Farewell to Reality: How Modern Physics Has Betrayed the Search for Scientific Truth. Jim Baggott. Pegasus, $ (p) ISBN. Two writers argue that modern science needs to get a grip on reality, rejecting ‘ timeless’ theories of the universe and the ‘fairytale’ physics of. It’s always good when a book of popular science has a clear line to argue, and Jim Baggott’s line is very clear indeed: modern physics has.
|Published (Last):||14 September 2009|
|PDF File Size:||11.44 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||14.82 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
He presents a clear and well written book.
This book provides a much-needed antidote. It begins, Smolin says, with the idea that nature is governed by eternal laws, such as Newton’s law of gravity: The math behind it may be elegant and self-consistent, but it’s just assumption piled upon assumption with no experimental evidence and no testable predictions. Maybe more importantly, this isn’t the point. I don’t completely agree with Reapity definition of science, too rigid for my tastes, but he does argue very well.
Therefore, it is “true. Trivia About Farewell to Reali Who am I kidding I’m never going to understand quantum physics.
A t an interdisciplinary gathering of academics discussing the concept of time, I once heard a scientist tell the assembled humanities scholars that physics can now replace all their woolly notions of time with one that is unique, precise and true. Such scientism is rightly undermined by theoretical physicist Lee Smolin in Time Rebornwhich shows that the scientific view of time is up for grabs more than ever before.
Order by newest oldest recommendations. As an experimentalist, I’ve always viewed various oddball experiments, exotic particle searches, and other more speculative analyses as basically harmless provided the authors at least do their math and statistics correctly harder than it sounds.
June 19, at 2: He does suggest that changes to those theories may help in their being accepted. For example, the cosmological constant, which determines the rate of the expansion of the universe, must have a small but positive value for observers like us to exist. His battles with other scientists.
Even further, I feel that having a richly-diverse experimental particle physics program is vital to science, because you can never be absolutely certain what kinds of experiments will turn out to be historically important until after the fact. Models with dozens of make them up as you need them unknowns are too often substituting for experiments, and too often the creation of a model is treated as a result and not a theorem.
The origin of mass. I’ve read it all.
To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. All, I think the PRL issue, which had nothing much to do with the book being discussed here, has now been convincingly beaten to death.
Time Reborn by Lee Smolin; Farewell to Reality by Jim Baggott – review
May be, people should just leave what is indeed more mathematics than theoretical physics compete for funding in mathematics? As a result I would skim the denser sections and read the summary sections where he would fit the technical discussion back into the premise, which is the physics that are popularized in the news and on TV are not actually within the bounds of science.
Therefore, faced with indissoluble difficulties of mathematics and conceptual design, might not the best method be to work following Feyerabend ‘against method’? Realith far, though, it’s completely unclear how it’s going to manage faerwell feat. I had the same reaction as Baggott when I read Susskind’s book: For every attempt to fix a problem in the standard model, it seems we multiply the free parameter space five-fold.
Have we entered the era of Post-Empirical Science? Until then, hidden dimensions represent an assumption within a layer of the theoretical rality.
Time Reborn by Lee Smolin; Farewell to Reality by Jim Baggott – review | Books | The Guardian
But now and then the balance tips too far towards the cost side for said folk to tolerate happily, and sports players, artists, writers etc. About quantum gravity I discuss why it’s not a question of aesthetics.
Lee Smolin thinks he has found a possible answer in his latest book “Time Reborn” and the hint is in the title, but Baggott is very clear that his book will not provide many answers to the questions it poses. I’ve read some books on physics where the authors themselves offered more volume and more detail of critique to their own work.
In this scenario, not only is time real, but the laws of physics must themselves change over time. Or is it that, as usual, popular science writers are not accurately characterizing the speculative nature of certain theories, jumping into philosophy way ahead of empirical evidence?
My take is that Baggott gets it just right. All this is very upseting, and in some way the theoretical physicist are rather confussed and lost, and gives way to wishful thinking and speculations in a supreme effort for surpass the theoretical frame of the standard model towards a succesful theory of everything ,unifiying the fundamental forces And it is posible that with the present colliders no new physics appears,then except a pure thought discovery by a genius as Einstein we will be in trouble.
Careful reading of this section should convey the impression that this is all speculative theorizing.