Fields and Particles, is fairly technical but accessible with the persistent enthusiasm of this physics layman. I return time and again to this chapter to gain understanding of aspects for which I had ignorance in previous readings.
In Symmetry in Physics (ch5) Newton takes us through Parity, Group Theory in Particle Physics, and Field Theory. I chose to prepare for this chapter by reading the lighter chapter on Symmetry in WMNT. Yet another example of the nice complementary correlation between the two works.
The last three chapters are Causality and Probability, Quantum Mechanics and Reality, and Arrows of Time. These titles are sufficiently self-explanatory for the purposes of this review and exist as final examples of the technical expansion that may be explored in the corresponding chapters of WMNT. The book concludes with an Epilog where the author asks whether we are able to distinguish relevant characteristics of our perception of physical nature and summarizes the three broad essentials this book was meant to identify: quantum fields and the explanatory machinery which provide the necessarily mathematical language to describe nature unambiguously - causality and probability.
The Further Reading section in the rear of the book is nicely broken down by the corresponding chapters with the suggested reading listed in the usual manner. A great resource! Finally, a complete bibliography and helpful index conclude the book. Last and certainly least, I ran across strange sentence early in my reading of TaP, '...it would take a very large hole in the side of a well-constructed skyscraper to make the building collapse.' The book was written in January 2000. Being serious about physics, I obviously don?t attribute this to conspiracy but do find the coincidence uncanny. BOTTOM LINE ON THE BOOK ? CHALLENGING, GREAT READ FOR THE HUNGRY AUTODIDACT.
Best regards to the author and the lay reader.
IndiAndy
Rating:
Summary: Carry-on concepts in modern physical theories for autodidact
Review: Many quality books will serve well for autodidact pursuits in expanding the serious layman's understanding of physics. Newton offers intellectually satisfying handles for what I like to call "carry-on concepts" in modern physical theories. From the outset of TaP, Newton offers that answers to issues in thinking about questions of physics are subject to debate and humbly advises us not to accept his word without question. He doesn't lie out the solutions offered over the years, with all the pros and cons (and yet he ultimately gives his 2 cents), but suggests we use his arguments as starting points for our own thinking.
I found a good overall summary in the beginning of this work: "This book consists of more or less independent essays on various general topics found in physics, whose common thread appears in the pervasiveness of probabilistic approaches and the central role played by mathematics, with the quantum theory of fields as the most basic description of reality."
In the Preface Newton admits a "...disagreement with a number of prominent physicists such as Feynman & Heisenberg, who, at the most fundamental level, give primacy to the particle concept."
As in Philip R. Wallace's Paradox Lost, Newton makes the argument that the supposed paradoxes in interpretations of theoretical conceptions of physical phenomenon have a "...linguistic source, stemming from the use of the concept of particles and waves." In contrast to Paradox Lost, he regards quantum fields "...as the basic entity, with "particles"-possessing great intuitive appeal but circumscribed utility-appearing as phenomena produced by the field."
His Introduction and Chapter 1-Theories can be seen as a condensed version of his book The Truth of Science and, at the same time, an expansion of a great layman's treatment in similar chapters of his title What Makes Nature Tick? The latter book is a less mathematically technical, more popular look at subjects conspicuously similar to TaP. It is in these two chapters where he addresses some challenges to a popular and historical philosophy of science. As an antidote to philosophical general assumptions, loose arguments and possible misinterpretations apparent in other popular publications, Newton places common sense definitions of experiments, theoretical understanding and explanation on solid ontological ground leaving us with a sense of complete logical satisfaction. He also discusses the necessity and great utility of using conceptual analogies in describing certain phenomenon in physical theory but makes the usual warnings of their limits and potential misleading.
The second chapter talks about the state of physical systems and phase correlations in classical & quantum mechanics. The state vector, density operator, and probabilities are nicely brought to light.
Chapter 3 is a sweet treatment of the role, beauty and & power of mathematics. This is an elegant and technical expansion of the chapter in What Makes Nature Tick?
Chapter 4, Quantum Fields and Particles, is fairly technical but accessible with the persistent enthusiasm of this physics layman. I return time and again to this chapter to gain understanding of aspects for which I had ignorance in previous readings.
In Symmetry in Physics (ch5) Newton takes us through Parity, Group Theory in Particle Physics, and Field Theory. I chose to prepare for this chapter by reading the lighter chapter on Symmetry in WMNT? Yet another example of the nice complementary correlation between the two works.
The last three chapters are Causality and Probability, Quantum Mechanics and Reality, and Arrows of Time. These titles are sufficiently self-explanatory for the purposes of this review and exist as final examples of the technical expansion that may be explored in the corresponding chapters of WMNT? The book concludes with an Epilog where the author asks whether we are able to distinguish relevant characteristics of our perception of physical nature and summarizes the three broad essentials this book was meant to identify: quantum fields and the explanatory machinery which provide the necessarily mathematical language to describe nature unambiguously - causality and probability.
