"Anyone Who is not Shocked...

[enoch]

...by quantum theory has not understood it." - Niels Bohr

This 256 page book, titled "QUANTUM - A Guide for the Perplexed" by Jim Al-Khalili is a must-have for anyone finding it difficult to grasp the counter-intuitive, we could say, "magical" realm of quantum physics.

Very clearly written, full of great examples and thought excersises...and what's more - if you can't grasp some of the literature some of the time then each and (nearly) every page is cram-packed with great diagrams and pictures to boot.

The copy I'm currently reading was hired from the library. £14.99 brand new - although I'm sure there are bargain copies available from ebay or amazon.

Excellent!! :wink: :P

[Quantitativefool]

Ohh sounds good! and the Bohr Quote is good.

I'll have to look for the book.
Thanks,
-Stu

[CFTraveler]

Thanks enoch. Even though I have read a few books about Quantum Physics, I still yet have to find an explanation for String theory that I can understand.... :roll:

[Chris]

Thanks enoch. Even though I have read a few books about Quantum Physics, I still yet have to find an explanation for String theory that I can understand.... :roll:

There are interesting developments in string theory. People are actually losing faith with it, as little of it relates to the unvierse and laws as we observe them. This has led to the possibility that the universe we inhabit it but a small area of a much bigger place, and the laws which govern our local universe are unique to our area, and other areas have radically different laws and particle values.

[enoch]

I read that too, Chris. I think it was Paul Davies who brought my attention to the prospect of mother and daughter universes, etc. To dream that we're off-spring from a mother universe fills me with wonder.

Thanks enoch. Even though I have read a few books about Quantum Physics, I still yet have to find an explanation for String theory that I can understand.... :roll:

There are interesting developments in string theory. People are actually losing faith with it, as little of it relates to the unvierse and laws as we observe them. This has led to the possibility that the universe we inhabit it but a small area of a much bigger place, and the laws which govern our local universe are unique to our area, and other areas have radically different laws and particle values.

I think I am beginning to understand some of it. So I suppose it is about time that scientists reject it.

In any event, think of a vibrating string, like that of a violin. That takes me back to the old concept of the Music of the Spheres.

The latest scientific idea I have been reading about is the reinvention of the ether.

That and the holographic universe will keep me busy for some time...

[Akashic_Librarian]

Yeah looks cool might buy it...

[Chris]

Thanks enoch. Even though I have read a few books about Quantum Physics, I still yet have to find an explanation for String theory that I can understand.... :roll:

There are interesting developments in string theory. People are actually losing faith with it, as little of it relates to the unvierse and laws as we observe them. This has led to the possibility that the universe we inhabit it but a small area of a much bigger place, and the laws which govern our local universe are unique to our area, and other areas have radically different laws and particle values.

I think I am beginning to understand some of it. So I suppose it is about time that scientists reject it.

In any event, think of a vibrating string, like that of a violin. That takes me back to the old concept of the Music of the Spheres.

The latest scientific idea I have been reading about is the reinvention of the ether.

That and the holographic universe will keep me busy for some time...

Science isn't rejecting it as such, just losing faith in its potential as a ToE (theory of everything). The problem with string theory is that the majority of it describes laws and states not present in our universe - which has led to the suggestions that these other 'universes' string theory describes are equally as valid as our own, and in fact, our own is just a local area (with it's own unique laws and rules), of a much bigger place consisting of radically different areas and rule sets.

The holographic universe is an interesting theory, and the book of the same name is too :).

Science isn't rejecting it as such, just losing faith in its potential as a ToE (theory of everything). The problem with string theory is that the majority of it describes laws and states not present in our universe - which has led to the suggestions that these other 'universes' string theory describes are equally as valid as our own, and in fact, our own is just a local area (with it's own unique laws and rules), of a much bigger place consisting of radically different areas and rule sets.

