Scan barcode
scottyreadsstuff's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.75
spav's review against another edition
4.0
A great quest to answer the question "Does the world embody beautiful ideas?".
Some chapters seemed messy, but picked up towards the end with great explanations of symmetry, the core theory and, specifically the Higgs field (perhaps one of the best explanations I have read of it)
Overall great book and very well layered for all different types of physics connoisseurs.
Some chapters seemed messy, but picked up towards the end with great explanations of symmetry, the core theory and, specifically the Higgs field (perhaps one of the best explanations I have read of it)
Overall great book and very well layered for all different types of physics connoisseurs.
ohhcomely's review against another edition
3.0
3.5/5. a lot more technical than i expected. He is pretty good at explaining the physics concepts in layman's terms but some things were still difficult to understand.
claytell's review against another edition
4.0
This is a hard science read. But… very well done. There were moments where I would be like just going to skim read here. Then I would be caught by another piece to the questions answer and find myself reading each word.
The plates were a great touch. So if anyone listens be sure to find yourself a copy to refer back to. I don’t think I would have enjoyed listening as much as I did reading.
I already had my answer formulated before reading. And even though I likely will not be ever at a level to espouse the justifications of Wilczek it is nice to have more confirmation. Especially in 2022, with all the nonsense happening in the world …
The plates were a great touch. So if anyone listens be sure to find yourself a copy to refer back to. I don’t think I would have enjoyed listening as much as I did reading.
I already had my answer formulated before reading. And even though I likely will not be ever at a level to espouse the justifications of Wilczek it is nice to have more confirmation. Especially in 2022, with all the nonsense happening in the world …
gsheffy's review against another edition
[only read pages 1-208 for class]
It’s a history of great physicists. Probably meant more for people who already have a background in it. I appreciated the integration of literary and philosophical texts, but felt that the discussion of beauty (in this section) was lackluster.
It’s a history of great physicists. Probably meant more for people who already have a background in it. I appreciated the integration of literary and philosophical texts, but felt that the discussion of beauty (in this section) was lackluster.
jkowski's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
gubz's review against another edition
5.0
A reread of my favorite science book. This book was so impactful, it lead me to change my major and career path. It’s one you have to really sit with to digest the concepts presented that show how the universe embodies beautiful ideas through the laws of physics, mathematics, and chemistry.
royvdb's review against another edition
4.0
40% I didn't understand
30% I've allready forgotten
20% I'll never use in my life
8% might be outdated in a few years.
But man, that 2% is going to make me a hoot at a cocktail party. I can sound smart now!
But the Quote on the cover I have: "Inspiring and remarkably accessible" is fake news.
30% I've allready forgotten
20% I'll never use in my life
8% might be outdated in a few years.
But man, that 2% is going to make me a hoot at a cocktail party. I can sound smart now!
But the Quote on the cover I have: "Inspiring and remarkably accessible" is fake news.
emsemsems's review against another edition
4.0
‘Electrons are described by space-filling fields—their wave functions—which prefer to vary smoothly and gently. They settle into specific standing wave patterns, or “orbitals,” that find an optimal compromise between the attraction of nuclei and their natural wanderlust. I like to imagine electrons explaining themselves to nuclei this way:
“I find you attractive, but I need my space.”’
It is not as ‘meaty’ (in terms of the ‘science’/mathematical bits) as I would have liked/preferred, but it is surely a highly entertaining book; very engaging writing, for sure. Or as readers who prefer light-er reading of pop. science books would say, highly 'readable' (I cringe a little at the term, but it is so fitting). I’ve heard/read that his more recent publication, [b:Fundamentals: Ten Keys to Reality|53398908|Fundamentals Ten Keys to Reality|Frank Wilczek|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1606104694l/53398908._SY75_.jpg|80085680] is quite ‘good’ too. And having read this, I don’t doubt the rave reviews.
‘—Salvador Dalí used dodecahedral symbolism to express a cosmic connection that might otherwise be hard to put on canvas. We’ve also found a dodecahedron lurking within every one of the infinite variety of buckminsterfullerenes, where its twelve pentagons serve as enablers, allowing the hexagons of graphene to close up into a surface—The dodecahedron is a thing of beauty, and by now it’s become a familiar friend.’
‘To me, Caravaggio’s rendering conveys two profound messages that go beyond the words of the gospel’s text—Those who believe without seeing are blessed with the joy of certainty. But it is a fragile certainty, and a hollow joy—Those whose faith is not passive, but engages reality, will receive a second, more fulfilling blessing in the harmony of belief and experience. Blessed are those who believe what they see.’
‘Supersymmetry was (and is) a beautiful mathematical theory. The problem with applying supersymmetry is that it is too good for this world. It predicts new particles—lots of them. We have not seen, so far, the particles it predicts. We do not see, for example, particles with the same charge and mass as electrons, yet are bosons instead of fermions.’
‘Spontaneous symmetry breaking is a strategy for having our supersymmetric cake and eating it too. If we are successful, we can apply beautiful (supersymmetric) equations to describe a less beautiful (asymmetric—or should we say subsupersymmetric?) reality. Specifically, when an electron steps into the quantum dimension, its mass will change—At the frontiers of ignorance, applications of spontaneous symmetry breaking involve creative guesswork. You must guess a symmetry that isn’t visible in the world, put it into your equations, and show that the world—or, more realistically, some aspect of the world you’re trying to explain—pops out of its stable solutions.’
‘In beauty we trust, when making our theories, but their “cash value” depends on other factors. Truth is highly desirable, but it is not the only, or even the most important, criterion. Newton’s mechanics (centred on conservation of mass) and his theory of colours (centred on conservation of spectral types), for example, are not strictly true, yet they are hugely valuable theories. Fertility—a theory’s ability to predict new phenomena, and give us power over Nature—is also a big part of the equation.
Trust in beauty has often, in the past, paid off. Newton’s theory of gravity was challenged by the orbit of Uranus, which did not obey its predictions. Urbain Le Verrier, and also John Couch Adams, trusting in the beauty of the theory, were led to propose the existence of a new planet, not yet observed, whose influence might be responsible. Their calculations told astronomers where to look, and led to the discovery of Neptune.
Maxwell’s great synthesis, as we’ve seen, predicted new colours of light, invisible to our eyes, but also not yet observed. Trusting in the beauty of the theory, Hertz both produced and observed radio waves. In more recent times, Paul Dirac predicted, through a strange and beautiful equation, the existence of antiparticles, which had not yet been observed, but soon thereafter were. The Core, anchored in symmetry, gave us colour gluons, W and Z particles, the Higgs particle, the charmed quark, and the particles of the third family all as predictions prior to their observation.
But there have been failures too. Plato’s theory of atoms and Kepler’s model of the Solar System were beautiful theories that, as descriptions of Nature, utterly failed. Another was Kelvin’s theory of atoms, which proposed that they are knots of activity in the ether. (Knots come in different forms, and they are not easily undone, so they have, it might seem, the right stuff to make atoms.)
Those “failures” were not without fruit: Plato’s theory inspired deeper study of geometry and symmetry, Kepler’s model inspired his great career in astronomy, and Kelvin’s model inspired Peter Tait to develop the theory of mathematical knots, which remains a vibrant subject today—but as theories of the physical world they are hopelessly wrong.’
heidi_'s review against another edition
5.0
Does the world embody beautiful ideas? Absolutely.
Marvelous tour of fundamental physics concepts through the lens of intuitive harmony. I didn't realize the idealism inherent to so many scientific endeavors which deliberately attempt to simplify natural realities into symmetrical equations — this deeply human motivation is beauty in and of itself.
As someone who has struggled to conceptualize many of the concepts mentioned, I greatly appreciated having them broken down in layman's terms, strung together by overarching aesthetic principles. Wilczek's explanation of Core Theory (The Standard Model) in terms of yin and yang makes so much more sense to my abstract mind than a more concrete explanation ever could.
I became so engrossed in this centuries-long trial and error mission that by the final chapter on supersymmetry, I audibly gasped at the ramifications of such a unifying concept. Even if it is later shown to be empirically false, its fertility for further study will surely prove fruitful. What an exciting time to live through, when we are able to entertain the possibilities of a great unifying force underlying the structure of (nearly) all things. A sacred discovery is in the making!
I most enjoyed the sections which referenced subjectivity and complementarity, given how easily they can be applied beyond the realm of the natural sciences.
"[B]y understanding how the same scene can appear different, depending on the viewpoint from which it is perceived, we learn to separate the accidents of viewpoint from the properties of the thing itself. By treating subjectivity objectively, we master it."
Here, we have the perspective needed to fully grasp what our individual limitations do not allow, be they the vanishing point of a landscape or the intentions of someone we interact with. Wilczek routinely references the universality of his themes, concluding in the last pages, "complementarity is a wisdom we rediscover, and confirm, both in the physical world and beyond."
Thank you to On Being, the holy grail of podcasts, for bringing me to this refreshing read.
Marvelous tour of fundamental physics concepts through the lens of intuitive harmony. I didn't realize the idealism inherent to so many scientific endeavors which deliberately attempt to simplify natural realities into symmetrical equations — this deeply human motivation is beauty in and of itself.
As someone who has struggled to conceptualize many of the concepts mentioned, I greatly appreciated having them broken down in layman's terms, strung together by overarching aesthetic principles. Wilczek's explanation of Core Theory (The Standard Model) in terms of yin and yang makes so much more sense to my abstract mind than a more concrete explanation ever could.
I became so engrossed in this centuries-long trial and error mission that by the final chapter on supersymmetry, I audibly gasped at the ramifications of such a unifying concept. Even if it is later shown to be empirically false, its fertility for further study will surely prove fruitful. What an exciting time to live through, when we are able to entertain the possibilities of a great unifying force underlying the structure of (nearly) all things. A sacred discovery is in the making!
I most enjoyed the sections which referenced subjectivity and complementarity, given how easily they can be applied beyond the realm of the natural sciences.
"[B]y understanding how the same scene can appear different, depending on the viewpoint from which it is perceived, we learn to separate the accidents of viewpoint from the properties of the thing itself. By treating subjectivity objectively, we master it."
Here, we have the perspective needed to fully grasp what our individual limitations do not allow, be they the vanishing point of a landscape or the intentions of someone we interact with. Wilczek routinely references the universality of his themes, concluding in the last pages, "complementarity is a wisdom we rediscover, and confirm, both in the physical world and beyond."
Thank you to On Being, the holy grail of podcasts, for bringing me to this refreshing read.