The Further Reading section in the rear of the book is nicely broken down by the corresponding chapters with the suggested reading listed in the usual manner. A great resource! Finally, a complete bibliography and helpful index conclude the book. Last and certainly least, I ran across strange sentence early in my reading of TaP, "...it would take a very large hole in the side of a well-constructed skyscraper to make the building collapse."
Rating:
Summary: the author's personal philosophy
Review: This is a great book. The author gives his personal philosophy as a practicing physicist and obviously good teacher about the current great issues in physics: the arrow of time, the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics, The EPR debate, entanglement, causality, probability..... There is an extensive discussion of models, theories, and paradigms and how they influence experiments as well as how they are chosen from among other likely candidates. There is even a short appendix on solitons. It is the reflection of a practical man as to how physics advances and its relationship to the "real" world - far from the philosophical musings of Kuhn or Popper. It's the kind of book that would make you want to sit down and have further discussions with the author. He does have a previous publication by Harvard U Press which I haven't read but will surely look at next.
Rating:
Summary: the author's personal philosophy
Review: This is a great book. The author gives his personal philosophy as a practicing physicist and obviously good teacher about the current great issues in physics: the arrow of time, the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics, The EPR debate, entanglement, causality, probability..... There is an extensive discussion of models, theories, and paradigms and how they influence experiments as well as how they are chosen from among other likely candidates. There is even a short appendix on solitons. It is the reflection of a practical man as to how physics advances and its relationship to the "real" world - far from the philosophical musings of Kuhn or Popper. It's the kind of book that would make you want to sit down and have further discussions with the author. He does have a previous publication by Harvard U Press which I haven't read but will surely look at next.
Rating: 
Summary: looking for philosophical discussion? look elsewhere!
Review: This is not a great book. It contains very little philosophizing about physics, and it brings very little to the table as far as the non-physicist will be concerned. Rather what you get chapter after chapter is the author's views about a particular issue in physics. But arguments are lacking and the opposing views are rarely considered (and when they are, they're swept aside without much scrutiny). As an example, the author takes a highly instrumentalist stance on the status of physical theories without even discussing alternative conceptions of reality. Although this might very well reflect the opinions of many physicists today, there are serious philosophical issues being ignored here. That would be fine if this were just supposed to be another book spewing the opinions of a scientist. But it's not. It's supposed to be a book geared towards critical examination of the opinions of working physicists. And on that front, I think the author falls far short of his aim. Furthermore, the author barely scratches the surface of the philosophical issues that he does address. Issues like entanglement and the arrows of time are discussed much more thoroughly and accessibly in other books. For those looking for an introduction to some of the philosophical issues in physics, or even a deeper appreciation for physics, there are plenty of decent pop-physics and philosophy of physics books out there besides this one that will give you what you want (check out authors like Stephen Hawking, Michael Friedman, Lawrence Sklar, Tim Maudlin, David Albert, Richard Feynman, Jim Baggott, and Roger Penrose). If you are a practicing physicist looking to read about another physicist's philosophical reflections (without much critical examination), this may be the book for you. Otherwise, I could not in good conscience recommend this book.
Rating:
Summary: looking for philosophical discussion? look elsewhere!
Review: This is not a great book. It contains very little philosophizing about physics, and it brings very little to the table as far as the non-physicist will be concerned. Rather what you get chapter after chapter is the author's views about a particular issue in physics. But arguments are lacking and the opposing views are rarely considered (and when they are, they're swept aside without much scrutiny). As an example, the author takes a highly instrumentalist stance on the status of physical theories without even discussing alternative conceptions of reality. Although this might very well reflect the opinions of many physicists today, there are serious philosophical issues being ignored here. That would be fine if this were just supposed to be another book spewing the opinions of a scientist. But it's not. It's supposed to be a book geared towards critical examination of the opinions of working physicists. And on that front, I think the author falls far short of his aim. Furthermore, the author barely scratches the surface of the philosophical issues that he does address. Issues like entanglement and the arrows of time are discussed much more thoroughly and accessibly in other books. For those looking for an introduction to some of the philosophical issues in physics, or even a deeper appreciation for physics, there are plenty of decent pop-physics and philosophy of physics books out there besides this one that will give you what you want (check out authors like Stephen Hawking, Michael Friedman, Lawrence Sklar, Tim Maudlin, David Albert, Richard Feynman, Jim Baggott, and Roger Penrose). If you are a practicing physicist looking to read about another physicist's philosophical reflections (without much critical examination), this may be the book for you. Otherwise, I could not in good conscience recommend this book.
<< 1 >>
|