The holographic universe is an interesting theory, and the book of the same name is too :).
The problem with the idea of the multiverse (or meta-universe), of course, is that it cannot be proven or disproven, so that it does not come under the heading of science.

[Matthew]

thanks, enoch... I put it on my amazon wish list... might pick it up soon.
-Matthew

[enoch]

It cannot be proven or disproven that man landed on the moon - statistically speaking.

Just finished reading the book and, not being the sharpest pencil in the box, I found it extremely hard-going mid-way. I suppose it's the same with all modern science books - they're enticing initially and then really throw it at you when they have you undivided attention. Definately worth a second read, though. Just flitting through each page and studying the diagrams and descriptions is good, wholesome reading. :wink:

It cannot be proven or disproven that man landed on the moon - statistically speaking.

Just finished reading the book and, not being the sharpest pencil in the box, I found it extremely hard-going mid-way. I suppose it's the same with all modern science books - they're enticing initially and then really throw it at you when they have you undivided attention. Definately worth a second read, though. Just flitting through each page and studying the diagrams and descriptions is good, wholesome reading. :wink:
It is useful to me to believe that man landed on the moon. Show me how it is useful to me to believe in the concept of multiple universes...

hehe, physics isnt really my thing, but I might look into it.

Thanks.

[Chris]

It is useful to me to believe that man landed on the moon. Show me how it is useful to me to believe in the concept of multiple universes...

It isn't. Empirical evidence will be eventually found if these multiple universes do exist, and a multitude of new technologies built upon such science.
Once quantum physics was theoretical and mainly considered as absurd. Now It is the basis of our current technology, from microchips, to x-ray machines - the science of QM spawned a multitude of technology which wouldn't of developed otherwise.

For example of where string theory might lead us to is the winner of last years 'nuclear and future flight' category of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronomics award. The paper submitted detailed a form of anti-gravity device and potential 'hyper drive' which could possibly fly us to a star 11 light years away in just 80 days. Our current technological level could possibly build devices based upon this paper if the funding was put there. At the least it shows that when string theory does start to mature, the technological breakthroughs will be astounding.

It is useful to me to believe that man landed on the moon. Show me how it is useful to me to believe in the concept of multiple universes...

It isn't. Empirical evidence will be eventually found if these multiple universes do exist, and a multitude of new technologies built upon such science.
Once quantum physics was theoretical and mainly considered as absurd. Now It is the basis of our current technology, from microchips, to x-ray machines - the science of QM spawned a multitude of technology which wouldn't of developed otherwise.

For example of where string theory might lead us to is the winner of last years 'nuclear and future flight' category of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronomics award. The paper submitted detailed a form of anti-gravity device and potential 'hyper drive' which could possibly fly us to a star 11 light years away in just 80 days. Our current technological level could possibly build devices based upon this paper if the funding was put there. At the least it shows that when string theory does start to mature, the technological breakthroughs will be astounding.
But clearly two universes cannot be connected. If they were, they would be one. That is what it means to be a universe, the set of all objects implied by a specific discussion.

[Chris]

But clearly two universes cannot be connected. If they were, they would be one. That is what it means to be a universe, the set of all objects implied by a specific discussion.

From what I can gather from this theory, there really is only 1 universe, but different areas of it have very different rules i.e. our perceivable universe is one area of a much larger place.
Or in M-theory, our universe is a (mem)brane floating in 11-D space with multiple (infinite?) other branes which could each be a different universe with different rules.
One theory of the big bang put forward suggests two of these branes collided, producing the energies which started our universe and also explaining the peculiarities of gravity (gravity is 'bleeding' to this brane from the one which collided with us and we are feeling the tail end of the force).
As yet these are theories, but evidence for or against should be coming when CERNs new particle accelerator is completed.

[enoch]

whatever it turns out to be - quivering string, off-spring, or marble in a giants pocket - the sun will still rise in the east and I'll still feed my toe nails to the dog. :roll: :evil: