Editorial Review

From Susan Casey, bestselling author of The Devil’s Teeth, an astonishing book about colossal,  ship-swallowing rogue waves and the surfers who seek them out.

For centuries, mariners have spun tales of gargantuan waves, 100-feet high or taller. Until recently scientists dis­missed these stories—waves that high would seem to violate the laws of physics. But in the past few decades, as a startling number of ships vanished and new evidence has emerged, oceanographers realized something scary was brewing in the planet’s waters. They found their proof in February 2000, when a British research vessel was trapped in a vortex of impossibly mammoth waves in the North Sea—including several that approached 100 feet.

As scientists scramble to understand this phenomenon, others view the giant waves as the ultimate challenge. These are extreme surfers who fly around the world trying to ride the ocean’s most destructive monsters. The pioneer of extreme surfing is the legendary Laird Hamilton, who, with a group of friends in Hawaii, figured out how to board suicidally large waves of 70 and 80 feet. Casey follows this unique tribe of peo­ple as they seek to conquer the holy grail of their sport, a 100­-foot wave.

In this mesmerizing account, the exploits of Hamilton and his fellow surfers are juxtaposed against scientists’ urgent efforts to understand the destructive powers of waves—from the tsunami that wiped out 250,000 people in the Pacific in 2004 to the 1,740-foot-wave that recently leveled part of the Alaskan coast.

Like Jon Krakauer’s Into Thin Air, The Wave brilliantly portrays human beings confronting nature at its most ferocious. ... Read more

Reviews

The Discovery Channel meets ESPN, September 2, 2010

Well written ultra press release for The Laird...Ultimate Wave Guy (TM), September 5, 2010

she's not one of the boys yet, October 22, 2010
the book begins excitingly - susan casey is a tour de force when it comes to research. she knows her subject and does all the homework, ranging over continents to talk to sources in science and industry and sport. she obviously has money, because she spares nothing in expense. she also has an amazing ability to bring esoteric concepts to life by translating the phenomenon of these giant waves into little images and analogies that the reader can relate to - she writes vibrant, muscular prose. what disappointed me: when she finally gets to the big waves and big wave surfers, that boldness seems to dissipate. and she writes like a schoolgirl with a crush on things like laird's hamilton's muscles. no longer the intrepid adventurer, she writes about quivering with fear and nervousness at actually going out with the surfers to the wave break-- but in the flank of it, where all the boats and skis sit, the safe zone. she has a tin ear for her own dialogue - her questions seem to be suddenly a whole 6 octaves stupider, focused on feelings and "how do you feel" questions to men she's already characterized as not much for excess words. women surfers appear almost nowhere in the book. the more it annoyed me, the more i began to see casey as just another goggle-eyed chick in a bikini, and i was disappointed because her book began with such a dramatic crackle of energy. when i researched around and read on laird's website that she made a financial deal to pay for access to his world, i felt even more disappointed.

so i went back to read her first book, about great white sharks. same tendencies. amazing writing, with the same snap crackle pop of good prose. prodigious research, and capacious funds to undertake it. and yet somehow in the middle of the book she becomes all thumbs - afraid to jump from a sailboat to a dinghy, afraid to bait a fishhook, afraid of the dark, afraid of ghosts. afraid her expensive underwear will get taken by a storm. pointing out that she feels sexy wearing fashion rugged gear in the company of men. once again she never really mentions the women interns who are actually living at the farralones - who actually deal every day with the things she finds overwhelming as a visitor. they're there, but the experiences she focuses on are her own, not the experiences of those with more mileage and qualifications under their sexy belts. when a shark researcher shows up (and yes, he's handsome!!! picture included!!) she admires his muscular forearms but seems vague about what he actually does. they go to the aquarium together at the end. meanwhile she manages to lose a sailboat, set off government inquisitions and insurance claims, break federal regulations, and get one of the top research scientists fired from his job, with not so much as a fare-thee-well of regret for being the cause of so much trouble.

i look forward to the day when casey goes through the teeth of an experience and develops a little stamina and endurance of her own. so far both her books are based on having watched specials produced by others on tv - which means it's a recycled experience, more or less. someone else pointed the way, and she picked up well on the clues, but the path was already given. and she comes across as an amazing woman who still gets self-conscious and intimidated being in the world of rugged men. her claim to fame is access, not achievement. she has too much talent to waste on schoolgirl crushes. the best adventure journalists of our time don't just get their la perla underwear dirty - they write having already gone through transforming adventures of their own.

apologies to all concerned. as a woman writing and working in the world of men, i took these observations as a cautionary tale about tone. and tone-deafness. and being naive instead of weatherbeaten.

Waves Are Not Measured In Feet Or Inches But In Increments Of Fear, September 9, 2010

More the book about and from a extreme surfer groupie..., December 1, 2010
...than a book about waves! Susan Casey is obviously fascinated by extreme surfers and spends most of the book on them, their close calls, their family life etc... Now, granted that it is a fascinating life but despite her breathless prose, one does not really get the scale of what these guys are doing: maybe a video of them riding those monsters and talking about would do more justice to their accomplishments. But, in all that, what I had bought the book for, thinking on the basis of early reviews that it would be dealing with the forces creating these monster waves, was basically lost even when eventually she talked to scientists, drawing out of them more their personal experiences than the science of it. A more accurate title would be something like "In pursuit of the ultimate ride"

Surf's UP!!!!!, November 12, 2010
An incredible account of nature in all her unsettled splendor. I was thoroughly caught up in the telling of how the oceans spawn monstrous waves which are both awesome to behold and at the same time can be devastating to people, ships, and the land.

Ms. Casey wrote a wonderful book based on scientific evidence and personal accounts from many people who study, live and play on the world's oceans.

Imagine surfing on a 70ft wall of water. Too hard to imagine? Look up at a 7 or 8 story building, then stand next to it and look straight up. That's where the surfer drops into the moving wave of energy. Can you feel it?

Photos of ships being pummeled by giant waves; of the devastation left behind when monster waves hit land; and of the very brave people who surf these giants are included.

I love this book! I grew up on the east coast and remember some very large waves that hit beaches during stormy weather. The waves described in the book far outweigh my experiences.

A must read for anyone who thinks about global warming, and how weather is dynamically changing the very face of the oceans.

The ocean is full of unpredictable forces and characters too, December 14, 2010
Here we are presented with a concept book that attempts to hold various subjects, incidents and characters together around one unifying piece of information. That the ocean is full of unpredictable forces that create huge waves, some as high at 100 feet. We join the crew and scientist aboard the RRS Discovery in the North Sea as it is hurled about for days. We attend scientific workshops where mathematicians try and study waves. Find out climate change is going to make the oceans even more unpredictable. We learn two large ships sink each week on average (worldwide) and no one ever studies the cause as we do with airplanes that crash. Their disappearance is simply recorded as the results of "bad weather". Susan Casey then layers on top of this what I found to be the complete idiocy of big wave tow surfing with Laird Hamilton of Maui as the main character we are to identify with. He is sort of the Spiderman of surfing. He and his buddies (in conjunction with the surfing industry who at one point offer $100,000 to the first person who successfully rides a 100 foot wave) risk life (several surfers deaths are covered in the narrative) to just get the rush of the big wave. And interestingly enough it does not count if it is not filmed so we also meet an incredible group of surf photographers. So you mix all this into the stew and bounce around a lot and you find yourself loving and hating the book.
For me reading is much the joy of learning things you never knew or would know if you had not read a given book. And there is lots to learn in THE WAVE about the ocean and the phenomena of big waves and I doubt many people have heard of the sport of tow surfing or how one goes about doing it. Or that the biggest waves to surf are found some 100 miles off the coast of San Diego in some 6 foot deep water which covers the tops of a huge mountain range, an area called the Cortes Bank. So the book has much to offer. What seems wrong is its balance. The surfers, especially the hero worship of Laird Hamilton gets old after a while. Does Susan Casey ever think Laird's actions as a father with a family are a bit irresponsible no matter his skill and Zen like personality? Is he really a wave whisperer with no warts?
The interesting character for me at the end of the book is Laird's buddy Brett Lickle who having suffered a major injury which left his left leg with a scar that was "though his entire calf had been melted" (and have being saved by Laird Hamilton) stands on a cliff watching his friends challenge the latest Maui big waves. Lickle made it clear that he no longer misses "the circus, the jeopardy, the nerves" by saying, "The only thing I'll say is that the accident was a kind of ticket out, you know what I mean? What we had was a gang. And you couldn't get out of the gang. There was no way out. There's so much peer pressure like, `come on, you're the man! Let's go!' You can't just walk away because.....you can't. But if you get shot up and almost die, they let you out." For the surfers the big waves are a personal challenge and thrill like climbing a mountain. For the scientist and ships crews the waves are something to respect and fear.
If the subject interests you which I am betting it does I believe you will enjoy the book although I found it very uneven and is a bit to hero worshiping in its promotion of the tow surfing culture.

Scientists, ships and lots of surfing, October 1, 2010
Susan Casey is a captivating writer. Somehow she is able to take the concept of something as comparatively non-threatening as waves and spin it into an interesting tale, highlighting how wrong I was about the pretty waves breaking on the beach.

Casey interviews mariners, Lloyd's of London reps, physicists, and--primarily--surfers about their experiences with and predictions for a huuge wave, dude. The science is a little glossed over but I suspect that it would be difficult to go into wave physics in more depth without the reader glazing over. I really did enjoy the section about Lloyd's of London and their history in insuring ships (and Tina Turner's legs, of course).

The major problem with Casey's approach is I think she got a bit too caught up in the surfing scene. For each original section where she talked to a scientists about their dire predictions for the potential destructivenss of waves, or someone on a ship who had been caught in a wave, etc., she intersperses it with a scene about another wave-chasing day with the surfers, and it got a bit repetitive by the end of the book. I don't know, I think I would have admired the surfers more had I actually known a little less about them by the time the book was over. Anyway, this flaw wasn't enough to drop it to 3 stars. I learned a fair bit about surfing, and I finished the book in awe of the giant waves that could pay us a visit any time they like.

Radical brah, September 27, 2010
My surfing experience is limited to boogie boarding in San Diego when I was 22, but I had many surfing dreams for about a year after that. Whatever it is, it is powerful. Still, like many others I expected less surfers and a little more exploration into others who deal or have dealt with massive waves, but I still enjoyed the book.

More Stories than Science of Waves, but Conveys Their Beauty and Destructive Power., September 2, 2010

Editorial Review

THE FIRST MAJOR WORK IN NEARLY A DECADE BY ONE OF THE WORLD’S GREAT THINKERS—A MARVELOUSLY CONCISE BOOK WITH NEW ANSWERS TO THE ULTIMATE QUESTIONS OF LIFE
 
When and how did the universe begin? Why are we here? Why is there something rather than nothing? What is the nature of reality? Why are the laws of nature so finely tuned as to allow for the existence of beings like ourselves? And, finally, is the apparent “grand design” of our universe evidence of a benevolent creator who set things in motion—or does science offer another explanation?

The most fundamental questions about the origins of the universe and of life itself, once the province of philosophy, now occupy the territory where scientists, philosophers, and theologians meet—if only to disagree. In their new book, Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow present the most recent scientific thinking about the mysteries of the universe, in nontechnical language marked by both brilliance and simplicity.

In The Grand Design they explain that according to quantum theory, the cosmos does not have just a single existence or history, but rather that every possible history of the universe exists simultaneously. When applied to the universe as a whole, this idea calls into question the very notion of cause and effect. But the “top-down” approach to cosmology that Hawking and

Mlodinow describe would say that the fact that the past takes no definite form means that we create history by observing it, rather than that history creates us. The authors further explain that we ourselves are the product of quantum fluctuations in the very early universe, and show how quantum theory predicts the “multiverse”—the idea that ours is just one of many universes that appeared spontaneously out of nothing, each with different laws of nature.

Along the way Hawking and Mlodinow question the conventional concept of reality, posing a “model-dependent” theory of reality as the best we can hope to find. And they conclude with a riveting assessment of M-theory, an explanation of the laws governing us and our universe that is currently the only viable candidate for a complete “theory of everything.” If confirmed, they write, it will be the unified theory that Einstein was looking for, and the ultimate triumph of human reason.

A succinct, startling, and lavishly illustrated guide to discoveries that are altering our understanding and threatening some of our most cherished belief systems, The Grand Design is a book that will inform—and provoke—like no other. ... Read more

Reviews

A very interesting book., August 23, 2010

Modern physics simplified, August 26, 2010

Excellent overview of contemporary cosmology and physics, August 24, 2010

Very Disapponting to a Fan of Hawking and Mlodinow, September 12, 2010
This is one of the prettiest books that has come across my desk in a long time: well-bound, slick paper, gorgeous pictures. All in all, it is an excellent example of the book-maker's art. Unfortunately, the actual text is so slight that I was disappointed from cover to index.

My first disappointment was right on the cover. I understand that Stephen Hawking is a world famous scientist (and one whom I admire) but was he the primary writer of the text? I hope so, because why else does Leonard Mlodinow have his name in one-third the font size? Mlodinow's book on geometry (Euclid's Window) is a truly great book while Hawking's books, though interesting, are not nearly as well written. I understand that this likely has much to do with marketing but I'm always put off by "ghostwriting."

Then there's the fact that we're being fooled into thinking this is a full-sized hardcover when, in fact, at normal font size and spacing, this book would be a third of its size. Essentially, it is nothing more than a longish essay. As a teacher, I couldn't help but be reminded of students who play around with font size, spacing, and picture inserts to try to appear to reach the required length of an assignment. Disappointing.

Most importantly, however, is the fact that the argument these two highly intelligent men are trying to make is simply unconvincing. Joining the ranks of scientists out to convince everyone that there is no need for god, they are arguing that "M-theory is the only candidate for a complete theory of the universe" which means (among other things) that there are multiple universes that can spontaneously generate from nothing. Beyond that fact that I'm always cautious when any scientist proclaims absolutes and predicts the end of science, as this has happened as often as pastors predicting the end of the world with the same result, there's not enough depth to their development here to make their sweeping conclusions plausible.

In fact, I couldn't help feeling that this was something of an exercise in ego. That Hawking, in particular, is relying on the power of his fame to be convincing rather than the power of his argument. This book simply isn't detailed enough to be a fully-formed argument. I have a degree in physics, know its history, am familiar with Feynman's work, and understand the basics of string theory, but I couldn't see how someone without this kind of background would be able to follow much of this. I don't feel I came away with a clear view of what they were trying to say.

Still, they deserve credit for promoting their atheism without being strident or condescending to believers, and there are some interesting things here. I like some of the history, particularly in the early parts of the book. I like the hints at the difference between model-independent and model-dependent theories, though I thought they could have made more of this. I like the description of the "Game of Life" and what it might mean for the development of a "universe" based on a set of simple rules, though this seems to contradict the main assertion of the book, that an entire sequence of complicated theories is necessary to describe the universe.

In the end, however, it suffers from the same problem as many books of this type. In its most important conclusions, it is all speculation masquerading as certainty. I don't mind speculation, and Hawking and Mlodinow may turn out to be perfectly correct in many or all of their conclusions. But I think the door is a long way from being closed on the debate here, and this book didn't bring me any closer to being convinced.

Expected much more from such elite minds, October 18, 2010
The media hype is just that--hype. The Grand Design is a very disappointing performance by these elite minds. I expected much more substance from these authors. The essence of their thesis is covered in the final three chapters, a thesis weakly argued with unclear logic and minimal substantiation. I think a more authentic forum would have been an essay in Reader's Digest or Time Magazine.

The authors seek to answer three philosophical/religious questions, seeming to assert that physicists are the new priests with physics as the new religion, because "philosophy is dead". Their modality is application of the suppositions (unproven ideas) of theoretical physics to arrive at a conclusion that M-theory can prove the universe spontaneously erupted from nothing and if proved "will be a model of the universe that creates itself." If the critics of "psi" accept these authors' example of argument I will lose faith in the critics' objectivity when it comes to their evaluation of theories on paranormal phenomenon.

There is little that is new here. Proposing M-Theory as the basis for describing the origin of the universe is certainly not a new idea. Arguing for M-Theory describing a universe's spontaneous generation from nothing is a new proposal in the world of cosmology--but not for the realm of non-Greek based philosophy. Thousands of years ago the Taoist described the universe as self generated from nothing. It's nice to see cosmology is catching up to thousands-of-years-old philosophy, contrary to the authors' opposing assertion in their opening remarks.

I will grant the book will stir thought and argument, which may be the authors' primary goal, since after 30 years of effort string theory /M-theory is wallowing in a quagmire due to its failure to simplify into the grand design. The authors' assert that the disjointed complexity of the M-theory is as good as it gets, just compromise and don't waste any more time on trying to make it better--it is already The Grand Design. Hmmmmm, what was the basis of that argument again?

I hope the authors will take on the rigor of producing a mathematical model, derived from current work that has some validation from Cosmic Ray Background measurements to demonstrate their conclusions. That will at least, allow others to check their work and bring authenticity to the proposal. Maybe they've done that work and neglected to mention it--one can only hope?

I for one, as a professional physicist and engineer, am not convinced by their arguments and do not see that they answered the three philosophical questions proposed in the first chapter. By the end of reading the second chapter I added a fourth question...should cosmologist attempt to become philosophers?

Welcoming your responses,
Bob Lindberg

Not Hawking's best, September 25, 2010
While there is beginning to be a build up of negative reviews for this book, I want to preface my review by saying that Dr. Hawking is still one of the top players in his field and that his views hold considerable weight given his track record. That being said, I found this book to mirror what most of the reviews have already noted. Nothing new is presented here that wasn't already said in Hawking's earlier book A Brief History of Time. Hawking begins the book by saying that philosophy is dead and that scientists must answer the tough questions about life....then launches into philosophy for a good part of the book. While Hawking has done much work with quantum mechanics, there are reasons to be skeptical of his conclusions given what other prominent people in his field have to say and the current state of knowns and unknowns about quantum mechanics. The best I can say is that the book is interesting at times but highly speculative and the conclusions drawn are questionable. I would suggest reading Roger Penrose's review of the book to get an idea of what his colleagues (Penrose is certainly of the same stature as Hawking, just not as much of a name outside of the scientific field) had to say. Hawking so far as I know, has not really responded to some of the challenges from those within his community.

Conclusion: Don't buy the book unless you're a really big Hawking fan or are doing research on the subject and want Hawking's thoughts on quantum mechanics and scientific determinism. The book is rather short and can be read in just a few days. Perhaps there was a letdown because people expected more from a Stephen Hawking book ( I may be guilty of this )but it feels like Hawking is going over familiar territory and did not do enough to substantiate his position on the subject. Regardless of your feelings about Hawking's atheistic conclusions I would say that theists, agnostics, and atheists alike will not find the challenging, cutting edge book that many had hope for or expected.

Something out of nothing, September 10, 2010
Disappointing. I read the book in just a few hours - it is definitely lightweight reading. Most of the book is, as others have noted, a review of introductory modern physics, but not with much depth. I too was stunned at the ending which sort of pulled a rabbit out of a hat with "Bodies such as stars or black holes cannot appear out of nothing. But a whole universe can." It may well be that M-theory leads to that, but I didn't feel prepared at all for that leap. The missing preparation is the book's problem for me.

A Worthy Successor to A Brief History of Time, September 2, 2010

A popularized science book that offers little science, September 8, 2010

Hawking at his Snarky Best, September 2, 2010

Editorial Review

The 21st Century Physics FlexBook is a collaborative effort of the Secretaries of Education and Technology and the Department of Education that seeks to elevate the quality of physics instruction across the Commonwealth of Virginia. ... Read more

Reviews

A Good Supplementary Physics Textbook, October 28, 2010
I am a college physics professor, and I am always interested in new pedagogical texts and tools that will help me with my instruction. This is by and large a very approachable and well presented introductory Physics textbook, although it is presented in a somewhat nontraditional way. It is written with an high school student or beginning college student in mind, and it is not Calculus based. The textbook consists of eleven chapters. The first eight deal with contemporary topics of theory and applications, including gravitation, nuclear and particle physics, nanoscience, and the current technologies used for medical imaging and visual display. The final three chapters focus on laboratory work employing state-of-the-art equipment and the rapidly modeling field of modeling and simulation. Unlike most traditional textbooks, this textbook is comprised of a collection of chapters each of which reads like and independent essay. Each one of them was written by a different author, and each reflects an individual's unique voice.

Each chapter ends with a several questions, most of which are not quantitative. In fact, this is not a very quantitatively oriented textbook, and would probably not be suitable as the primary textbook in most curricula. However, it is a very interesting book in its own right and makes great supplementary material.

There are many illustrations throughout the textbook, and they are generally of fairly good quality and on the average probably better than in most other CK-12 textbooks.

This book is available under the Creative Commons License through the CK-12 foundation, which means it can be reprinted, modified and resold if necessary. It is also a fairly large file, pdf version being about 450 pages long, so be prepared for a longish download.

The Kindle formatting of this textbook leaves something to be desired. The book was originally typeset in LaTeX, and this did not translate all that smoothly into the Kindle format. I've found that getting this textbook on other e-readers or computers in the epub format rendered it much more satisfactorily.

This is not the flashiest textbook that you will come across, but in my opinion it gets the job done.
... Read more

Editorial Review

The best-selling author of Stiff and Bonk explores the irresistibly strange universe of space travel and life without gravity.Space is a world devoid of the things we need to live and thrive: air, gravity, hot showers, fresh produce, privacy, beer. Space exploration is in some ways an exploration of what it means to be human. How much can a person give up? How much weirdness can they take? What happens to you when you can’t walk for a year? have sex? smell flowers? What happens if you vomit in your helmet during a space walk? Is it possible for the human body to survive a bailout at 17,000 miles per hour? To answer these questions, space agencies set up all manner of quizzical and startlingly bizarre space simulations. As Mary Roach discovers, it’s possible to preview space without ever leaving Earth. From the space shuttle training toilet to a crash test of NASA’s new space capsule (cadaver filling in for astronaut), Roach takes us on a surreally entertaining trip into the science of life in space and space on Earth. ... Read more

Reviews

"To the rocket scientist, you are a problem.", July 31, 2010
It seems like a previous life: the mid-1980s and NASA's program to send the first American "civilian" into space. I was interested, then sidelined when applications were restricted to teachers, then stunned by Challenger's launch disaster. But now I'm delighted to get a sort of ride-along with the clever and uber-curious Mary Roach in PACKING FOR MARS.

She begins: "To the rocket scientist, you are a problem. You are the most irritating piece of machinery he or she will ever have to deal with." And then she dives in to explore that human machinery in space and how everything -- procedures, equipment and supplies -- is designed to best serve it.

Through examples from animal simulations and crash-test cadavers, the race-for-space/ shuttle/ space-station projects, and planning Mars-length missions, she examines astronaut selection; the effects of isolation, inactivity and cramped spaces; the spectrum from weightlessness to multiple g-forces; eating, eliminating, and hygiene; and ... well, enough with the listmaking; it hints at dull and anyone who's read Roach knows she doesn't do dull. Instead, she mines excellent and surprising facts about physics and biology -- and what most captures me is her practicality, for example this from a passage about religious observations aboard the international space station: "Zero gravity and a ninety-minute orbital day created so many questions for Muslim astronauts that a [guideline] was drafted. Rather than require [them] to pray five times during each ninety-minute orbit of Earth, they were allowed to go by the twenty-four-hour cycle of the launch location." How to stay oriented toward Mecca at such speed and prostrate oneself in weightlessness are also addressed.

I loved Roach's Stiff, but Spook -- not as much, so skipped Bonk (until now, maybe). She's a front-and-center kind of narrator, a participant even, and Spook seemed too much about her. Here, she's back in terrific Stiff form -- (wo)manning the audio and video for us like a TV news crew, giving just an occasional glimpse of her metaphoric microphone to remind us she's there. Though she isn't a slave to structure and linearity, there's a satisfying organization of her material into chapters here. And all of her interesting-but-off-topic segues? -- they're here too, in a hundred witty footnotes. She also references dozens of space-travel articles, histories, biographies and memoirs and lists them in a bibliography. Highly recommended.

Mary Roach hits another Home Run for Weird Science, August 4, 2010
As I suspected, Mary Roach's new book is rocketing (pun intended) up the best-seller list. She has once again focused her splendid sense of humor on the weird aspects of science to reveal the most human dimensions of preparing for space exploration.

I had always been frustrated with NASA's stopping at the moon. "Let's go on to Mars," I would say. "What are you waiting for?"
Mary Roach points out that human biology, sociology, and psychology are the weak links in the chain. The engineering is in place. People are the problem. And these problems are the ones no one much talks about in polite company. What do you do with all the pee? How do you keep from hating the guy or gal next to you when they reek of B.O.? How do you remain sane for nearly two years cramped into a space the size of a small SUV, with all sun and no stars to keep you company?

Mary Roach tells us that there are people uniquely, biologically qualified for such a journey. Evidently the ideal astronaut could well be an African-American who is deaf. This would help with loss of bone density and with not tossing your cookies in space.
These are some of the strange quirks of nature she turns up, which has become her trademark. She asks the questions that few have the audacity to ask, and she asks them of people who generally would not talk, on the record, about such things. I have a feeling that the book might be beautifully accompanied by videos of the astonished faces of her interviewees, trying to cope with questions they have never had to field before.

This is a delightful read. Mary Roach will entertain you and keep you laughing out loud and she maintains your sense of wonder about space. In the end, you will want us to go to Mars more than ever because it represents a conquering of our biological limits even as we conquer our little corner of the cosmos.

Can man really make this trip? With a big suitcase...., August 4, 2010
Packing for Mars: The Curious Science of Life in the Void by Mary Roach is a must read for any of us that are curious about space exploration and what it would be like to live in the "void". This is my first Mary Roach book and I can already tell that I'm going to have to take a long look at her backlist, especially Stiff.

I know that most space exploration advocates have been completely frustrated by our lack of progress in colonizing space after the Apollo moon missions, especially the hold up on the trip to Mars. The issue isn't technology, as Roach points out, but the frailty of the human animal. Packing for Mars is a wake up call and a realistic look at what it would take to make that trip: food, social issues, psychological issues, and just the basic "how do you handle the lack of.....?." What does happen to a human who is deprived of familiar earth environments for a long period of time? What do you do with human waste on long trips? Do we really have to drink pee (recycled of course)? What's the impact of not being able to stand or run for more than a year? What is "fecal popcorning"? And on and on.

Packing for Mars isn't a comedy, but there are moments of absolute humor in this read.

Well researched, well written, and terribly interesting Packing for Mars is a terrific read, especially for us space program fanatics and amateur astronomers.

I highly recommend.

The Wonderfully Entertaining Underside of Exoplanetary Whatever, September 15, 2010

Enjoyable but not outstanding, September 1, 2010
In many ways I really like Mary Roach's Packing for Mars. It's an extraordinarily inventive approach at space travel and our space program. When the book is good, it's really good. The book is at its best when it looks at how the absolute mundane parts of being alive translate when taken into a zero gravity environment. But the book sometimes veers off course (especially in many of the footnotes) and at times becomes a little to cleaver for its own good.

Packing for Mars is a perfect beach read - it's light, engaging and often funny, but it wasn't strong enough to make me want to run out and recommend it to friends. It's the kind of book that would be ideal to pick up when it comes out in paperback to read on a long plane ride or on a beach trip.

...And take this with you on the trip!, August 25, 2010

Lets Go To Mars, August 14, 2010
Packing For Mars is the first book by Mary Roach that I've read, but it won't be the last. I judged it by the cover and I'm glad I did. It's rare to find a book that's interesting and educational, and at the same time really funny. This book is that and more.

The truth is usually stranger than fiction, and the story of our reach for the stars is no exception. Humans are not designed to live and work in outer space and the challenges that this presents are numerous. Packing For Mars goes behind the scenes of space exploration to meet the people who make it possible.

You can tell Mrs. Roach did her homework. She talks with everyone from the astronauts to the guy who designs the space toilets. She goes to the training facilities and test labs to see what types of crazy and amazing things people are doing for science. She also uncovers lots of the little noted but fascinating details.

It's a great story but what makes Packing For Mars even better is that it's so funny. Mrs. Roach has a terrific sense of humor and this book will make you laugh, out loud, many times.

Droning and monotone., September 13, 2010

100% educational, 100% entertaining and 100% hilarious!, September 15, 2010
The ability to land a spacecraft on Mars is old hat. As a matter of fact, the technology, although it was and remains prohibitively expensive, existed over thirty years ago. The real impediment, indeed, the only impediment to manned space travel to Mars is man himself.

In PACKING FOR MARS, an inexhaustibly curious, incorrigibly irreverent and perennially humorous Mary Roach explores the myriad issues and problems that the biological package known as "man" presents to space travel. It is no exaggeration to suggest that preparation for long term survival in low gravity and extended confinement in extremely close quarters touches on virtually every aspect of man's life - biology, culture, morality, sexuality, psychology, politics, leisure, health, hygiene and even religious practice.

Although the scientific content of PACKING FOR MARS is 100% real and informative, Mary Roach's approach to the topic is light-hearted and, from cover to cover, tongue in cheek and 100% hilarious and utterly entertaining. With the practical problems of zero-gravity defecation and the logistical problem of what to do with the results of any successful elimination being very near the top of the list of engineering conundrums, it's probably not a big surprise to let a potential reader know that scatological humour runs rampant throughout the book. Tears of laughter positively streamed from my eyes as I learned, for example, that the gas volume and the speed of expulsion of even the most flatulent person conceivable would not be sufficient to propel him or her across the room in a zero-gravity situation (Note to self - watch for a potential future MYTHBUSTERS episode!)

PACKING FOR MARS ends with the acknowledgement that pure research on Mars is probably best conducted by robots, computers and pure hardware technology without benefit of man's presence. But, she also pleads the case that, since governments are so prone to fritter away vast sums of money on unproductive and entirely wasteful projects anyway, perhaps it may actually be prudent to plan some frivolous spending on a manned Mars landing. After all, you never know what may come of it!

PACKING FOR MARS is highly recommended with the comment that, aside from being thoroughly entertaining and wonderfully educational, it undoubtedly makes my Top 10 list of the funniest books I've ever read. How can you go wrong with a combination like that?

Paul Weiss

Entertainingly lacking, October 4, 2010
In the last few pages of "Packing for Mars," Mary Roach displays a touch of passion in making the case for a manned trip to Mars. Sadly, in the preceding 300+ pages, passion was kept firmly in check in favor of a random set of anecdotes. The anecdotes, by themselves, can be quite good, but I'm left wanting the story that hasn't actually been offered.

Billed as an uproarious trip into the world of space travel, I was hoping to get "In the Shadow of the Moon" with a funny edge. Maybe the reverential Alan Bean meets Mr Bean. PfM is often funny, although not side-splittingly so (my kids were, however, in stitches at a turd floating around the Apollo 10 capsule). As a comedy, though, the author's writing style wears you out with repetition in the form of all-too-frequent overreach; trying to squeeze out one crass metaphor too many just because she could. Good comedy writers know when to pause, Ms Roach does not (Deke's 1-star review is spot-on in describing how the humor reads).

2 stars for some good snippets - many of which the average reader will not have known about previously - in what can only be described as a random collection of anecdotes aimlessly delivered. By the time Ms Roach sets her sights on making the case for a manned Mars shot, we no longer care.

Frequently entertaining, but not a memorable read I'd recommend to others. ... Read more

Editorial Review

The People's Physics Book is intended to be used as one small part of a multifaceted strategy to teach physics conceptually and mathematically. ... Read more

Reviews

A Decent Introductory Physics Textbook, October 27, 2010
I am a college Physics professor, and I am always interested in new pedagogical texts and tools that will help me with my instruction. This is by and large a very approachable and well presented introductory Physics textbook. It is written with an advanced high school student or beginning college student in mind, and it is not Calculus based. It starts with some basic concepts, such as measuring units, scalar and vector quantities, and problem solving and setup skills. However, right after this introductory general chapter it jumps all the way to introduce somewhat advanced concept of energy. I sympathize with the idea that on a very fundamental level energy is perhaps the most fundamental concept in all of Physics, but from a pedagogical point of view this is a rather odd choice of an introductory topic.

After the second chapter, however, the topics return to the traditional canonical sequence: linear motion, acceleration, Newton's laws, linear and angular momentum, etc. and then it continues into other branches of Physics such as Thermodynamics, Electromagnetism, etc. In fact, this textbook aims to be a comprehensive textbook on almost all major areas of Physics, including some modern topics such as Quantum Mechanics, Relativity, and Particle Physics. It also includes a final chapter on "Physics of Global Warming." I am highly skeptical that such a complex and interdisciplinary topic can be done justice in a one chapter of a very introductory Physics textbook, and should probably be handled in a separate stand-alone class.

There are many illustrations throughout the textbook, and they are generally of fairly good quality and on the average probably better than in most other CK-12 textbooks.

The material is presented in a very straightforward manner and it is very easy to follow. There are multiple worked-out examples throughout the text, and each section ends with a several problems and select solutions for some of them. The problems vary in difficulty, and many are designed with practical applications in mind. Unfortunately, the book does not emphasize the use of scientific calculator or a computer in working out of some of the problems. Today more and more scientific work is heavily reliant on computational devices, and would be advisable to introduce such methods as early as possible in the Physics curriculum.

This book is available under the Creative Commons License through the CK-12 foundation, which means it can be reprinted, modified and resold if necessary. It is also a fairly large file, pdf version being almost 600 pages long, so be prepared for a longish download.

The Kindle formatting of this textbook leaves something to be desired. The book was originally typeset in LaTeX, and this did not translate all that smoothly into the Kindle format. I've found that getting this textbook on other e-readers or computers in the epub format rendered it much more satisfactorily.

This is not the flashiest textbook that you will come across, but in my opinion it gets the job done.
... Read more

Editorial Review

The solar system most of us grew up with included nine planets, with Mercury closest to the sun and Pluto at the outer edge. Then, in 2005, astronomer Mike Brown made the discovery of a lifetime: a tenth planet, Eris, slightly bigger than Pluto. But instead of its resulting in one more planet being added to our solar system, Brown’s find ignited a firestorm of controversy that riled the usually sedate world of astronomy and launched him into the public eye. The debate culminated in the demotion of Pluto from real planet to the newly coined category of “dwarf” planet. Suddenly Brown was receiving hate mail from schoolchildren and being bombarded by TV reporters—all because of the discovery he had spent years searching for and a lifetime dreaming about.

Filled with both humor and drama, How I Killed Pluto and Why It Had It Coming is Mike Brown’s engaging first-person account of the most tumultuous year in modern astronomy—which he inadvertently caused. As it guides readers through important scientific concepts and inspires us to think more deeply about our place in the cosmos, it is also an entertaining and enlightening personal story: While Brown sought to expand our understanding of the vast nature of space, his own life was changed in the most immediate, human ways by love, birth, and death. A heartfelt and personal perspective on the demotion of everyone’s favorite farflung planet, How I Killed Pluto and Why It Had It Coming is the book for anyone, young or old, who has ever dreamed of exploring the universe—and who among us hasn’t? ... Read more

Reviews

A Great Story About the Science, September 28, 2010

Very well-written, both educational and enjoyable, October 1, 2010

You don't have to be an astronomer..., September 26, 2010

Compelling and fast-moving, October 11, 2010

From "It Is to Write", December 19, 2010
It shocked me to realize just over halfway through "How I Killed Pluto and Why It Had It Coming" that such a book would orbit the top of my short list of all-time favorites. But it did--and it landed closer to the periapsis than the apoapsis. Why?

I'm not a scientist; indeed, my interest in astronomy, while healthy, halts one step short of an emotional attachment to Pluto. Hence, I suppose it was easier, unencumbered by a wounded celestial psyche, to embrace Mike Brown's story of the stepchild planet and his unapologetic role in its demise.

I am, however, a writer, and Mike Brown's startlingly delightful prose is priceless--educational, poignant, illuminating, and subtly hilarious, if that doesn't put too much of a strain on one's oxymoronic sensibilities. How do you read a book full of gritty technical detail covering years and years of painstaking astronomic observation and find yourself laughing out loud page after page. Just look at the title if you want a glimpse of his writing voice. I mean really, how do you *not* read a book with a title like that?

The emotional attachment I did develop was to the author and his family. Mike weaves his personal trajectory from single PhD student to fianc� then to husband and father seamlessly into his ascension as a renown astronomer and a scientist. As a non-technical type, I was smugly pleased how wife, Diane, and daughter, Lilah, influenced Mike's cerebral center of mass a bit closer to the right-brain end of the spectrum, albeit kicking and screaming the entire way.

Finally, Mike ambushed me with his beloved science. While already somewhat familiar with orbital dynamics, by the end of the book I was surprised to discover how much I had learned about astrophysics without even realizing it was happening. Actually, that's the only way I could learn anything about astrophysics. He made it fun.

Kudos to Mike, a chivalrous bow to Diane and a big squeeze for Lilah. All three of you made my day.

Nitty Gritty of Planetary Astronomy plus Public Relations., November 23, 2010

Still mourning the loss of Pluto from the list of planets? This engaging account explains what happened and why, November 8, 2010

How 21st Century astronomy is done, and made compelling, September 29, 2010

This book is to astronomy, December 18, 2010
as "Soul of a New Machine" was to the birth of the "small computer" revolution. I thought it would be a fun bedtime read for a week or two . . . instead it kept me awake until I was done. Previous reviews have explained the story well enough . . . I'll just add a vote that it's a great, fun read . . .

Pluto's executioner speaks!, December 12, 2010
The bit about killing Pluto is a joke, of course. Pluto is still out there, just as oblivious of what people call it as ever. But it was Mike Brown whose discoveries forced the astronomy community to address the anomaly of Pluto being classified as a planet. And he, despite his years-long quest to discover a tenth planet, despite the glory associated with being the only living discoverer of a planet, was true to his scientific convictions, and argued against his discovery, and therefore against Pluto, being considered a planet.

I will admit that I came into the Pluto controversy with a strong view of my own. I am one of those people who concluded many years ago, long before I ever heard of Mike Brown, that Pluto was not a planet. When it was discovered Pluto was thought to be quite a large object, and its designation as a planet made sense. But additional measurements showed it to be much smaller than originally thought,* smaller, in fact, than Neptune's moon Triton, itself believed to be a captured Kuiper Belt object. Further, it is locked in a orbital resonance with Neptune, where Pluto makes three orbits of the sun in the time Neptune makes two. So Pluto doesn't even orbit freely around the sun.**

I've heard Mike Brown talk about his experiences, and came to this book expecting a good read. He delivered. The astronomy is interwoven with Brown's life during the period of discovery. Some may object to this, but scientific discoveries are made by people who are concurrently living their lives. Too often what we hear about are the odd ducks who live only for their science. But most scientists aren't like that; most have lives beyond science, and their work is intertwined with their broader existence.

In this book we follow Brown from his early years in astronomy to his decision to look for another planet beyond Pluto. During his early, less than successful, attempts he meets, as a result of his work, the woman who will become his wife. We follow his courtship, marriage, and honeymoon as the search continues. The fruition of his search, the discovery of several large Kuiper Belt objects, overlaps the gestation and birth of his daughter.

During the time he is completing papers on his discoveries, and awaiting his daughter's birth, controversy erupts. A previously unknown astronomer in Spain appeared to have found one of his discoveries, and beat him to a public announcement. Initially gracious, Brown learns that the Spaniard apparently used the internet to learn where he had pointed a telescope to track the object, and used that knowledge to find the object and claim the discovery. This motivates a discussion of how science works, and the competing pressures to, on the one hand, announce discoveries so as to claim credit and, on the other hand, to get the facts together and write a comprehensive paper that adequately describes the discovery.

Having weathered that controversy, the Pluto issue explodes. Brown provides a comprehensive discussion of why it doesn't make sense to call Pluto a planet. He writes about the last time astronomers had this problem. (No, Pluto wasn't the first.) When Ceres was discovered between Mars and Jupiter in 1801 it was considered the eighth planet. (Neptune hadn't yet been discovered.) Then more "planets" were discovered between Mars and Jupiter. It was eventually realized that all these bodies couldn't be considered planets, and they ended up all being called asteroids. (The decision of the International Astronomical Union on Pluto made Ceres, like Pluto, a "dwarf planet".)

Similarly, Brown argues convincingly that Pluto is simply one of the larger bodies in the Kuiper belt. Its interaction with Neptune caused it to be discovered earlier than other large Kuiper Belt objects, but it is otherwise unexceptional. The book includes an excellent discussion on how scientists choose categories for objects, and why definitions matter.

All in all, this is a compelling book that captures the story of discovery and two controversies, as well as the reality--sometimes mundane, sometimes not--of how scientists actually live and work. And how can you not love a book where the astronomer gets the girl?


* In 1980 A. J. Dessler and C. T. Russell wrote a humorous one page paper that was published in EOS (vol. 61, no. 44, page 690) titled "From the Ridiculous to the Sublime: The Pending Disappearance of Pluto". In it they pretended to take the historical mass estimates of Pluto as being correct, did a mathematical fit, and predicted that Pluto would disappear in 1984. They then speculated on what would happen after it disappeared. This is available online, just search for it.

** I've heard the argument that Neptune could just as well be said to be in an orbital resonance with Pluto. While in a narrow technical sense that is true, saying it makes about as much sense as saying Neptune is in orbit around its moon Triton. Neptune is eight thousand times more massive than Pluto, and "captured" Pluto while itself remaining in a nearly circular orbit. Further, there are other Kuiper Belt objects in orbital resonance with Neptune, Pluto is simply the largest. When it comes to gravity size--or at least mass--matters. ... Read more

Editorial Review

Teleportation, time machines, force fields, and interstellar space ships—the stuff of science fiction or potentially attainable future technologies? Inspired by the fantastic worlds of Star Trek, Star Wars, and Back to the Future, renowned theoretical physicist and bestselling author Michio Kaku takes an informed, serious, and often surprising look at what our current understanding of the universe's physical laws may permit in the near and distant future.Entertaining, informative, and imaginative, Physics of the Impossible probes the very limits of human ingenuity and scientific possibility. ... Read more

Editorial Review

One of the world’s most beloved and bestselling writers takes his ultimate journey -- into the most intriguing and intractable questions that science seeks to answer.

In A Walk in the Woods, Bill Bryson trekked the Appalachian Trail -- well, most of it. In In A Sunburned Country, he confronted some of the most lethal wildlife Australia has to offer. Now, in his biggest book, he confronts his greatest challenge: to understand -- and, if possible, answer -- the oldest, biggest questions we have posed about the universe and ourselves. Taking as territory everything from the Big Bang to the rise of civilization, Bryson seeks to understand how we got from there being nothing at all to there being us. To that end, he has attached himself to a host of the world’s most advanced (and often obsessed) archaeologists, anthropologists, and mathematicians, travelling to their offices, laboratories, and field camps. He has read (or tried to read) their books, pestered them with questions, apprenticed himself to their powerful minds. A Short History of Nearly Everything is the record of this quest, and it is a sometimes profound, sometimes funny, and always supremely clear and entertaining adventure in the realms of human knowledge, as only Bill Bryson can render it. Science has never been more involving or entertaining.


From the Hardcover edition. ... Read more

Reviews

Perhaps the Best Armchair Scientist Book I've Ever Read, May 28, 2003
I picked this one up expecting "good". Instead, I got one of the most delightful reading experiences in science that I have ever had. What a wonderful surprise.

Bryson tries to do what most school textbooks never manage to do, explain the context of science in a way that is relevant to the average person. At the beginning of the book, he recalls an event from his childhood when he looked at a school text and saw a cross-section of our planet. He was transfixed by it, but noticed that the book just dryly presented the facts ("This is the core." "This part is molten rock." "This is the crust.", etc.), but never really explained HOW science came to know this particular set of facts. That, he quite correctly points out, is the most interesting part. And that is story he sets out to tell in this book.

Bryson obviously spent a great deal of time and effort developing and checking his facts and presentation. He obviously enjoyed every minute of it too, and it shows. Never have I read a book where the author conveyed such joyful awe of what we have learned as a species (with the possible exception of some of Richard Feynman's books).

My benchmark for this kind of book is usually; How well does it explain modern physics? There are few books out there that manage to explain relativity, quantum mechanics and string theory in a way that doesn't make your eyes glaze over. The Dancing Wu Li Masters by Gary Zukav is the best of the lot in my opinion. While this book did not change my opinion, Bryson's explanations of these mind-bending theories are not only lucid and sensible, they are also full of his telltale tongue-in-cheek side comments and therefore are just plain fun to read. However, Bryson goes way beyond Zukav, focusing not only on physics, but on the full panoply of scientific disciplines. He also focuses more on the discoverers themselves, and the process of discovery.

One of the things I like about this book is that Bryson again and again makes sure credit is given where credit it due. For many discoveries, he tells us the "official" story, but also tells us the often untold story of the small-time scientist who got the idea first but, for whatever reason, never got credit. This happens a great deal in science, and Bryson appears to be on a quest to set the record straight when he can. The result is not only charming storytelling, it's got a certain justice that just feels good.

I didn't have huge expectations for this book, but I am delighted to report that it is one of the best of its kind. Hurrah to Bryson for writing it, and hurrah to me for stumbling on it.

A Man Said to the Universe, November 13, 2005
Bryson's "A Short History of Nearly Everything" is beautifully written, very entertaining and highly informative--and now, it is lavishly illustrated as well.

Bryson is not a scientist, but rather a curious and observant writer who, several years ago, realized that he couldn't tell a quark from a quasar, or a proton from a protein. Bryson set out to cure his ignorance of things scientific, and the result was "A Short History of Nearly Everything," which was originally published in 2003.

For readers who are new to science and its history, "A Short History of Nearly Everything" contains one remarkable revelation after another. It is amazing how enormous, tiny, complex and just plain weird the universe is. Learning about "everything" is a humbling experience, and I kept thinking of Stephen Crane's blank verse: "A man said to the Universe: 'Sir, I exist!' 'However,' replied the Universe, 'the fact has not created in me a sense of obligation.'"

Just as engaging as Bryson's story of what we know is the parallel story of how we know it--from the first clever experiments to figure out how much the earth weighs to today's ongoing efforts to describe the origins of the universe itself, it becomes obvious that science is not an answer but a process, a way of learning about a world that always seems to have one more trick up its sleeve.

Whatever else may be said about the universe, Bryson explains that learning about its mysteries is a very human endeavor. The book is peppered with tales of the odd turns, like Percival Lowell, the astronomer who saw canals on Mars when in fact there are none (and whose initials figured in the naming of "Pl"uto, the ninth planet); the Askesian Society, a learned 19th century body devoted to the study of laughing gas; and the knock-down, drag-out personal battles between scientists whose genius was rivaled only by their lack of civility.

This is a superb book and a quick read despite its length. The illustrated edition makes the journey all the more enjoyable.

All that stuff we were supposed to have learned, but ..., May 11, 2003
I am a big fan of Bill Bryson's travelogues. I was therefore surprised when I cam across this, somewhat more weighty, tome. But I am pleased that I picked it up.

The author says he didn't do very well in science when he was in school because the teachers and texts seemed to be hiding all the good stuff. Now, as an adult, he's gone after the good stuff. And he's the guy to write it so the rest of us can understand. Not only does he write clearly, but he's very good at explaining as much as a normal person can understand (of relativity, for example), while pointing to the stuff that's weird, and setting aside the stuff that you have to be a specialist to understand.

He also is very good at giving credit to people who thought of things but were ignored until someone else came along and took credit. This has happened all too frequently, and it's good for the record to be set straight.

If you too were afraid of science, this is a wonderful book. If you already know a lot of this but just like to read enjoyable writing--it's also a wonderful book.

A layman's guide to the history of the world, June 11, 2003
I've spent the past few days devouring Bill Bryson's latest work: A Short History of Nearly Everything. It's an incredible read and reinforces how amazing the history of the earth really is. Bill's wit and comedic timing that has made all his previous travel books instant classics is absent, but it has been replaced with an enthusiastic and somber tone that is just as interesting to read. I've enjoyed all his previous books, but I like this one just as much, even though it's a bit of a departure.

Bryson took three years to research the book by conducting interviews and reading lots of history and it comes through in the text. You almost feel like you were in the room with Bill, following prominent scientists around, asking newbie questions. Bryson comes off as genuinely enthralled by the subjects at hand and you learn new things along with him. The narrative reminds me a great deal of James Burke's books and Connections TV series. Bryson not only tells the tales of how things came to be, but he's constantly weaving a link between all the various stories and pulling similar themes out.

It's a fantastic book and reminds me why I was so enamored by science in school. It also drives the point home many times that we are very, very lucky to be standing here, doing what we do everyday. The chances that the universe came together to enable it are insanely slim for all sorts of reasons as you will quickly find out.

Not quite everything, but enough..., November 16, 2005
I was first acquainted with Bill Bryson through his works on the English language and various travelogue types of books. In these books he proved to be an entertaining writer, witty and interesting, with just the right amount of I'm-not-taking-myself-too-seriously attitude to make for genuinely pleasurable reading. Other books of his, 'Notes from a Small Island' and 'The Mother Tongue', are ones I return to again and again. His latest book, one of the longer ones (I was surprised, as most Bryson books rarely exceed 300 pages, and this one weighs in well past 500), is one likely to join those ranks.

Of course, a history of everything, even a SHORT history of NEARLY everything, has got to be fairly long. Bryson begins, logically enough, at the beginning, or at least the beginning as best science can determine. Bryson weaves the story of science together with a gentle description of the science involved - he looks not only at the earliest constructs of the universe (such as the background radiation) but also at those who discover the constructs (such as Penzias and Wilson).

A great example of the way Bryson weaves the history of science into the description of science, in a sense showing the way the world changes as our perceptions of how it exists change, is his description of the formulation, rejection, and final acceptance of the Pangaea theory. He looks at figures such as Wegener (the German meteorologist - 'weatherman', as Bryson describes him) who pushed forward the theory in the face of daunting scientific rejection that the continents did indeed move, and that similarities in flora and fauna, as well as rock formations and other geological and geographical aspects, can be traced back to a unified continent. Bryson with gentle humour discusses the attitudes of scientists, as they shifted not quite as slowly as the continents, towards accepting this theory, making gentle jabs along the way (Einstein even wrote a foreword to a book that was rather scathing toward the idea of plate tectonics - brilliance is no guarantee against being absolutely wrong).

Bryson traces the development of the universe and the world from the earliest universe to the formation of the planet, to the growing diversity of life forms to development of human beings and human society. Inspired by Natural History (the short history refers more to natural history than anything else), this traces the path to us and possible futures. Bryson juxtaposes the creation of the Principia by Isaac Newton with the extinction of the dodo bird - stating that the word contained divinity and felony in the nature of humanity, the same species that can rise to the heights of understanding in the universe can also, for no apparent reason, cause the extinction of hapless and harmless fellow creatures on earth. Are humans, in Bryson's words, 'inherently bad news for other living things'? He recounts many of the truly staggering follies of species-hunting, particularly in the nineteenth century, calling upon people to take far more care of the planet with which we have been entrusted, either through design or fate.

Bryson's take on things is innovative and his narrative is interesting, but there is a point to it, just as there is with most of his writing. He writes not merely to entertain, or to inform, but to persuade. Bryson is intrigued by science, having a joy that comes across the page of someone who essentially did not know or understand a lot of the background of science and how it worked in the world until recently, and now wants to share that joy with everyone! He definitely has points to argue - for starters, the need for open-mindedness, even among (perhaps particularly among) those who are supposed to have the open and searching intellects, the scientists themselves. He also wishes others to know more about science, professionals and laypersons, and more about our own origins as a people, both in terms of where we've come from, and how we've come to know about it.

This is a new version of his already-published text, this time with graphics, paintings, pictures, maps and other things that make the history come alive in new and interesting ways. This is a good revision, adding quite a bit to Bryson's already interesting text. Unique among Bryson's writing in many ways, this is in some ways a travelogue through geology, paleontology, cosmology and evolution. A fun and fascinating read!

An entertaining read, cautiously recommended, July 13, 2005
Bill Bryson's "A Short History of Nearly Everything" has a lot of good points. It is above all a very entertaining and engaging read. Bryson writes in an informal, chatty style that at times reminded me of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. His subject is, essentially, life, the universe and (nearly) everything. Bryson aims to explore the history of science in general, summarizing not only what we know, but also how we know it - he sets himself the wonderful goal of trying to explain "how scientists work things out". It's a big task, and had Bryson accomplished it, this would have been an incredible book. As it is, "A Short History of Nearly Everything" is still a worthwhile read, despite its flaws, which I will soon discuss.

The organization of the book is partly chronological, partly thematic. It is divided into six parts and thirty relatively short chapters. The earlier parts focus on the physical sciences, including astronomy, cosmology, geology, physics and physical chemistry. The latter half of the book deals primarily with the life sciences - biology, ecology, botany, zoology, oceanography, organic chemistry and so on. It's a considerable challenge to organize such a large amount of material dealing with so many distantly-related subjects, and Bryson pulls it off quite well. I can make no criticism of his large-scale organization.

However, the devil is in the details, and many of the details Bryson chooses to include in his "Short History" have little if anything to do with what he's supposedly writing about. He has a persistent tendency to head off on irrelevant tangents and lose himself in anecdotes about some of the curious characters that have walked the halls of science. Bryson wastes far too much ink relating bizarre factoids picked up in the course of his research, from William Buckland's dining habits to Gideon Mantell's twisted spine. He especially loves recounting the details of feuds and squabbles between scientists - the more intense, underhanded, unreasonable and destructive, the better. In all of this, the material we picked up the book to explore can get somewhat lost. Chapter 10, for instance, is "an important and salutary tale of avarice, deceit, bad science, several needless deaths, and the final determination of the age of the Earth" - in that order of importance.

Reading "A Short History of Nearly Everything", I did greatly appreciate Bryson's ability to make clear how much scientists don't know and are still working to figure out. However, I was disappointed that despite his promise to explore "how scientists work things out", Bryson often just quotes results and conclusions without further explanation. Sometimes he doesn't even do that - modern physics is largely dismissed as wacky and incomprehensible.

Even worse, Bryson makes several glaring errors in his discussion of physics (and perhaps also in other areas that I'm not so familiar with), far worse than any I've seen in other popular science books I've read. For example, he suggests particles with "spin" are actually spinning about an axis (which they are not) and presents entanglement as a violation of relativity (which it is not). Bryson also incorrectly claims that the production of black holes within future particle accelerators would destroy the world. In fact, these microscopic black holes would evaporate in a fraction of a nanosecond - something that would have been very nice to learn in "A Short History of Nearly Everything".

I enjoy reading popular science, and much of what I've read I've found better than Bryson's "A Short History of Nearly Everything". I would especially recommend Brian Greene, Stephen Hawking, Alan Guth and Martin Rees for physics, astronomy and cosmology, and Richard Dawkins and Stephen J. Gould for biology. However, I know of no other work that attempts to cover nearly as many fields as Bryson's "Short History". Even though Bryson's book wasn't able to live up to its initial promise, it was a decent read - one I recommend, though with some reservations.

Not Dumbed down. Gets you very excited about science., October 31, 2003
This book is the type of book that would inspire you to become a biologist or a geologist or an astronomer. From this book you are able to see bits and pieces of famous scientists lives and get a feeling by the end that its not all fun and games but at the same time it soooo very worth it to dedicate your life to the pursuit of furthering the knowledge of your fellow human beings and in some small way pushing our species in a positive direction. From reading this book you find out how all the knowledge from hundreds of years ago has become the basis of where we are today. This is conveyed extremely well to the audience. The other thing which is conveyed so very well is the power and destructive force of mother nature here on earth and in space. Parts of this book read better than seeing an end of the world movie because the author is so good at getting a vivid picture drawn in the reader's minds eye.

This book is so good and so comprehensive I can see myself reading this over again.

Thank you Bill Bryson for your hard, extensive research! Quite remarkable.

Wonderful Overview of Science and Scientists, August 13, 2003
I think this book should replace the texts used in most high school science courses. If it did, I think we would see more kids pursuing science careers, because Bryson does a wonderful job of conveying the joy and excitement of doing science as well as a sense of awe that our world evolved as it did.

Sure, given a book of this nature, there is plenty people could quibble with. Bryson's writing style is amusing and entertaining, though it doesn't come close to matching "A walk in the woods," (but then again, not much could...). Readers expecting the humor quotient of that book or Bryson's other travel books will be disappointed, however. And although one can tell Bryson struggled valiantly to make the chapter on quantum physics understandable, he didn't succeed (at least for me). For example, he relates a study showing that one atomic particle can affect another atomic particle 70 miles away, simultaneously. I still don't understand how that can happen and wish somebody could explain it to me.

But those are minor complaints compared to what this book is able to accomplish, which is to provide a broad, yet admirably detailed, education in the physical and biological sciences. I am overjoyed to see this book on the bestseller lists, because if enough people read it, we can no longer be accused of being the scientific ignoramuses that we largely have been. I think it could also work to serve more effectively as an environmental wake-up call than the wide array of existing polemical books that are read only by the already convinced.

Lastly, perhaps the aspect of the book I admired and enjoyed the most is the way Bryson provides the human side of science through his frequent character sketches of the quirks and foibles of the many scientists whose work is reviewed. I may soon forget, once again, all three of Newton's laws of motion, but I will never--for the rest of my life--forget that he once inserted a rod behind his eyeball and stirred it around "just to see what would happen." This book is worth reading just for the anecdotes, and along the way you will learn an incredible amount of science.

Armchair Traveler Develops Genius of Rocket-Scientist!, November 15, 2003
When I picked up "A Short History of Nearly Everything" I had abosolutely no idea what to expect. As a travel junkie who can rarely afford to travel myself, I grab Bill Bryson's books whenever I can with great enthusiasm. His keen wit in presenting characters and scenes is unparalleled, and in this new romp (in which he narrates a journey through not just a county but through the scientific world as well as space and time) he is in top form.

Bryson's everyman prose makes the mysteries of scientific thought interesting, understandable, and funny. The book begins with the building blocks of the universe and works its way slowly down through the smaller mysteries such as life on earth and why human beings even exist. However, the science of the work does not become overwhelming to the lay-reader and Bryson maintains an admirable sense of wonder and joy throughout.

And, of course, the text is delightfully littered with anecdotes about the men and women who have dedicated themselves to discovering and defining these mysteries. Both living and dead, these men and women take on life that leaps off the pages, making them feel like old friends. And from the comfort of your favorite reading spot, you feel like you could be sharing a pint with them and Bill in a cozy pub somewhere.

I recommend this book to anyone who has a inclination for pondering the large questions of life but who is equally interested in keeping his or her sense of humor and sanity in tact.

Science Explained For The Rest Of Us, July 14, 2003
Bill Bryson has done something exceedingly useful: written a book that explains the major tenants of science in a form that non-scientists can understand and enjoy.

This is a smart and intelligent book that retains Bryson's charming and witty voice in the telling of the broad range of natural history. It is interesting that this author can retain his appeal across mediums -- he is known as a witty travel writer and has also produced fun and intelligent books on the history of the English language. Now, he goes far afield and explains natural philosophy, as the sciences were once called, in a way that textbooks have avoided ever since there have been science textbooks.

Bryson tackles space, the origins of the universe, geology, the formation of the Earth, physics, the beginning and development of life, cells, DNA and humans in this natural world round-up. Each chapter follows a similar format. A fascinating tidbit is introduced to draw the reader in, the history of understanding in each field is discussed and the evolution of thinking to the current state of understanding explained. This format is enlivened by the personalities past and present (including science's crackpots, iconoclasts and geniuses).

Besides the Bryson wit, what makes this a phenomenally good read is the author's ability to relate scientific principles with examples that laymen can understand and that clarify often confusing scientific knowledge and theories.

For example, I was floored to learn that our solar system is so vast, that it literally could not be drawn to scale on any size in a meaningful way. Neptune is five times farther from Jupiter than Jupiter is from Earth. On a scale drawing with Earth the size of a pea, Jupiter would be a thousand feet away and Pluto a mile and a half (and the size of a bacterium). Now that illustrates space in our immediate environs better than I've every seen it described before.

What is the largest concentration of magma waiting to blow? (and possibly blow us out of existence) It's under Yellowstone National Park. Ten percent of the weight of a six year old pillow is dead skin flakes, mites and mite dung. Most physicists think Einstein wasted the second half of his life pursuing a unified theory instead of thinking about other useful things. Every human cell contains DNA strands that are six feet long if laid end to end. The core of the Earth is as hot as the surface of the sun - and solid because of the immense pressure compacting that mass. Only three percent of the Earth's water is fresh, and almost all of this is in ice sheets - only a scanty .03% of the total is available to us a fresh, flowing water.

Interesting tidbits like the above abound. So do dire stories about past volcanic activity, changes in magnetism, changes in atmospheric conditions and asteroid impacts that have periodically befell Earth and helped move species development forward (usually by wiping out most species existing at the time). Could they/ would they happen in the future? Sure. However, the scale of time over which the next cataclysmic event may occur could be so far removed that we will have evolved into something else (or have found a way to blow up or steer threatening asteroids out of our way).

This book fascinates and amuses. If science textbooks had a bit of this ability to relate and engage during my time in school, I'd bet today there would be a lot more scientists working to figure out the remaining mysteries of our world. ... Read more

Editorial Review

In this groundbreaking union of art and science, rocker-turned-neuroscientist Daniel J. Levitin explores the connection between music—its performance, its composition, how we listen to it, why we enjoy it—and the human brain. Drawing on the latest research and on musical examples ranging from Mozart to Duke Ellington to Van Halen, Levitin reveals:
• How composers produce some of the most pleasurable effects of listening to music by exploiting the way our brains make sense of the world
• Why we are so emotionally attached to the music we listened to as teenagers, whether it was Fleetwood Mac, U2, or Dr. Dre
• That practice, rather than talent, is the driving force behind musical expertise
• How those insidious little jingles (called earworms) get stuck in our heads

And, taking on prominent thinkers who argue that music is nothing more than an evolutionary accident, Levitin argues that music is fundamental to our species, perhaps even more so than language. This Is Your Brain on Music is an unprecedented, eye-opening investigation into an obsession at the heart of human nature. ... Read more

Reviews

New Appreciation of Music and of Brains, August 7, 2006
There are questions that are too big for science; are there gods, for instance, or what is love? And maybe we will never fully find out scientifically why music does what it does and why we care about it so. But for many reasons, music ought to be a profitable subject for scientific enquiry. It is, as Pythagoras knew, an activity strongly rooted in mathematics, and the physics of music is fairly well understood. It is as universal as language; all human cultures have some sort of music, indicating it does something indispensable. And we are increasingly able to figure out, with our sophisticated brain imaging gadgets, what brains do when they hear or think about music. The neuroscience of music is the area of expertise of Daniel J. Levitin, and he writes of it in _This Is Your Brain on Music: The Science of a Human Obsession_ (Dutton), a fascinating account of current music psychology. Levitin has produced a book wonderfully accessible to lay readers, since although he is an academic (he runs the Laboratory for Musical Perception, Cognition, and Expertise at McGill University), before he became a scientist, he had been a performing musician, sound engineer, and record producer, working with names like Steely Dan and Blue Oyster Cult. He does pull examples from Bach and Beethoven, but he is obviously more comfortable citing universally-known tunes like "Happy Birthday to You", "Somewhere Over the Rainbow", or "Stairway to Heaven". (Readers whose tastes range in previous epochs will possibly be surprised at the sophistication modern popular musicians have displayed.) Levitin has a good sense of humor and is a genial explainer.

He starts out with a forty page first chapter "What is Music?", which is as good a short explanation of key concepts as tone, scale, fifths, and timbre as anyone could want, and is a fine foundation for all that comes after, a collection of scientific lore and tidbits from all over. For instance, even if you are not a musician, you have a huge store of tunes in your memory. You may not have perfect pitch, the ability to know that an A flat is an A flat as soon as you hear it, but Levitin's own research has provided surprising evidence that your sense of pitch, even if you are not a musician, is really quite good. Subjects who were asked to sing a song from memory got the absolute pitch just right, or very close; they did the same with the song's tempo. There are differences in the brains of musicians and nonmusicians. The corpus callosum, the mass of fibers that connects the right brain hemisphere to the left, is larger in musicians, and is especially larger in those that started music training early. The overall lesson here, though, is that we are all musical, even if we are not musicians, and so non-expert musical brains are really very similar to expert ones. There are descriptions here of surprising research that makes clear how truly ready our brains are to incorporate musical experience. Fetuses in the last three months of gestation, for instance, can hear music within the womb, along with other outside and inside noises. Experiments have shown that if you repeatedly play a song into the womb, and then make sure the child does not hear it again after birth until it is one year old, and then play the music again, the infant will prefer hearing the womb-music rather than completely novel music. This was true whether the experimental music was Vivaldi or the Backstreet Boys.

Levitin certainly has connections; he tells of discussions with Francis Crick about themes in this book, as well as with Joni Mitchell. The final chapter, "The Music Instinct", is a response to cognitive scientist Steven Pinker, who spoke at a 1997 convention of researchers in music perception and cognition. Pinker took the dismissive stance that music was "auditory cheesecake", tickling the parts of the brain that were really for the important functions of language and (unlike language) useless as a force in human evolution. It is not surprising that Levitin and his fellow researchers disagree. Darwin himself felt that musical tones were used in conveying emotion and that those who were able to expend energy in singing or playing were demonstrating biological and sexual fitness. Musical success does make for high numbers of opportunities for spreading one's genes (just ask Mick Jagger). Interest in music peaks in adolescence, indicating a role in sexual selection. Music has been around longer than agriculture, and there is no evidence that language actually preceded music in our species. It may have promoted the cognitive development that was harnessed for speech. Only in the past few hundred years did music become a spectator activity, but in the eons when it could have shaped our social evolution, it was a group activity that may have promoted group togetherness and synchrony. It is an engaging final argument that serves to emphasize the importance of all that the book has presented before, a demonstration that looking at an important human activity in a scientific way only increases our wonder and delight in the activity itself.

Extended Wikipedia article meets self-serving autobiography, December 28, 2007
I'm a musician who's been thinking about reading this book since seeing it favorably reviewed. I read it after receiving it as a gift this Christmas, and unfortunately found it to read like an extended Wikipedia entry. Opinions and speculation are stated as facts, claims are not justified with evidence, the author frequently oversteps his expertise, and the writing is otherwise amateurish, lacking direction and leaving loose ends. It seems as though the author wrote it off the top of his head without researching his points or his examples, and a number of statements are false. Other reviewers have listed their pet gripes (some of which have been fixed in the paperback copy), here are a few of mine that haven't been mentioned (and that still exist in the paperback):

-The detailed discussion of the Haydn's Surprise Symphony theme (p92-93) is flawed at every turn: He uses the term parallelism (a term reserved for describing a particular harmonic device) incorrectly to refer to the melody. He describes the melody as going up "just a little" when what we have at that point is the *largest interval leap* anywhere in the theme. Then, "the highest note we've encountered so far" in the melody is incorrectly identified as the fifth. We have already (just two notes ago) heard the C above the G he is referring to. (The highest note is the tonic, not the fifth). Finally, the "surprise" in the Surprise symphony, is identified in the wrong place--eight measures too soon. Why so much detail about something the author hasn't researched? Not only that, but the misunderstandings lead him to bad analysis.

-In one of the book's stupidest sentences, the author claims that "A schema for Dixieland includes foot-tapping, up-tempo music, and unless the band was trying to be ironic, we would not expect there to be overlap between their repertoire and that of a funeral procession" (p117). Dixieland bands playing funeral processions is, of course, an important and well-known New Orleans tradition.

-Beethoven's Ode to Joy theme from his 9th symphony is used as an example of violating expectations (p 119). He describes that we expect the first phrase to end on "do" and we are surprised to hear it end on "re." In the second phrase we are surprised to hear it end on "do" after hearing the first phrase end on "re." Most musicians would disagree with this analysis. This phrase structure is so common, in fact, that there are terms for paired phrases such as this. (The first phrase, typically ending on a member of the dominant chord as happens here, is called the antecedent. The second phrase ending on the tonic is called the consequent. Together the pairing is called a period, or informally a call-and-response.) What is described here as Beethoven's clever violation of expectation is a very good example of the very most common phrase structure in all of music.

-Later, in describing how jazz musicians play over AABA song form (p238-239), Dr. Levitin explains that the "B" section is the "chorus." I think you'll find that by far the most common term for the B section is the *bridge,* the term "chorus" being reserved for one entire iteration of the form. He goes on to describe this as a point of confusion, but it's not if you use the usual terms. Confused himself, he also says "Some songs have a C section, called the bridge." One of his own examples, "All of Me" is ABAC. However, most musicians would say that this song has no bridge, and certainly the C section of "All of Me" cannot be considered the bridge.

I don't have the time or the space for a line-by-line critique of the entire book, but suffice it to say that my examples are not cherry-picked (rather the positive aspects in some reviews seem to be cherry picked, and some of the positive reviews are not so positive). The writing throughout the book is imprecise, inaccurate, misleading, and interspersed with nonsense. The anecdotes make up a conspicuously large portion of the book, and are conspicuously self-serving (dropping the names of rock stars and famous scientists). He has an entire chapter on meeting Crick (of the DNA-discovering pair Watson and Crick). According to the author's account, he was nervous, and had a past memory that kept him from introducing himself. What a relief to find that after finally meeting, Crick enjoyed his company and found his research fascinating! ("Crick's eyes lit up. He sat up straight in his chair. 'Music,' he said. He brushed away his lepton colleague.") On reflection, the topic of music and the brain seems less the main point of the book, and more a jumping off point for a superficial, glowing autobiography. I was disappointed.

Fascinating information on how our brain is involved in our perceptions of music, September 21, 2006
The first thing is that this is a book expressing ideas about how the human mind processes music and how the brain is involved with that processing (not HOW the brain processes it, which no one knows), rather than a book on music. While I am not obsessed by the topic, I find the exploration of the mind and brain function fascinating. My interest was piqued when my father was taken by a brain tumor and I tried to find material on the subject. I read "Phantoms in the Brain" by V. S. Ramachandran and then some articles by others in the field who claimed the mind is simply an illusion created by brain function, that our sense of consciousness and choosing is simply false.

This has always seemed wrong to me, no matter how much of our brain function occurs without our "mind" or "consciousness" being involved in any way. Being a pianist, it has seemed to me that there is no biological necessity to play Chopin. And when I sit down at the piano, I choose what to play, how to play it, and whether to learn the piece in the first place. I was amused when I read articles by Pinker and others struggling in trying to come to terms with some evolutionary reason for music. Some simply dismiss it (I think because it is so inconvenient to their models), others try and find it a way to attract mates (as this author does), others find it an accidental use of some other evolutionarily advantageous trait even though they can't quite identify what it is or was.

So, I was glad to read this book because of my interest in the brain and mind along with my passion for music. It is indeed a very interesting book that I could not put down. Daniel Levitin is a scientist whose work involves trying to understand how the mind perceives music and how that maps into the brain. It helps that he is also a musician. He worked in a commercial rock and roll band and as a record producer. Now, I am a classical musician and have a degree in music theory, so it is unsurprising that he and I view some aspects of music differently. In fact, I found some of his descriptions a bit sloppy and more simplistic than the simplification required in communicating to the general non-musician reading public. But then again, I know nothing about the technical terminology of brain function.

Just a few examples that stopped me cold. On page 31 Levitin asserts that the way we use sharps and flats is artificially complicated. He says, "there is no reason for the system to be so complicated, but it is what we are stuck with." Well, actually, there are several great reasons that have to do with the way our music system has evolved over the past eight centuries and more. There weren't keys or chords or even scales in the beginning. As soon as things would become settled in one generation a new generation would come along and stir things up because they wanted something a bit more this or a lot more that. So, the musical system adapted to accommodate the new music.

The idea of those keys and chords Levitin refers to as features of all music are really only a few hundred years old while the notions of modulation or "changing keys" is younger yet. And as he notes, non-Western music is organized more along "melodic" and "motivic" principles than our notions of functional harmony.

Some experimental music systems have been proposed over the past couple of hundred years and they have caught on about as well as Esperanto replaced English, French, or the hundreds and thousands of other natural languages and dialects. And for similar reasons. A complicated "natural" system, even with their inconvenient irregularities, will outlast a regular and tidy "artificial" system every time.

When he was discussing "keys" around page 36, he asserts that tonal prominence is given to the stated "key" through assertion by repetition. Actually, no. It is not a simple subject, but the tonal center of a major key is asserted by the combination of perfect fifths versus the one diminished fifth on the note a half step main keynote, plus the combination of major and minor thirds plus the combination of whole and half steps. When evaluated, there are a number of places in the scale that are ambiguous, but there are unique combinations that become pointers to the key center. And this is why the minor key, which the author asserts has purely cultural status (wrong), is used by composers to connote affects with more ambiguity.

C-major and a-minor (in its natural form) use exactly the same notes. When you play a-minor in its natural form you will eventually want to get to C-major (and that is why most classical piece in the minor mode modulate first to the relative major key rather than the dominant as is done in major keys). In order to make a-minor sound like a tonal center the harmonic form has a "raised" seventh scale degree (one of those pesky accidentals Levitin dislikes) so that it is a half-step below the key center (g-sharp in a-minor instead of the g-natural the key signature would call for) in order to provide a cadence as satisfying as the normal defining cadence in the major key. But this is getting too technical, and may be why the author avoided these discussions. After all, this is a book for the general reader and one must simplify things that are sometimes difficult to simplify.

Another time he uses the argot of commercial rock music in a way that would be confusing to people trained in traditional musical grammar (what is usually called music theory). At one point, he is writing fondly of the music of Joni Mitchell and her difficulty in finding a bass player who is sympathetic to and compatible with her approach to the sound of her music. Levitin recounts a conversation with Mitchell when they talked about most bass player wanting to play the roots of the chords of her music when she didn't want them to play roots, just play something that sounds good. OK. But bass lines don't always play the root note of every chord. That would be idiotic and boring. So, they do add passing tones and other "non-harmonic" tones. The problem wasn't that the bass players were so dim as to want to play only the fundamental notes of the chord (which would be boring indeed), but that they wanted defined harmonies at each moment in the piece, but Joni views her music more linearly. She can let harmonies from one chord linger into the sound of the next chord. Mitchell hears the music going from here to there and the stuff in between is a path between the departure and arrival points, but might not be a traditional triad. OK. That is fine. It is called voice leading or counterpoint. But pop musicians usually don't study that aspect of music.

It is important to note that much of music is not really analyzable without understanding voice leading. Not everything is just chord-chord-chord outside of the freshman four part chorale writing exercises. Believe me, there is no harmonic structure that Joni Mitchell is going to create that hasn't been done before, no matter how unique or personal her "sound" or timbre as Levitin likes to call it.

Anyway, it is clear that Levitin approaches music from the point of view of pleasure and the joy of sound rather than the idea of meaning because that is much harder to define let alone map in the brain. When the author is talking about the parts of the brain that are activated when listening to music, it is all quite interesting and I enjoyed it very much. He is very enamored of the idea of schema and taps into the Chomsky model of generative grammar, a model that has had tremendous descriptive power, but has been quite lacking in explanatory power.

The author uses the idea of the subtle rhythmic and pitch changes that a Frank Sinatra or other master musician uses as creating their effects because they violate some sort of schema built into our brains. It is true that we do try to impose order on anything. We want things to fit together and will stick purposes in where there isn't one. However, the kind of subtle changes Levitin describes are called expression by musicians for a reason. Just as we emphasize words and meanings in our speech or movement by stressing something by making it earlier or later than its peers, or louder or softer, or part of a pattern that is somehow different than what one would normally expect, we also do that in music. But it is noticing a difference in relation to what is around it rather than something universal. We don't feel that a piece that is 60 beats a minute is somehow fast or slow because of our brains, we hear what is IN the piece and decide if the tempo is appropriate, too fast (dense) or too slow (not much happening). We want a certain amount of activity based on our human experience of reality. If there is a lot happening in the piece we perceive it as we would perceive an activity in real life with a lot of things happening and would feel similar emotions. But again, this is too technical.

I was also fascinated when he discussed the redundant structures in the nerves going from our ears to our brain. He talks about it having a part to play in our startle reflex. However, I also wonder if loud sounds don't cause strong enough pressure waves on our skin to cause those nerves to become involved as well and from there to the spinal column. But I don't know anything about this except from my own experience at being startled.

Just one of the many interesting observations the author makes concerns the role of talent in success. He describes a study done in which young people are rated by experts as to their talent in a given field. A longitudinal study is done and an analysis of who ended up successful shows that there is a factor much more powerful than native talent. The author points out that the most important factor in success is 10,000 hours of work in that field. This corresponds deeply to my own experience.

When young people ask me what they can do to learn to play the piano, I tell them to play five million notes. I don't care which ones. After the first million they will get bored of playing with their fists, knees, nose, or whatever and by the third million they will be taking it seriously. And I suppose it would take about 10,000 hours to play that many notes. I have also taught my children that talent is a multiplier of work. So a talent of 10 that multiplies a work effort of 1 loses out to a talent of 5 that multiplies a work effort of 100 and loses by a lot.

In any case, this is a fascinating book regardless of my slight disagreements and likely misunderstandings of what the author is saying. I am sure you will find a lot to enjoy and I recommend it with enthusiasm.

How did this book get published?, June 14, 2007
pp. 28-29: "One of the several notes we call A has a frequency of 55 Hz and all other notes called A have frequencies that are two, three, four, five (or a half) times this frequency." This is simply wrong. The other notes called A are 110 Hz, 220 Hz, 440 Hz, 880 Hz - that is, you double (or halve) frequencies to produce octaves. The author claims to know music and science and yet gets this basic fact of musical science wrong?

p. 60: "Think of 'Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star,' written by Mozart when he was six years old." It was not written by Mozart, it is a French song called "Ah! vous dirai-je, Maman." Later in life (not in childhood), Mozart composed some variations on the song, as did many other composers.

I read a book to learn something new. But if I see mistakes about things I already know, how can I trust the author about things I don't know? Mistakes this elementary, moreover, raise the question of editing. Did no one with a basic competency in music read this book before it was published? Did Keith Lockhart, who surely knows the relationship between frequencies, read the book before he wrote - or signed - a blurb for it?

The Big Bang Big Band Harmonic Convergence, December 19, 2006

Half-whispered in the background, it's hard to get too far away from suspicion. The question remains: Does analyzing music scientifically take away from the aesthetic appreciation?

I had once thought of music as the ultimate proof of the glorious irrelevancy of science. But it's really no different than any other pleasure. Does learning cosmology detract from the beauty of a star filled night? Can a couple of physics lessons dull the gaping excitement of seeing a massive rainbow absorb the sky? I conquered this ambivalence personally, while lying in the sun, on a hot day, at altitude, following a final in a physics class. Everything clicked together in my head, the nuclear reaction I watch sizzling eight minutes and eighteen seconds ago, the light as waves, the heat as energy, the energy as mass, the waves as particles. It all clicked, and it was fine. We were all vibrating together in the same rich meaninglessness, and a good feeling felt good whether I purposefully conquered every little detail or it blindsided me and left my head spinning.

That's the day I got it. That science is not a static pool of knowledge. It is not a religion. It is not a method. It is a process, and a spiritual one at that. That was the day, lying there, absorbing photons and resonating passively in the hum, the Ohmmmmm. Science is as much a quest as any other system of belief. And nothing is off limits. Nothing is reduced by knowing that another layer of explanation can be sought out.

And what better subject to tackle scientifically than the beauty of music. Like consciousness, like science, music too is an arbitrary punctuation around organically transmitted, unconsciously determined, preferred patterns of influenced interactions.

So, how's the book?

Not bad. He does a nice job of illustrating the importance of music in our lives and the emotional impact music can convey. He has a nice introductory section where he defines the basic terms of music such as pitch, rhythm, tempo. It's the kind of stuff you get the first week in a music appreciation class, and Levitin does a nice job with it. He never takes his eye off the bigger questions though, for example, he opens his definition of pitch with the disclaimer: "Pitch is a purely psychological construct." He then needs an introduction to neuroscience before he can connect the two streams, discussing the hotter than ever topics of mind, brain, and consciousness. Of course, he has to throw in a little introduction to evolutionary theory as well.

The mistake armchair Anthropologists frequently fall into is taking a complicated concept, music in this case, or intelligence in other infamous cases, and reify it as if it were a single discrete thing. So let's come up with theories of selection for musicality as if it were the scientific equivalent of Mendel's wrinkled garden peas. But Levitin does a nice job of showing how different parts of the brain process different aspects of music. He gives a nice sense of the complexity involved and the parallel processing necessary between different realms of music. If you think about it, this should come as no surprise to anyone who has listened to a one-year old discover language. They can babble with the rhythms, intonations, and prosody of fluent speech well before they have the actual words. It should come as no surprise to any musician, anyone who has experienced that moment when the execution shifts from working memory to procedural memory. My favorite part of playing the piano is reaching the point where my cerebellum and basal ganglia are doing the heavy lifting. Then I can sit back and enjoy the music, like some kind of twisted grandiose self-sycophantic fan, without thinking about what I'm doing.

So formulating the question as "What evolutionary advantages were conferred on individuals who exhibit musical behaviors?" is a mental exercise. A fun and pleasantly meaningless one. Musical sensibility is much more likely an offshoot of multiple smaller functions of the brain, such as language processing, mother-infant interactions, the novelty seeking and cognitive flexibility behind creativity, or empathy, all of which individually may respond over time to certain selective forces. This does not mean, as Steven Pinker and the Blank Slaters would assert, that music is a meaningless accident. It is a part of all the systems that contribute to it, an echo of numerous other functions that comprise our humanity.

When a music lover hypothesizes that musical instincts may have been the prime factor in promoting the cognitive development of the species, it is no more a sophisticated argument than when a drug enthusiast, such as Terrance McKenna, proposes that psychedelics were the primary force behind the expansion of the human cranium. Isn't it funny? No matter how far we come, we're still story tellers creating creation myths in our own image. So my personal hypothesis: The primary force behind the evolution of human intelligence is the drive to drink Tanqueray and play backgammon while listening to Gabby La La. You heard it hear first. Evidence pending.

It is an ambitious book in its scope, especially when the conversation also needs to be liberally peppered with references to Philip Glass and John Cage, Bernstein and Bach, Sinatra and Parker. Well, you know musicians love showing off their chops. Anyway, thumbs up for a solid, thought-provoking read. You've just got to appreciate anyone who uses "mirror neurons" and "iPods" in the same sentence.

Overrated and overstuffed, January 22, 2007
This book is divided into 3 sections. Nearly half the book deals with the technical basics of what defines and characterizes music, a tedious block of chapters that could have been reduced to an enlarged glossary. The second section is the more interesting, since neuroscience and cognition is at last treated, and here Levitin discusses some new experimental information on the mysterious processes that make music a unique and emotionally powerful form of language and communication. However, it is too short and rather sketchy, and we are left thirsty for more and more detailed information. The final quarter of the book is taken up in a hodge-podge of topics, from the predilections toward certain musical tastes, to the qualities of musicianship, to evolutionary origins of music, all of which could be a book in themselves. Indeed, the several books of Joachim-Ernst Berendt are far more worthy in dealing with these various subjects. Thus, only about 1/4 of the book actually approaches the specific subject of the title, with only a couple of pages mentioning how music triggers the pleasure pathways and regions involved in addiction and obsession, aspects that bring a philosophic attribute into biochemistry. Scattered throughout the book are references to popular Western music, jazz, and classic compositions, in order to provide some reference points for the readership. World music, which has a wider spectrum of timbre, so important in his discussion, is barely scratched. In short, I was disappointed with the book as being insufficiently focused.

Could have left out 95% of the book, February 7, 2007
As a professional musician and an amateur scientist (that is, I studied science in college before pursuing music as a career), I found this book to be condescending and packed with needless and uninformative drivel. I had hoped for a detailed and fascinating book that would shed light on such curious questions as to why humans developed music, why some people are more musical than others, and why we get songs stuck in our heads so easily. I was extremely disappointed that instead of a discussion of these subjects written for an intelligent reader with a basis in either music or science, the author seemed to believe that his audience would be people who had a background in neither field--something I would think would be highly unlikely in a person taking the time to read a book with such a focus. There were far too many dull anecdotes about all the famous musicians the author had had the pleasure of meeting (perhaps he was trying to impress his non-musician readers?), and wading through the name-dropping to find the very few facts and scientific theories in the book was not terribly rewarding. I can recall approximately three interesting facts that I learned from the book, which would explain all the filler--if all he'd written were the three discoveries he'd made, the book would have been only seven pages long.

If you're interested in this book and its ideas, I suggest you find a copy that some college student was required to read and hope they underlined the three important facts for you. It will save you a lot of time.

Triviality masquerading as science, April 5, 2008
Think about earworms, you know, those tunes that you can't stop playing back in your head.

Now we'll play a little game. We'll take some ordinary English sentences but dress them up in smartypants neuroscience language. So instead of saying "in your head" you say "in your brain". And instead of saying "idea" you say "neural pathways representing a concept". You can probably make up your own rules for converting English to Neurospeak. "I have a headache" might become "a neural excitiation in my brain is causing the my pain sensors to represent pain in my cerebral area" or "I remember that book" might become "signals from my optic nerve are analysed and compared with prior stored representations of books until a match is found" and so on. Anyone can play, it's easy.

Dan Levitin knows how to play. Here's what he has to say on earworms: "Our best explanation is that the neural circuits representing a song get stuck in `playback mode'". Cute eh? But here's the weird thing. He doesn't realise this is just a game you can play with language. He thinks these are actually scientific explanations. In fact he spends 300 pages writing trivial things about music in Neurospeak, presenting it as science. It's like Moliere's joke about explaining how opium works by saying it has "soporific virtue".

It's not completely content-free however. For example he has a quote from Newton pointing out that you can't see the colour of light waves, rather that light waves are what you use to see things in colour. Bizarrely Newton made no such claim because he believed light was made of particles, not waves. The point still stands, but how did a completely fictional quote like that get through? Is it acceptable to make up quotes from scientists to make your point?

At one point Levitin tells us all about the mistake of Cartesianism - the idea that the things we sense in the world are just encoded in a new representation that some inner self can view, as if the external world is presented on an inner screen in our brains. That, of course, leads to an infinite regress. Who watches the inner screen? This is all well and good, but throughout the book Levitin describes a model of the brain that is 100% Cartesian. For example, he says that when we hear a sound, the end of the journey is a mental image of that sound. He seems to have missed the point that the philosphers he quotes, Wittgenstein and Dennett, devoted much of their lives to demolishing such a silly picture.

I did find the discussion of the roots of Joni Mitchell's chords quite interesting however, not that I like Joni Mitchell. But that saves the book from one star.

Oh, and Levitin does know a lot of famous people, if you're impressed by that sort of thing.

Words have rarely done as much for music, August 4, 2006
A good writer with a unique background, Levitin presents facts and ideas useful for musicians, ordinary music lovers, and everyone who cares about brains. His interview on NPR (Diane Rehm, Aug. 3) includes musical examples. The first chapters may be scanned by trained musicians and by those who have little interest in music theory to get to the unique material in the book.
--EJL (psychiatrist and amateur cellist)

Some Fascinating Parts, December 29, 2006
Parts of this book really blew me away. I loved reading about the reasons why certain music appeals to me, the connections that are being made in my brain and the evolutionary development of a love for music. I gained a greater appreciation for musicians in general and especially those who take risks in their composition.

I found some of the technical information hard to follow, though. I am neither a professional musician nor a professional scientist, so I found myself sometimes lost in the details of science and music contained in this book.

My other major problem with this book was that Levitin referenced so many songs, using them as examples in his writing with the assumption that the average reader would immediately be able to bring to his or her mind the song and the part to which he referred. I know most, but not all, of the songs mentioned in this book, but I often had trouble "listening" in my mind to specific musical phenomena. I found myself stopping for long periods of time in my reading, desperately trying to think of a certain tune. This book should have come with a CD of all of the music Levitin mentions; I would have found it very helpful. ... Read more

Editorial Review

Wine is radioactive? Organic foods have more poison in them than those grown with pesticides? Best-selling author Richard A. Muller enlightens us.Richard A. Muller demonstrated in his recent bestseller, Physics for Future Presidents, that he has a unique talent for delivering the “aha” moment—making difficult topics accessible. In The Instant Physicist he shows his ability to entertain, too, by presenting the best of the scientific curiosities he has assembled over his distinguished career. Assisted by award-winning cartoonist Joey Manfre, who has created an original color cartoon for each “physics bite,” Muller will have readers chuckling while they’re absorbing more science than they ever thought possible. From the surprising (chocolate has more energy in it than TNT) to the scary (even kids can make a bomb), this book contains a revelation on every page. Once finished with this page-turner, readers will be the stars of their next cocktail party.

The book consists of a color cartoon on each right-hand page and explanatory text on the left. Color cartoons throughout ... Read more

Editorial Review

A Brief History of Time, published in 1988, was a landmark volume in science writing and in world-wide acclaim and popularity, with more than 9 million copies in print globally. The original edition was on the cutting edge of what was then known about the origins and nature of the universe. But the ensuing years have seen extraordinary advances in the technology of observing both the micro- and the macrocosmic world--observations that have confirmed many of Hawking's theoretical predictions in the first edition of his book.

Now a decade later, this edition updates the chapters throughout to document those advances, and also includes an entirely new chapter on Wormholes and Time Travel and a new introduction. It make vividly clear why A Brief History of Time has transformed our view of the universe. ... Read more

Reviews

Many Different Angles, February 3, 2000
Most people know that Hawking is a brilliant physicist, but after reading this book, one develops a respect for his other talents as well. Most noticeable is Stephen Hawking's ability to make very complicated ideas seem quite clear through good explanations, clear comparisons to real life events, and a soft humor. The organization of chapers mostly follows a chronological order, which gives a sense of history from Aristotle to present day, yet also establishes concepts in an order that builds on itself. One also realizes that A Brief History of Time was written by a writer, not a scientist who happened to put ideas to paper. This makes a big difference in the enjoyment of a book, since good information in a dry, dull form can be difficult to read (remember trying to keep your eyes open while reading a dull textbook in a subject of interest?). On the other hand, interesting information presented in an interesting manner make A Brief History of Time as much of a 'page-turner' as physics can be.

In summary, a fountain of information from galaxies and black holes to quantum mechanics presented in such a way that is not only as easy to understand as it can be, but is an enjoyable experience to read.

No master of the written word, December 6, 1999
Hawking is no master of the written word. Early on, he warns us not to consult his earlier books for more detail - because they are "quite unreadable". He also admits that, during the production of this book, his editor bombarded him with comments and questions. The impact of this editorial input is plain. The book wallows from unnecessarily long complex sentences written in the passive sense to snappy anecdotes from Hawking's life.

I found the early chapters very useful as overviews of the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics. The middle chapters - on black holes and the origin of the Universe - were clearly written with enthusiasm.

However, that enthusiasm seemed to fade towards the end of the book. The chapter on the arrows of time seems to have been lifted from an old speech. Here's what I'm about to tell you: this is what I'm saying: this is what I've just told you.

Also, the explanation of the cosmological arrow of time left a lot of questions hanging. Question: What will happen when the Universe starts to contract - will people start to experience time running backwards? Answer: Intelligent life could not exist because, by then, all the stars will have burned out. Well, OK - but does that answer whether time is in reverse or not?

Chapter 10 introduces string theory. Clearly this is an incredibly complicated subject and not capable of being explained in a book entitled "Brief History". However, the way the subject is introduced and then dropped is tantalising. Apparently, string theories are only consistent if space-time has either ten or twenty-six dimensions. All these extra dimensions are curled up into space of a very small size. I, for one, would have liked more explanation of what that means.

In summary, a useful but frustrating book that varies in tone as the pages turn. I feel a better populist book would have resulted if Hawking had used a ghost writer to interpret his ideas, rather than simply submitting his own words to the scrutiny of an editor.

It's not THAT good, nor is it THAT easy to read., January 30, 2003
I don't care what anyone says, that book was not easy to get through. I have a degree in Math, and he does not give this stuff in layman's terms. Most of it, will eventually make sense if you can wrap your head around the hard to grasp principles, but he keeps adding more, and more to the theories and he will definitely lose you at some point.

Now don't get me wrong, it's obvious that we are dealing with complicated stuff, and he needs to discuss these things, but I just don't want you to think that this is an easy read. It's a necessary read, and I DO recommend you buy it, but don't think it will be easy.

Interesting but uneven and frustrating, April 4, 2003
Are the praises for this book really recognition of Hawking's accomplishments or that he achieved them despite his physical infirmities? I approached this book years ago and was swiftly and completely lost. Years passed and I found a wonderful (if dated) primer, Knowledge and Wonder by Weisskopf. My success in understanding K&W (I get quantum physics now and can easily explain it to others) convinced me to reapproach `Brief History.'

The book remains for informed insiders; perhaps not the inner circle, but definitely `you gotta know it to get it.' Hawking consistently gives very short descriptions of theories that he then refers to throughout the text, but in ways that have little to do with the aspects he defined and in fact require more complete information. For example, I was frustrated trying to use his explanation of the theory of general relativity (p 30) in re: subsequent references. Luckily, in the years between my earlier attempt and this reading, the web has burgeoned and I was able to find a more complete and yet still brief but comprehensible explanation of this theory. And oh my goodness, Hawking now made sense. Obviously the connection is clear in Hawking's mind, but it never made the transition to words on the page.

Despite all, I *did* get it. But unfortunately, rather than finishing with a desire to learn more I am just tired and glad to be done with it. I feel like I subjected myself to a badly presented lecture series.

Hawking's writing is poor. Ideas ramble, tangential information occasionally takes over so the actual subject at had gets lost, recapitulation is erratic. Some of the self-references are conspicuously self-serving. True, for a scientist it's decent, but the book's writing should not be judged by a different standard than any other writing. That's what editors are for, and apparently this book's editor was so overawed by Hawking that he forgot to do his job.

This book should not be iconized. Nor should it be touted as accessible to the layperson. The information is interesting, but you have to want it and work for it. And when you're done, what you get may not have been worth the effort you put in. It was for me, but just barely.

Now It Can Be Told: It's Overrated, January 25, 2003
Stephen Hawking became a celebrity because the image of a wheelchair-bound genius whose mind roamed free was so compelling. As the stir over him dies down, I think it will come out that this reputation-making work of his is not actually so great.

I am a smart and semi-numerate layman who loves popular science books, but I barely made it through this one. Although I have lost my copy, I recall that Hawking uses at least one important term without defining it, and at other times leaves you to connect the dots on your own in a frustrating, rather than stimulating, way.

Hawking's area is cosmology. I'm not sure who else to recommend to cover the same territory, although Kip Thorne has a good reputation (and a bet with Hawking over some cosmological hypothesis--probably decided by now--with the wager a subscription to Penthouse). If you enjoy physics books in general, I recommend Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe, and if you enjoy popular science in general, I recommend my all-time favorite popular science book, Steven Pinker's How The Mind Works.

Hawking is an Overrated Physicist/Writer, March 24, 2005
Hawking's story makes him a media favorite. The press (who know minimal physics if any) have for years given him the title "Greatest Physicist Since Einstein". He is an excellent physicist and a decent teacher but he is nowhere near being in the same league as Einstein, Newton or Maxwell. Paul Dirac and Richard Feynman are arguably the two most distinguished 20th Century physicists after Einstein. Ed Witten may be the most distinguished living physicist.

Richard Feynman (through his lectures transcribed on audiocassette/text formats and books) is perhaps physics's greatest teacher for the layperson and expert alike. Feynman had an unmatched knack for explaining high level physics in an original way. His "Lectures on Physics" is a classic and should be on the bookshelves of all physicists. Feynman's QED is the best non-mathematical description of quantum mechanics ever (QED stands for quantum electrodynamics, for which Feynman shared the Nobel Prize). His book, The Character of Physical Law, covers much of the same material as Brief History but is much clearer and more insightful. You won't have to unlearn anything from Feynman's books even if you decide to pursue a PhD in physics. I cannot say the same for Hawking's books. Read reviews on these and Feynman's other works. Also, Feynman lived an inspirational and incredibly rich life. He had the brains of Einstein, the showmanship of a performer (which made him a great teacher) and just a great love and wonder for life in general. Read reviews on "Surely You're Joking, Mr Feynman" and "Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman" for more details. You won't regret it.

For those who want to read about what many physicists view as the best candidate for a "theory of everything", read The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene. Hyperspace by Michio Kaku is another great book of the same vane. For those interested in a complete description of physical law, read the Road To Reality by Roger Penrose.

Reading physics makes me go something something..., October 20, 2001
This book brings physics to the understanding of the average women and man. It's basically a survey's course on Einstein's relativity and quantum physics with a little black hole and big bang here and there. The real magic of this book is the author himself--reading from a man of his scientific stature, the enigmatic genus in the wheelchair feels more life-like rather than a caricature on a Simpson's episode. I really dug the part how we can speculate that the universe is presently expanding and not contracting. I liked how it made me muse on time and the life that we see today would differ if the universe was headed back to its origin. The book does leave me with a sense of wanting to more, which was good because I went on to read Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" afterwards. "The Elegant Universe" proved to be more elucidating in explaining Einstein's relativity and quantum physics, and goes into a bit of a breadth in black holes and big bangs (in the frame work of string theory). It is true that the book is the successor to "A Brief History of Time", but I feel Brian Greene's book lacks the charm that Hawking has put into his (or the charm that we put into it). At any rate, both very good books for the novice at mind.

Pithy, packed with info, December 11, 2000
I am the quintessential sophmore in high school. I even live up to the greek meaning: "wise-fool"; I am the kid who lacks the intelligence to be a "nerd" but wishes he had the capacity to be one. I eagerly pick up books that are far over my head, but this book was different. A Brief history of Time presents an intricate topic generally for the simplistic, non astro-rocket scientist type. Hawking didn't gorge his book with alien equations and twenty letter words. Hawking didn't intend this book to be read by Ph.D's in physics, intending instead to write it for laymen, sophmores, like me. The book isn't intended to enable the reader to write disquisitions on wormholes after reading it; however, it is a primer. It acquaints the reader with the subject It is written succiently and the only reason I am giving it four stars is because I am still skeptical that for some readers it may be superficial. But heck for us sophmores it is enough information to at least appear smart... So what do you think about the Space-Time Continuim?

Excellent Popular Work on Complex Subject .. But Uninspiring, January 17, 1999
I must be the only person who finds Stephen Hawking uninspiring. I give the man credit for his ability to reach out across the science boundary and touch the mind of the average person. And he no doubt is qualified to discuss the subject of the book. Perhaps I expected too much given all the praise that people have showered upon Hawking's popular books. Whatever the reason, I found the book to be adequate at best. There was nothing truly inspiring or enlightening that energized my scientific curiosity. However, I'm willing to give Hawking credit for his ability to speak the language of the common man in order to convey complex scientific concepts. There are few scientists that can do this and even fewer who write popular works. For this reason, I give Hawking 4 stars, whereas I would have only given him 3 from my own personal impressions.

A great theoretical physicist shows that he is also a great writer, January 11, 2007
Universally hailed as the greatest theoretical physicist since Einstein, Dr. Hawking serves as both an intellectual and physical inspiration. His disability - Lou Gehrig's disease- serves to make his every endeavor a slow and tedious affair, and yet his professional output remains very high, both in quality and quantity. This book is no exception.
Written at the level of the layperson, it is clear, concise, and through. As the title suggests, he begins with the origin of the universe and progresses through the theoretical foundation for, and the evidence in favor of, the existence of black holes. Of particular interest is his thermodynamic analysis of black holes, showing that they too, obey the second law of thermodynamics. Combining the ideas of general relatively and quantum mechanics, he was able to show that a black hole is really not totally black; it does leak radiation at a rate inversely proportional to its mass. This debunking of the supposed "final fate of matter" once again shows that the universe "is stranger than we can possibly imagine."
The only sad note occurs in the acknowledgements when Dr. Hawking explains the lack of equations by stating that every equation that appears in a book will cut its sales in half. This is an unfortunate comment on the degree of intellectual sophistication of the reading public.

Published in School Science and Mathematics, reprinted with permission.
... Read more

Editorial Review

William Kamkwamba was born in Malawi, a country where magic ruled and modern science was mystery. It was also a land withered by drought and hunger. But William had read about windmills, and he dreamed of building one that would bring to his small village a set of luxuries that only 2 percent of Malawians could enjoy: electricity and running water. His neighbors called him misala—crazy—but William refused to let go of his dreams. With a small pile of once-forgotten science textbooks; some scrap metal, tractor parts, and bicycle halves; and an armory of curiosity and determination, he embarked on a daring plan to forge an unlikely contraption and small miracle that would change the lives around him.

The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind is a remarkable true story about human inventiveness and its power to overcome crippling adversity. It will inspire anyone who doubts the power of one individual's ability to change his community and better the lives of those around him.

Reviews

Build a windmill, get invited to TED!, September 6, 2009

An amazing story of determination and hope, September 10, 2009

Inspirational, definitely; drudgery at times, December 30, 2009
I didn't really know what to expect when I purchased this book for my Kindle, although I will admit that I noticed the high marks (5 stars) from the other reviewers. So I decided to give it a try and see what the hype was about.

For the first 10% of the book (Kindle doesn't have page numbers) I really was regretting the purchase. The pages were filled with stories of William (main character) as a young boy and the various predicaments he found himself in. The stories told of magic and witchcraft that caused all kinds of terrible things to happen and the overall direction of the book seemed to bounce back and forth from story or idea to another story or idea. I found myself thinking that these stories were so farfetched, how is the remainder of the book going to integrate these magical tales. At that point, I wasn't looking forward to reading more of the book. Nevertheless I persevered and was happily rewarded.

As William grows older (relatively speaking), the story - rather than witchcraft and magic - turns to real life events (famine and hardship) which actually brings you closer to William and his family. Not that many of us can relate to devastating famine where it wipes out entire populations, but it does help us understand what William had to deal with during such a trying time. Some touching moments are created in these pages and definitely rewards for turning the pages.

Once William begins his journey of harnessing the wind, for me, this was the most interesting part of the book. It truly was fascinating to me to not only learn how some of the things we take for granted (like electricity) can play such an integral role in communities that are essentially third world countries but also how one would go about constructing things with no money. The inspiration and true reward which William finally receives for his hard work does make you want to stand up and feel proud - it's definitely a feel good moment to say the least.

It was funny, as I was reading the first 10% of the book, I was going to give this review one star. Then as I continued to read on, I planned on raising it to two stars and when I finished, it was three stars. And while I agree that it could be given a true five star rating, portions of the book just seemed so distracting to me that it actually took away from the reading. Again, this is a truly inspirational story and that alone is a five star rating but fold in much of the remaining passages and it loses some of it's luster - hence the three stars.

Overall though, should you decide to pick up a copy, just know that if you're bored in the first pages, it will get better.

Inspiring true story of hope and invention set against Malawi's worst famine in 50 years, August 29, 2009
You can't help but be moved by the tale of William Kamkwamba, a poor young Malawian boy who was forced to drop out of high school for lack of school fees. Rather than waste his life, he decided to educate himself via a small library at his former primary school. He sees the cover of a 5th grade textbook from the United States which depicts a windmill, and decides to build one to power his family's home, despite no knowledge of exactly how to do so and no money for parts. Whether he succeeds and what happens after I won't spoil here.

Set against the backdrop of the country's worst famine in 50 years where people were literally starving to death, this story is also the journey of a boy who believes in magic as he becomes a young man of science. Co-written with journalist Bryan Mealer, the book reads like a novel. You'll find it lyrical, poignant and in parts, heartbreaking, but ultimately uplifting, hopeful and life-affirming. Perfect for anyone who enjoys thrilling and inspiring true-life tales. Besides general readers, I recommend "The Boy" for bookclubs, gifts, do-it-yourself enthusiasts (Makers!) and for middle school, high school and college readers.

If you loved Greg Mortensen's "Three Cups of Tea," you'll love "The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind."

Fascinating picture of life in a modern 3rd-world country, September 11, 2009

Harnessing Hope., September 10, 2009

Starving? No education? No power? Build a windmill. Absolutely amazing story., September 4, 2009

Inspirational story grabs you and takes you away, September 14, 2009

Humanity prevailing against odds, September 13, 2009

everyday survival and determination, September 13, 2009

Editorial Review

"[Greene] develops one fresh new insight after another...In the great tradition of physicists writing for the masses, The Elegant Universe sets a standard that will be hard to beat." --George Johnson, The New York Times Book Review

In a rare blend of scientific insight and writing as elegant as the theories it explains, Brian Greene, one of the world's leading string theorists, peels away the layers of mystery surrounding string theory to reveal a universe that consists of 11 dimensions where the fabric of space tears and repairs itself, and all matter-from the smallest quarks to the most gargantuan supernovas-is generated by the vibrations of microscopically tiny loops of energy.

Green uses everything from an amusement park ride to ants on a garden hose to illustrate the beautiful yet bizarre realities that modern physics is unveiling.

Dazzling in its brilliance, unprecedented in its ability to both illuminate and entertain, The Elegant Universe is a tour de force of science writing-a delightful, lucid voyage through modern physics that brings us closer than ever to understanding how the universe works. ... Read more

Reviews

A magnficent accomplishment, February 5, 2000
In this book on eleven-dimensional space-time, Brian Greene proves himself to be truly exceptional in at least three of those dimensions: by his thorough comprehension of the origins and direction of theoretical physics up through the emergence of superstring theory, by his monumental contributions to that theory in identifying its components and extending its reach, and, thirdly, in explaining this subject in a way that allows the "layman" to gain an appreciation and intuitive understanding of it.

By way of explaining the use of the term "layman," let me point out that this book is not light reading. I don't believe it can be read by those without at least some exposure to college level physics. I am a former high school physics teacher, and I had to really stretch to understand Dr. Greene's explanations. Nevertheless, considering the mathematical and physical complexity of the subject matter, Dr. Greene has done a splendid and remarkable job of explaining the subject at a conceptual, nonmathematical level. Anyone with a physics background through the level of an introductory course in modern physics will find Dr. Greene's treatise accessible. It brings the reader closer to the current state of research in the rapidly moving field of superstring theory than books written even two years ago.

The book requires work, but it was a labor of love. This book is beautifully and artfully written and was a joy to read. I recommend it highly to anyone with the modest physics background described above who enjoys exploring theoretical physics and cosmology at a level approximating that of Scientific American.

I felt my brain growing!, July 30, 2003
Before I read this book, I didn't know the first thing about string theory, general relativity or quantum mechanics. I believe people like me were the author's target audience; that is, people who are profoundly interested in the mysterious physics of the universe, but lack the scientific or mathematical background to understand them in their raw form. This book certainly shouldn't be seen as anything other than an introduction for those of us outside the field of physics.

Each chapter in this book lays down the foundation for the next chapter. Greene manages to group together scattered discoveries from the past century or so according to their relevance to the topic at hand, and it feels very natural. Every complex concept is explained in somewhat technical detail and then followed up immediately by a clever (and occasionally humorous) analogy. The key points are always restated and rephrased to make absolutely sure the reader is on the same page with the author. This method really does wonders for nailing important concepts to your head, which turns out to be absolutely essential as the book progresses and new ideas are stacked atop the old.

This book, overall, is interesting. There are some extraordinarily intriguing chapters that will have your mind racing for at least a couple days, trying to piece together the chapter's implications, and then there are a couple dull chapters that almost feel like a chore to get through. However, the dull chapters, which seem to be flooded with basic mathematical and technical details, are necessary to understand the big picture. Greene only presents us with the details we need to understand, nothing more, and I honestly can't think of a way he could have made these dull chapters exciting.

If you are a curious physics newbie, or only know bits and pieces about the basic concepts of string theory, special and general relativity, quantum mechanics, black holes, the big bang, or hidden dimensions, this book is certainly for you! If you are already knowledgeable in these subjects and seek the deepest technical and mathematical information about them, I'm guessing you will not find what you are looking for in this book.

Excellent Book, December 11, 1999
Assumes no prior knowledge of physics as such. Has an excellent introduction to relativity and quantum theory. Actually, I haven't seen a better introduction to relativity or quantum theory elsewhere. The book then moves on to string theory (which is the main theme of the book). An excellent introduction to string theory, I must say. The book is very easy to follow and can very well serve as a layman's introduction to high-end physics. For the more advanced readers, the author provides endnotes which elaborate the subject matter in a mathematical/physical perspective. People from all walks of life will enjoy this book

Excellent book for understanding mysteries of the universe, May 24, 1999
I recommend this book to anyone who is curious enough to wonder about the origins of matter, energy, and the universe itself. Mr. Greene makes it very easy for the lay readers to grasp the basic understanding of some out of this world concepts, such as extra dimensions and vibrating strings. I am a professional engineer with years of training in math and physics, however, I enjoyed the non-technical way Professor Greene has written this book. After reading this book I had a much better understanding of quantum mechanics, relativity, and the string theory, and enjoyed reading the whole book from beginning to the end.

Some of the reviewers have faulted Professor Greene for communicating his ideas without using complicated mathematics. To me, this is one of strengths of this and other similar books that are written for the lay people. Those readers who are mathematical geniuses can find plenty of other resources to suit their taste. Others think that it is inappropriate to write about incomplete theories that cannot be experimentally verified at the present time. This is absurd. This is what the progress of science is all about. I thank Brian Greene for sharing his ideas so clearly with the rest of us. I am going to talk to my young daughter about this book in the hopes of inspiring her to someday join the minds who want to unlock the mysteries of our universe.

Alternative view of a physicist not in the Superstring Camp, June 10, 2005
I've read popular books on superstrings/M-theory (Greene's being the prime example), and I've watched TV programs popularizing the same. While I must admit the propaganda value of these media in helping to raise the general public's interest in Physics, I'm afraid that these books and media are extremely biased and give a skewed view of the state of theoretical physics today. An unsuspecting reader picking up this book will likely come away with the feeling that this is a summary of the status quo of theoretical physics nowadays, but nothing can be further from the truth.

While superstring/M theory is one of the active frontiers in theoretical physics, it is hardly the only active frontier, nor is it the most promising. Due to the almost complete lack of empirical evidence for superstring/M theory, plus the almost impenetrable math (even to many theoretical physicists!) within which superstring/M theory has wrapped itself, superstring/M theory stands out as a rather strange theory: it's an isolated self-perpetrating theoretical construct almost impervious to external checks and reviews. Such theories aren't uncommon in physics: throughout the history of physics they pop up every now and then, e.g. Eddington's numerology, Einstein's unified field theory and Finkelstein's theory of everything, to name just a few. The main difference between superstring/M theory and these other theories is that superstring/M theory is much more polished mathematically, and has a much larger following. This in turn has made superstring/M theory much more respectable in appearance, by patching any loopholes that appear with newer and higher orders of abstractions (as evidenced by appearance of the most anti-intuitive wild concepts like extra spacetime dimensions, parallel universes etc.), all of which were wrapped in the most exquisite and impenetrable mathematics. This in turn has attracted even more smart students to superstring/M theory, which in turn makes it appear even more respectable, which in turn... ad infinitum.

A theory in physics is only as good as the physical (not mathematical) foundation upon which it's built, and the physical foundation of superstring/M theory is shaky at best, non-existent at worst. As a purely mathematical theory, superstring/M theory may be able to stand on its own as an elegant and insightful theory which may even have applications in other exotic branches of mathematics. But a physical theory can never stand alone, it must have verifiable connections to experiments and to other more established branches of physics. A completely isolated theory in physics, however elegant and compelling it may be mathematically and aesthetically, is irrelevant and is doomed to suffer the fate of so many other fads and irrelevant theories in physics: to be forgotten in time.

I just hope that Brian Greene and other proponents of superstring/M theory can be a little more humble and admit that their theory is nothing but a spectacular but ultimately speculative theory in physics, just one among many many others, and stop preaching like it's the best and only candidate theory in physics.

(For a more balanced view of superstring theory, based on BBC interviews of several leading theoretical physicists (including Feynman, Weinberg and Glashow), read the book "Superstrings : A Theory of Everything?" edited by P.C.W. Davies and J. Brown. e.g. here's what Glashow (Nobel-prize winner in physics) has to say about superstring theory:

"... There have always been kookie fanatics following strange visions. One of the most kookie, and of course most brilliant, was Einstein himself. It has often been said by my string theory friends that superstrings are going to dominate physics for the next half of a century. Ed Witten has said that. I would like to modify that remark. I would say that string theory will dominate the next fifty years of physics in the same way that Kaluza-Klein theory, another kookie theory upon which string theory is based, has dominated particle physics in the past fifty years. Which is to say, not at all."

My sentiments exactly :)

A Feast of a Book!, December 6, 1999
This book is a sheer delight to read! Brian Greene's clarity of thinking and joy of exploring the quest for the ultimate physics theory come clearly through as he describes how superstrings just might be the "common thread" that runs through this universe from the tiniest quantum bits to the largest relativistic bodies. Are you curious to know how all these dimensions can exist in our universe unseen? Greene brilliantly describes memorable analogies (such as an ant seen from a distance to be walking along on a garden hose) that give readers a clear sense of what hidden curled dimensions might feel like... and he writes about physics with such grace and style! If you've hungered to know how to better understand hidden dimensions and superstrings, this book is guaranteed to first pique and then satisfy your appetite.

A Great Intro to the "Holy Grail of Physics", June 30, 2003
I had picked this book up in its hardcover edition a few years ago, but haven't got around to reading it until recently and I'm sorry I didn't do so earlier. It is an excellent introduction to physics and an outstanding overview of "string theory" that is accessible to the layman (in as much as particle physics *can* be accessible without a real knowledge of mathematics.)

The Elegant Universe is worth the purchase price, if only for chapters 2,3 and 4 which lay out, in terms understandable by anyone, the ideas behind Einstein's theory of special relativity, Einstein's theory of general relativity and quantum mechanics. I highly recommend it for this purpose alone.

The rest of the book deals with the central connudrum of modern physics which is, unfortunately, although the theories of relativity (governing large systems) and quantum mechanics (governing minute systems) have been experimentally verified over the past century and are indeed true, they are *not compatible*. Greene does a good job of explaining why the theories are in conflict with one another.

The rest of the book deals with string theory, which Greene and a lot of other string theorists claim can "bridge the gap" between relativity and quantum mechanics. Although Greene does a terrific job of explaining string theory through graspable metaphors, towards the end end of the book, my tiny brain had difficulty understanding some of the concepts.

Yet, by far, Greene provides the most accessible description of this revolution in physics. Greene is quite obviously an ardent evangelist of string theory and his optimism concerning its possibilities lend a certain energy to the read, getting you through the difficult parts. You can tell that this is a man who loves and is excited by what he does for a living, and that excitement is contagious.

Anyone with an interest in why the universe is the way it is will be well rewarded by this text.

Incredibly Clear, Enjoyable Read -- A Great Book, March 4, 2001
Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" is the best book on a scientific subject I've ever read. The first five chapters, which deal with Space, Time, Special & General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics, are incredibly clear and worth the price of the book alone. Without using any math, Greene is able to explain the key points of all these topics, and most importantly, to show why Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are incompatible, and why that's a problem for physicists. He then takes the reader through the various stages of thinking that have gone into String Theory, and it's fascinating stuff! Greene uses copious examples to demonstrate concepts that are difficult to visualize or grasp, and this is incredibly helpful. You definitely get a sense, for instance, of what a "curled up dimension" means, through some very clever reduced-dimension examples (not sure if these are Greene's constructions or well-known in the physics world, but they're very clear and helpful). The going gets a little tougher towards the end of the book, where the most recent thinking on String Theory and the discussion of Black Holes & the early instants of the cosmos are more complex and tougher to grok straight through. But even so, they are fascinating and worth the effort.

Greene's prose is clear, analytical, and well thought out. At least a half dozen times while reading the book, I said to myself, "Hmmm, but what about X?" to find a few paragraphs later Greene would write, "You may be wondering about X. Well, here's how that works..." To me, this is a sign of a clear thinker and helped make the book even more enjoyable to read. If you're at all interested in cutting edge physics theory, this is a great book to turn to.

Question reality., May 21, 2000
This is an excellent trip through the wonders of modern cosmology and physics. I kept having to get up and walk around the room once in a while and pinch myself to get a new reality fix. Well maybe reality -- but Mr. Greene might think I was fooling myself and only moving about in the 3 dimensional space known to my conciousness, and not the other seven tightly wrapped dimensions in Calabi-Yau forms at a billionth of a billonth of a meter. Who needs science fiction when the real thing is so "unreal?"

As a reader I have more than a casual interest in modern physics and have read dozens of books in this vein, however I do not have a math background sufficient enough to deal with the professional literature in the field. I have found this work one of the best in explaining string theory. Mr. Greene's approach of using analogy and metaphor is right on target. His sometimes humorous approach was a good antidote for what could become overbearingly theoretical.

The first half went down pretty easily in spite of the difficult nature of the subject. Brian Greene deserves much applause for pulling off this bit of magic. The second half gets tangled up in the author's own areas of research and I felt that he suddenly began talking to a different audience, in this case his peers, and instead of an explanatory tone, the book seemed a little bit argumentative. Of course this is a topic where anything said in a definitive manner is likely to provoke a professional argument. Nonetheless, the first half of the book is well worth the read and more than adequately covers the field for the reader where this topic would be of interest. The second half will be of interest to folks with more background.

Wonderfully written, November 24, 1999
Ive been reading several books on RT/QM like "Relativity Simply explained [Martin Gardner]", "Alice in Quantum Land" etc. but this is so far the best i have read. the scenarios that Brian sets are fantastic. Esp I like the Grace/George and time-dilation examples. Even if the main theme of the book is about strings, i doubt you will find a better explanation of relativity elsewhere. And slowly when the author moves to string theory.... its just wonderful. As gripping as a Holmes story. ... Read more

Editorial Review

In the spirit of National Geographic’s top-selling Orbit, this large-format, full-color volume stands alone in revealing more than 200 of the most spectacular images from the Hubble Space Telescope during its lifetime, to the very eve of the 2008 final shuttle mission to the telescope. Written by two of the world’s foremost authorities on space history, Hubble: Imaging Space and Time illuminates the solar system’s workings, the expansion of the universe, the birth and death of stars, the formation of planetary nebulae, the dynamics of galaxies, and the mysterious force known as "dark energy."

The potential impact of this book cannot be overstressed: The 2008 servicing mission to install new high-powered scientific instruments is especially high profile because the cancellation of the previous mission, in 2004, caused widespread controversy. The authors reveal the inside story of Hubble’s beginnings, its controversial early days, the drama of its first servicing missions, and the creation of the dynamic images that reach into the deepest regions of visible space, close to the time when the universe began.

A wealth of astonishing images leads us to the very edge of known space, setting the stage for the new James Webb Space Telescope, scheduled to launch in 2013. Find the stunning panoramic of Carina Nebula, detailing star birth as never before; a jet from a black hole in one galaxy striking a neighboring galaxy; a jewel-like collection of galaxies from the early years of the universe; and a giant galaxy cannibalizing a smaller galaxy.

Timed for the 2008 shuttle launch and coinciding with the 400th anniversary of Galileo’s first telescope, Hubble: Imaging Space and Time accompanies a high-profile exhibit at the National Air and Space Museum and will be featured on the popular NASM website. ... Read more

Reviews

HUBBLE:IMAGING SPACE & TIME, October 29, 2008
This is a picture book, beautifully done. This is not a highly technical text but mostly a collection of extraordinary photos from what is arguably the greatest achievement of the US space program. From this relatively small telescope, unhindered by the earth's atmosphere, we have an amazing array of objects that link art with science. Absolutely stunning.

astonishing, November 13, 2008
This is an incredible book showcasing the unbelievable wonders of outer space. Anyone who has looked up into the night sky will love this one. The swirling colors, brilliance, and unimaginable size will give you an awe and appreciation of the vastness and complexity of our universe. It is like looking thru the eyes of God. Each page brings a more brilliant image. Makes one feel pretty humble.

Great pictorial book of Hubble Space Telescope achievements, December 9, 2008
This book provides a very nice overview of the visual achievements of the Hubble Space Telescope. It is a pictorial book, very pleasant to peruse at one's liesure. The text is not in depth as noted by other reviewers but does provide an overview of the telescopes history, on orbit repairs, methods of obtaining obeserving time and some limited science results. Highly recommended visually but lacking a little in textual depth.

Great gift, February 2, 2009
I bought this lovely book as a gift for my engineer husband -- he was thrilled with it. The images are both stunning and eerie. Who knew that just outside our local astral neighborhood there were such amazing sights? In this day of high tech instant gratification it's hard to keep in mind that mysteries and miracles do exist - and it's too easy to take for granted such stellar achievements in the sciences. Pick up this book and leaf through it and that just falls away - you'll be amazed. And humbled.

Hubble: Imaging ..., January 11, 2009
Absolutely glorious. Breaches all the boundaries: physical, spiritual, intellectual. Immerse yourself in it; and for the love of your children, share it with them when they are ready.

Art and Science Merge, January 11, 2009
The artist and the scientist will love this exquisite book that is suitable for all ages. My thirteen-year old grandson, 46 year-old son, and I spent the day after Christmas gently turning the pages of Hubble:Imaging Space and Time, reading some of the text, and being astonished by the photographs. We could not put the book down until we were satiated by its richness.

Illustrated Cosmos, March 28, 2009
This is a large, hardback, heavy book. It is a reference book with tons of illustrations and pictures of distant astronomic objects. It especially covers the origin of the study of astronomy and its transformation by orbiting astronomy. It concentrates on the Hubble Space Telescope, its design and the images it produces.

Hubble Telescope Results, November 1, 2009
The book is an amazing mixture of technical descriptions of the Hubble Telescope, astrophysical phenomena, historical perspectives of the Hubble project (a story in itself) as well as of the development of the astronomical knowledge in the past and last but not least wonderfull pictures of what is normally hidden in the sky.
The book ist worth every penny I spent for it with Amazon (and I paid very little).
J.Benn

Hubble. This amateur astronomer sees what fantastic images are, October 30, 2009
Hubble Imaging Space and Time is fantastic. This is essentially a coffee table picture book. The images are fantastic. There is good description. As an amateur astronomer for 40 years I get good views with my 20 inch telescope but NOTHING can compare to the beautiful and detailed pictures in this book. A good assortment of images is offered.I go to a few star parties and give backup presentations to school kids if the clubs telescopes get clouded out and the kids cant see anything. This book will be great for showing both kids and grownups the wonders of the universe. This book is great for parents to show their kids and read desriptions. Both will love this book and hopefully want to learn more about the Universe and Astronomy.

I am so thankful for the scientists, government workers and everyone throughout the world that made the use of the Hubble possible. The Hubble is indeed a world treasure. One of mankinds technological masterpieces.

A great book!, August 20, 2009
For anyone interested in the Hubble Space Telescope, this is an enthralling read... But above all it's a breathtaking tour through some of the most exquisite images ever captured of the cosmos. I've thumbed through lots of Hubble and cosmology books, but this beats all. A must-have for astronomers and cosmologists. Huge detailed photos and lots of fascinating technical information. ... Read more

Editorial Review

The unique Lunar Year The: A Glow-in-the-Dark Calendar 2011 Wall Calendar re-creates the wonder of a moonlit night. Printed with a special glow-in-the-dark ink, each page illuminates all the daily phases of the moon, while also showcasing extraordinary lunar photographs. Included are images from a NASA exploratory mission, a view of a lunar eclipse, shots that document unusual lunar phenomena, and striking landscape compositions. This is the perfect calendar for stargazers of all ages.

* Glows in the dark.

* Appeals to adults and kids of all ages.

* 12 high-quality reproductions of the moon.

* 365 glow-in-the-dark moons that let you track the phases of the moon daily. ... Read more

Reviews

Buy This Every Year, September 4, 2010
This is probably my 5th time buying Universe's Lunar Calender. It is well made, with stunning photography. Bonus is the glow in the dark feature! Shows on phases of the moon, too. Highly recommend.

By the author of Harmonious Environment

I never buy any other calendar!, October 14, 2010
I buy this calendar every year and certainly hope they never stop publishing it. It is a definite statement calendar with 'in your face' spectacular moon photos
that are photographic works of art. The days are white printed on a black background - very easy to read (!), but there can be no writing on the pages.
Each day shows the moon phase & since I walk my dogs at night, checking the brightness that night is very useful; not to mention what you might expect....
Love this calendar - it's so unique compared to all the others out there.......... Get it!

Not for Notes!, December 23, 2010
I bought this for the wonderful photography but if you need a wall calendar that you can write in important dates, stay away from this one. The whole thing is black! Even if I got a special pen the squares are tiny. Great for kids who like glow in the dark stuff. I wasted money therefore I'm very disappointed. ... Read more

Editorial Review

Editorial Review

With the born storyteller'scommand of narrative and imaginative approach, LeonardMlodinow vividly demonstrates how our lives are profoundly informed by chance andrandomness and how everything from wine ratings and corporate success to school gradesand political polls are less reliable than we believe.

�

By showing us the true natureof chance and revealing the psychological illusions that cause us to misjudge theworld around us, Mlodinow gives us the tools we need to make more informed decisions.From the classroom to the courtroom and from financial markets to supermarkets, Mlodinow'sintriguing and illuminating look at how randomness, chance, and probability affectour daily lives will intrigue, awe, and inspire.

� ... Read more

Reviews

Excellent Book on Randomness in Everyday Life, May 16, 2008
I just love books like this - especially when they're as well-written as this one. The author, a physicist, proceeds to show the reader how randomness plays a much greater role in everyday life than one might think. As he discusses the basics of probability and statistics, he provides wonderful illustrations from fields as wide-ranging as sports, medicine, psychology, the stock market, etc., etc. He does an excellent job in driving home the fact that the true probability of events is not intuitive. Perhaps because of this anti-intuitiveness, I had to read a few paragraphs more than once to allow the point being made to sink in. One enigma that is particularly well explained is the Monty Hall (Let's Make a Deal) problem. The writing style is clear, accessible, very friendly, quite authoritative, engaging and often very witty. This book can be enjoyed by absolutely everyone, but I suspect that math and science buffs will savor it the most. By the way, the math-phobic need not fear: the book does not contain a single mathematical formula.

Chances are good you'll like this one, May 18, 2008
This smart book will make you think. Academic yet easy to read, it explores how random events shape the world and how human intuition fights that fact. I found this point fascinating. It never occurred to me that our brains naturally want to see patterns and order, and life doesn't necessarily work like that.

It's comforting to think of an orderly world, with everything in its place, running according to plan. It dovetails into our yearning for meaning and control, and the need to feel that we are important. The idea of randomness is frightening. If the world is shaped without conscious decision, it's a pretty chilly prospect.

Author Leonard Mlodinow examines the importance of randomness in diverse situations, including Las Vegas roulette tables, "Let's Make a Deal," the career of Bruce Willis, and the Warsaw ghetto after Hitler invaded Poland. The author does a good job explaining how chance and luck are vital factors in how things turn out.

The cover has a nice touch. On the dust jacket, several die-cut holes reveal letters on the hardback underneath. The letters are the R and D in "Drunkard's," the A in "Walk," the N in "Randomness," the O in "Our" and the M in Mlodinow. These letters are connected by a thin red line. They spell out "RANDOM."

Here's the chapter list:

1. Peering through the Eyepiece of Randomness
2. The Laws of Truths and Half-Truths
3. Finding Your Way Through a Space of Possibilities
4. Tracking the Pathways to Success
5. The Dueling Laws of Large and Small Numbers
6. False Positives and Positive Fallacies
7. Measurement and the Law of Errors
8. The Order in Chaos
9. Illusions of Patterns and Patterns of Illusion
10. The Drunkard's Walk

Competent but unoriginal, May 17, 2008
Promising prologue "... when chance is involved, people's thought processes are often seriously flawed .... [this book] is about the principles that govern chance, the development of those ideas, and the way they play out in business, medicine, economics, sports, ..." but a disappointing book. The book consists of a range of topics already well covered in a dozen previous popular science style books: history of probability (Cardano, Pascal, Bernoulli, Laplace, de Moivre) and of demographic and economic data; statistical logic (Bayes rule and false positives/negatives; Galton and the regression fallacy, normal curve and measurement error, mistaking random variation as being caused); overstating predictability in business affairs (past success doesn't ensure future success) and perennials such as Monty Hall, the gambler's fallacy, and hot hands.

These topics are presented in a way that's easy to read -- historical stories, anecdotes and experiments, with almost no mathematics. So it's a perfectly acceptable read if you haven't seen any of this material before before, but it doesn't bring any novel content or viewpoint to the table. Other books are equally informative and well written but have more interesting individual focus and panache:
Dicing with Death: Chance, Risk and Health shows hows to add analysis to anecdote,
Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk has more intellectual discipline (staying focused on the current topic),
Struck by Lightning: The Curious World of Probabilities gives a thorough treatment of implications of textbook theory,
The Jungles of Randomness: A Mathematical Safari gives snippets of contemporary research,
Chances Are: Adventures in Probability has less hackneyed history,
and Fooled by Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the Markets is an engagingly opinionated view of chance in the stock market and life.

BEST NON-FICTION BOOK THIS YEAR, May 26, 2008
I do not know how to explain this book because it is so good. Its lessons are useful in business strategy, in evaluating the Iraq war, in deciding whether the Feds should lower interest rates and in planning one's own career. It is simply put the Best Book of the Year.

The author covers the growth and evolution of theories of probability, what he calls theories of randomness, and ties it together with anecdotes one cannot find in any other book on the subject. Yes, it is just as readable as Peter Bernstein's classic Against the Gods and far more thoughtful (and less arogant) than Fooled by Randomness by Nasim Taleb. The author is the co-author with Stephen Hawking of the Briefer History of Time and unless he has a ghost writer, is easily the best writer of non-fiction of the serious kind. His prose is perfect, his choice of anecdotes appropriate, his domain expertise unmatched.

The book ends unexpectedly but poignantly, about his aunt's awful fate at a Nazi death camp. Honestly, I respect the author's prerogative but I wish it was in an epilogue. It is too serious a subject and takes the mind to another dimension, to be read at the last minute, that too in a book with so much to think about anyway.

THIS SHOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL READING IN EVERY COURSE IN BUSINESS SCHOOL, SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT, SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, MILITARY INSTITUTION, BESIDES IN EVERY COLLEGE AND COLLEGE CAREER'S COUNSELING. AND IN EVERY HOSPITAL WAITING ROOM. AND IN PLACES OF WORSHIP TOO. NO PERSON CAN BE IN THE MODERN WORLD WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENTS IN THIS BOOK

Thought-Provoking Examples of Randomness in Our Lives, July 11, 2008
Instead of repeating other reviewers, let's focus on other content.

Arguments about the astronomical improbably of a DNA chance match are disingenuous. A false match can also occur because of lab error, and this is far, far more likely than a genuine DNA chance match.

Mlodinow illustrates the Bayesian principle: "...the probability that A will occur if B occurs will generally differ from the probability that B will occur if A occurs." (p. 117) About 1 in 10,000 heterosexual non-IV-drug-abusing white males are infected with HIV. As for tests of HIV infection, the rate of false negatives is about zero, and that of false positives is 1 in 1,000. So, out of 10,000 tested subjects, there will be 9, 989 negatives. Of the 11 positives, 10 will be false and 1 will be true. So only 1 in 11 individuals who test positive for HIV actually are infected with HIV. (pp. 115-116)

During WWII, German V-2 rockets often hit near each other, prompting fears that the Germans had perfected pinpoint accuracy in their targeting. It turned out that the clusters of hits were random. Most geographical clusters of cancer occurrence also are random clusters.

We learn about such things as regression toward the mean, Pascal's wager, the gambler's fallacy, and the scratched (and therefore biased) roulette wheels at Monte Carlo. Also, election recounts in very close elections are bound to differ with each recount owing solely to small random errors operating on millions and millions of votes. So no recount is necessarily more accurate than the original count.

Life expectancy applies to groups, not individuals. For instance, if the life expectancy of a 90 year-old is 6 years, it only tells us that half of 90-year olds will still be alive at 96. It does not tell us which particular 90 year-old individual will still be alive at 96.

When there are hundreds of coin tosses, it is common for strings of consecutive "heads" and "tails" to arise solely by chance. Likewise, a string of good luck or bad luck in our lives can be completely random, yet easily misinterpreted as something meaningful.

When experimental subjects are told that, by pressing a button, they are controlling actually randomly-flashing lights, they readily believe it. We want to believe that we are in control because a lack of control, or perceived lack of control, leads to stress. This is especially true in extreme situations. For instance, concentration-camp victims who survived tended to be those who established some measure of control over their horrible experiences.

Marvelous! Marvelous! Marvelous!, October 1, 2008
As a teacher of high school mathematics and statistics, I have read many such books on the subject at hand. Few of them are as readable and enjoyable as The Drunkard's Walk.

What Mlodinow's brings to the table is a great sense of humor and a writing style that is entertaining and engaging, with great stories to go along with the mathematical ideas he shares. He brings in historical anecdotes and psychological research to highlight how mathematical truth and human perception clash. I found myself very impressed by his ability to bring in the perfect study or story to illustrate a point.

Essentially, the book is a course in Statistics 101, but reading it, you'd never know. It is geared to the average intelligent reader, but there are few mathematical formulas or abstractions. Enjoy!

Other related books and how they compare:
Against the Gods- The Remarkable Story of Risk: Much drier. More detail, less fun.

Fooled By Randomness: Arrogant writing style, too philosophical for my taste. Focus on the markets.

Damn Lies and Statistics: Narrow focus on how Statistics can mislead. Good examples, though not as entertaining.

Chances Are: A good read, similar content, though this is more engaging.

Innumeracy: A must read classic by Paulos.

Predictably Irrational: Fun book, similar style but more about behavioral economics (overlaps last chapter of this book)

Sway: Pretty good, but not as overarching as Predictably Irrational

SuperCrunchers: Unimpressive book that I thought didn't prove thesis well.

Best for Probability/Statistics Novices, June 22, 2008
If you're not versed in probability this is an excellent book to introduce you to the history and importance of probability in daily life. Its an easy and interesting read. Much of the book however is dedicated to explaining mathematical basics & history. If you already know what a normal distribution is, this book falls a little short in really linking randomness and how we perceive success. Only one or two chapters at the end are devoted to this.

Fascinating, humbling (even potentially disturbing), June 1, 2008
The author says nothing new on the topic, nor does he say it in a way that is apt to make a dent in the "willful consciousness" of many who insist on a world of clear-cut cause and effect or on a Divine Will that keeps its eye not merely on a sparrow but on a nation's military actions or on human behaviors provoking retributions (hurricanes, etc.) upon its godless practitioners. In all such instances, the distinction between cause-effect thinking and predestined events that happen by necessity is lost. Instead, it all comes down to the pragmatic need of an inherently egocentric human nature to impose order where circumstances may not justify it.

The author writes to the layman, making the language of statistics, probability, randomness a fascinating read. It's clear that he's well aware of the fallacies and delusions (and consequent harm) to which most of us are easy prey. But he leaves it to the reader to draw any philosophical-theological inferences about the need for greater humility. His immediate goal is to help the reader understand the distinction between 1. the "common-sense" logic employed by self-serving finite beings coping with problems in the material world and 2. a "scientific method" that takes nothing for granted in a universe of perpetual flux. More miraculous than either the accomplishments of the romantic hero or the intercessions of a supreme being (everyday stuff for most of us) is the rare discovery that two things (or "events" in the spatial-temporal order) suspected of being connected (a hypothesis) in fact cannot be shown "not" to have such a relationship (the proof).

Such a small yield is unlikely to satisfy most of us, let alone a creationist or a supporter of intelligent design--in other words, it's not more propagandist "proof-texting" and weird science; it's "real" science. And those who take it upon themselves to help us understand the universe as it is, merit a reader's undivided attention. Highly recommended for the genuinely curious.

Enjoyable read, not exceptionally profound, August 2, 2008
Some unorganized reactions.

The Drunkard's Walk owes much to a classic in this field, Innumeracy by John Paulos. This book borrows much from that work in its discussion of misleading use of probabilities, with at least one story lifted directly from it, and most others coming more indirectly from Innumeracy. To those who have read that book it still offers some in terms of unintuitive probabilities, including a discussion of the infamous Monty Hall problem.

It touches areas that Innumeracy didn't though discussing psychology, statistics, and offering a history of probability/statistics. The historical ranting are rather tedious and most likely already known to the readers of this type of material or unwelcome. The dabbles into psychological aspect of why we have trouble perceiving randomness, among other such issues discussed, provide the most interesting and original aspects of the book.

The book falls very short of its stated goal of revealing how randomness runs our lives. In fact, only his discussions of statistics and anecdotes seem to bring us closer to his goal. The other points are enjoyable to read, but deal little with the supposed purpose of the book.

A good read, mostly for those unfamiliar with the Mathematics, but I find the psychological aspect of the book will make an acceptable read for those who have prior understanding of probability and statistics.

Drunkard's Walk, June 3, 2008
An amazing traverse across the landscape of randomness that makes sense to scientist and layperson alike. I thought Euclid's Window was readable and clear, but Drunkard's Walk makes sense of an incredibly random world in a concise, clear, and thoughtful way. A "should read" for everyone in a management job who is looking for those insights that could propel your operations beyond the ordinary by understanding the universe as it is. The examples are concrete and compelling. ... Read more

Editorial Review

“A triumph.”—Steve Weinberg, Boston GlobeThis is “must-have” information for all presidents—and citizens—of the twenty-first century: Is Iran’s nascent nuclear capability a genuine threat to the West? Are biochemical weapons likely to be developed by terrorists? Are there viable alternatives to fossil fuels that should be nurtured and supported by the government? Should nuclear power be encouraged? Can global warming be stopped? 73 figures and illustrations ... Read more

Reviews

A Level-Headed Scientific Approach to Important Issues, September 2, 2008
What drew me to this book was not so much its title, although it is quite intriguing, but its author. I had read a couple of Professor Muller's books in the past and found them to be very engaging as well as models of clarity. This book is no exception. Using logical scientific reasoning, the author addresses various topics that a future president would likely need to deal with. The topics are: terrorism, energy, nuclear matters, outer space and global warming. Removing any mythology and misinformation that may be associated with these issues, the author carefully analyzes them from a physics perspective; this is to help any future presidents in making solid well-informed decisions. The contentious matter of global warming is dealt with particularly well; in fact, it is one of the fairest and most level-headed discussions of this matter that I have read thus far. A set of notes at the end of the book contain a few simple calculations that complement some of the statements in the main text. However, a reader who is math-phobic need to not worry since the notes are not essential to fully appreciate the book's content. The writing style is very clear, accessible, authoritative, friendly and quite engaging. This informative book can be enjoyed by anyone, especially those interested in the use of a logical scientific approach to address important world issues.

Oval office science, July 26, 2008
We don't expect our presidents to be literal rocket scientists (though it would be nice if one of them every so often was at least a metaphorical one), but we ought to expect them to know enough about science to surround themselves with the very best advisors. The troubling truth of the matter is that presidents, like most Americans, know little about science, even though public policy is increasingly dependent on scientific expertise. So author Richard Muller, who teaches science to nonscience majors at UC-Berkeley, has written his Physics for Future Presidents not only for future presidents but also current citizens.

The book isn't an easy read, and there are enough graphs and equations to set aflutter the hearts of even the most intrepid of nonscientists. But Muller recognizes this possibility, and recommends that nonscientific readers go for the big picture, not allowing themselves to get bogged down with details that might be too complicated on a first run-through. And the big picture--or rather big pictures--he wants us to understand are the science behind bombs and biological weapons likely to be used by terrorists (chapters 1-4), the fossil fuel crisis (chapters 5-7), nuclear energy and nuclear weapons (chapters 8-14), space technology, including space weapons (chapters 15-19), and global warming (chapters 19-25). Especially helpful are the "Presidential Summaries" in which Muller offers convenient wrap-ups of each of the five topics he discusses and some quick public policy recommendations.

My guess is that many readers will find his section on global warming the most interesting and contentious. Muller concludes that global warming is a reality, but one which has been exaggerated in certain ways. Other conclusions that will doubtlessly be contested by some include his claim that disposal of nuclear waste from power plants isn't really a problem (pp. 173-77) and that there's no viable alternative to fossil fuels in sight (in this regard, by the way, Muller agrees with James Howard Kunstler's conclusion in the latter's brilliant The Long Emergency).

It's in the arena of public policy recommendations that Muller, I think, falls short. His answers are too often quick and easy. (Quick example: when it comes to public policy, we (meaning the US but presumably any other country too) "have no right" to insist that China (or presumably any other country) cut back on pollution creation. The implication of this is that the international community has no moral authority--a scary conclusion. And even though Muller claims to be letting science speak for itself in every chapter but one (p. 173), science, performed as it is by opinionated humans, rarely speaks in neutral terms, especially in a book like this. Perceptive readers will pick up on Muller's interpretation of what he considers to be basic data, especially when it comes to global warming trends.

Still, a very helpful, very good book. Even if presidential candidates don't actually read it, it's good that voters do.

Clear and Objective, November 19, 2008
This book is not for the casual reader, but it is a must-read for those who pride themselves on being well informed in any one of the five important issues discussed in this book: Terrorism, Energy, Nukes, Space, and Global Warming. The author has ordered the subject matter according to what he believes are the most pressing issues that will confront the new President. While passionate about the subject material, the author is refreshingly detached in reaching his conclusions, as a physicist should be.

When I recommend this book to my better-informed friends, the most frequent question I get back is, "What does he say about Global Warming?" Those who are looking for pithy sound bites will be disappointed. Those who fear a boring professorial-type lecture will be pleasantly surprised. Dr. Muller presents well thought-out rationales for each section, and his delivery has been refined in the classroom by teaching non-physics students at the University of California, Berkley.

I appreciate Dr. Muller's respect for his readers (and future Presidents.) He does not try to impose a hidden agenda upon us. Dr. Muller clearly states his premises and the physics of his findings flows nicely from them

Here is a sketch of my views, as a physicist, on what the reader can expect.

Terrorism: Dr. Muller discusses the high energy content in the jet fuel carried by each hijacked airplane that hit the towers of the World Trade Center on 9/11. He later describes the likely limitations of a terrorist's dirty bomb. He reminds us that Jose Padilla, an American with extensive al-Qaeda training, proposed to build a dirty bomb. Padilla was directed instead to blow up two apartment buildings using natural gas.

Energy: Dr. Muller hits us with a number of "surprises," such as, gasoline delivers 15 times the energy of an equal weight of TNT; coal is 20 times cheaper than gasoline for the same energy; a square mile of sunlight at midday receives a gigawatt of power. He points out that gasoline holds 100 times more energy, pound for pound, than the high quality expensive batteries in cell phones. (Hence, although he owns a hybrid car himself, he is skeptical about the future of all-electric cars until batteries or fuel cells can be greatly improved.)

Nukes: Here he includes both nuclear weapons and nuclear power. After explaining how to estimate the dangers of exposing many people to radioactivity, he discusses the difficulty of building nuclear weapons. He describes how to build safe nuclear reactors, such as Pebble Bed reactors.

Space: Dr. Muller's believes that science should be the central goal of government space programs. Consequently, he advocates robotics rather than manned space travel. He uses a number of examples to illustrate rocket propulsion, orbits, spy satellites, stealth bombers, meteorite impacts, etc.

Global Warming: This is the most balanced and competent treatment of climate change that I have found. After a chapter on climate history, Dr. Muller discusses the Greenhouse Effect. The evidence brings him to the conclusion that most of the buildup of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is manmade. He then classifies the various kinds of distortions and exaggerations that have plagued this subject over the last decade. Next, he focuses on what he sees as the real task: reducing carbon dioxide. After a discussion of "Non-solutions," he addresses solutions. The centerpiece is a concept that he calls "Comfortable Conservation," by which he means better ways to accomplish a task that is less polluting and often cheaper. Florescent light bulbs are an example.

One of the Most Important Books of the Twenty First Century, July 22, 2008
Buy this book! Read it, and understand it. Then buy one for your Senators and Congressman, and insist they read and understand it. Richard Muller, a physics professor at Cal Berkeley and researcher at Laurence Berkeley Labs, has written a highly accessible book that treats some of the most important, yet misunderstood, topics of our time. He treats, in understandable language, the physics and some of the economics of terrorism, energy, nukes, space, and global warming. You will get no politics. In fact, you probably will have no idea who he might vote for. But you will learn the key facts, questions, and alternatives on the vital issues. You will be amazed at what you didn't know, what you knew that actually isn't true, and what the real alternatives for solutions likely are. You will be outraged at the ignorance of our politicians, policymakers, television news anchors and commentators, as well as newspaper editors and columnists. But you will not be bored.

Professor Muller reveals the real story, the promise and the limitations of solutions to topics such as these: Nine-Eleven, terrorist nukes, the next terrorist attack, and biological terrorism; key energy surprises, solar power, and the end of oil; radioactivity; nuclear weapons, nuclear power, nuclear waste, and controlled fusion; space and satellites, humans in space, and spy satellites; history of climate change, the greenhouse effect, evidence and false evidence, non-solutions, real solutions, and new technologies.

My personal biases: I have a background in both physics and management, and practiced both during a 35-year career with NASA. I do not know Professor Muller, but have admired his work since I discovered his "Physics for Future Presidents" podcasts on iTunesU. I highly recommend this book.

Not meant to be a science text book, November 14, 2009
Large numbers of us out here in the real world did not major in (or even take much beyond required) science in college. We are the humanities majors who prefered English or Psychology to Physics or Chemistry. This also means that often a scientist isn't what the rest of us might call a "clear" writer. Meet Richard Muller. He writes with clarity all of us can understand. We, as citizens, are more able to take a stand on public policy for having read this book. He covers the science of terrorism, energy, nuclear matters, outer space and global warming. Some of the reviewers who give him fewer than 5 stars on this book do so because he sometimes over simplifies, but I guarantee you will be better informed after reading the book.

There are a few things left out. For instance, using solar cells to make energy he covers, but not using evacuated tubes to heat your water. He talks about geothermal energy but not ground source heat. And I felt he could have given more emphasis to the incremental results from all of us doing a little something. But these are small things in a book that is important for informed citizens.

Excellent book, dispells endless common misconceptions, flawless logic, October 2, 2009
I, a civilian, read this book at the recommendation of a certain naval ensign. It is by far the most informative piece of literature I have ever had grace my eyes with it's print. Time is of the essence for me at the moment, so I will be brief. If you have any desire to be able to be an informed citizen who does not participate in useless urban legends about science, or if you want to know the truth behind all the political fluff that obscures most modern scientific truth, I highly recommend you read this book cover to cover.

Very basic physics plus logic and conversions = Clarity, July 27, 2008
Although there are a few graphs and diagrams and a lot of numbers and units, I think this book is accessible to any reader with a citizen's interest in energy, terrorism, nuclear weapons and nuclear power (not the same!), and climate change. You don't have to consider yourself a future president to want and really need to understand this stuff - all elected officials and voters should have this level of familiarity with the science (and often engineering) behind these important issues. And it's really not that hard to follow - it's very readable.

There are no equations here (OK, a few in the notes if you're interested), and the "physics" comes mainly in the approach, breaking problems down into essentials to which basic concepts like energy conservation and efficiency can be applied. A lot can be accomplished simply by converting energy and other quantities in different situations into common units (Muller uses mainly common US units rather than metric units that physicists use in their real work).

It is true that Muller does not completely remove his own opinions in favor of "pure science" - but this is a book for general readers, not a text book (he also has a text book version for his course at UC Berkeley). And the issues are real-world issues, not abstract physics problems. But for the most part he is combining basic science with logic and common sense, and if you learn to do this yourself, and remember some of the conversions and rules of thumb he discusses, you will be better able judge for yourself whether some claim about energy or terrorism really makes sense, and have a better calibration of risks and opportunities in this complex world.

P.S. I was a physics major and have a masters in optics, but I also do educational outreach programs, so I'm really viewing this more from the perspective of an educator and citizen than as a science-educated person. And I personally learned a lot. Also note that one review from 2007 really applies to Dr. Muller's textbook, not this new general interest book.

Overcoming Distortion, Exaggeration, & Cherry-Picking of Evidence, November 1, 2009
While cleverly titled as a book for future presidents, "Physics for Future Presidents: The Science Behind the Headlines" is an excellent resource for all, particularly for those who have been confused and/or dismayed by conflicting opinions and data on important science-based global issues of the day - terrorism, energy, nukes, space, and global warming. Physics Professor (UC Berkeley), "MacArthur Fellowship" winner, and now author, Richard Muller, does an excellent job in setting the record straight for a global public victimized by "experts" and politicians who have been distorting, exaggerating, and cherry-picking the evidence to advance personal agendas as well as by the fourth estate, the mainstream media, who has been complicit with news bias and an intellectual laziness in ferreting out the facts.

This very well written and easy to read book has been written for the lay audience. Those who take the time to read "Physics for Future Presidents" will be well informed and well prepared to discuss these issues from a position of knowledge rather than opinion drawn from the lay press. You will learn about the difference between uranium and plutonium bombs, the difficulty of enriching uranium (Iran), the most probable future terrorist attacks, the truth about solar power and all other alternative energy sources, the realities of human space travel, the science behind low to high orbit satellites, the probability of cancer resulting from radiation exposure, the future of oil, the real cost of energy, and the importance of energy conservation.

"Physics for Future Presidents" covers the most essential facts and ideas enabling readers to understand the science behind the headlines, to discern distortions and personal agendas, and to participate fully in any discussion with friends, families, and associates. I have found this, despite my technical and science background, to be one of the most useful books I have read over the past four years. Muller does an excellent job in entertaining while laying out scientific principles critical to understanding today's world simply.

A good read. Enjoy the science but question the policy conclusions, March 24, 2009
The 5 star and 1 star reviews are both credible. It's easy, interesting science reading, but his policy conclusions sometimes steamed me. If you can read it with an open mind and healthy skepticism, then it's 5 stars--enjoy it! If you will gullibly swallow everything he says, then it's a toxic 1 star for you. I give it 3.5.

On the positive side, it's fascinating to learn that a chocolate chip cookie has half the energy of the equivalent weight of gasoline and much more energy than the equivalent weight of either TNT or bullets. Nor did I know that Bush's "nukular" pronunciation is common at some of our weapons labs nor that global warming is likely to increase, not decrease, antarctic ice.

Learn how stealth technology avoids radar, how infrared is used to spot marijuana growing in an attic, or how x-ray backscatter spots illegal immigrants in a truckload of bananas. Such unusual facts abound, and make this eminently worthy of reading--albeit with some skepticism.

On the negative side, it sometimes seems that he segues between science and politics such that policy recommendations falsely appear to have been proven by hard science. It sometimes (not always) smells a bit like conservative politics masquerading as pure science--exactly what I hoped this book intended to expose.

His discussion of nuclear waste is an example. Even if you buy his calculations (I don't), he begins with the premise that we already have it and must put it somewhere, argues for the benefits of putting it in Yucca Mountain, and then subtly leaves the reader with the impression that he has therefore dismissed valid objections to this aspect of nuclear power. He evades the real questions, such as whether we should generate MORE nuclear waste, how the corporations who profit from the nukes can possibly be charged and trusted to pay for the $100 Billion dollar disposal facility and the cost to maintain it for centuries to come, and whether the prevailing powers (government, regulators, corporations) can be trusted to actually follow the prescribed practices. Remember that we dumped 22,000 barrels of atomic waste into the ocean just 20 miles beyond the Golden Gate (San Francisco) into the 1970's--long after we knew better. The nuclear industry, like most large corporations, has demonstrated that they are simply driven by short term profit and are not above evading regulations, colluding with regulators, buying politicians, and otherwise putting profits above public welfare. (That might almost be a definition of a modern corporation.) Granted, these points are NOT PHYSICS, but HE deviates from physics whenever it suits his agenda.

I also felt that he failed to do justice to the horrors of depleted uranium munitions. Our soldiers with Gulf War Syndrome and Iraqi parents of malformed children are likely to have a different viewpoint, which you can get from the documentary Beyond Treason.

He does make some good points about nuclear--for instance pebble bed reactors in place of China's dirty coal power--and I find myself concurring that further consideration may be warranted. But if even the U.S. can't use radioactivity responsibly then how can we expect China or other developing nations to follow all the protocols and safety requirements? (I had some experiences with the Three Mile Island Citizen's Monitoring Network that left a deep distrust of the industry.)

9/11 theorists will be disappointed that he accepts the standard explanations and has not addressed any of the unanswered questions. For example, he barely addresses the third building that fell that day, nor the rate at which it fell (nearly free fall). (At least he could provide a calculation for the time of fall where the falling mass accretes stationary floors as it accelerates.) Nor does he examine the physics of the total "vaporization" of the titanium engine parts of the jet that struck the pentagon nor how it is that the engines and vertical stabilizer left no imprint on the building facade.

He acknowleges the Hubbert's Peak of oil but dismisses it, saying that we can simply convert coal to gasoline whenever oil stays above $50/bbl. This might be true, but it leaves the reader complacent about peak oil, and it's not until later, in other contexts, where he discusses the environmental costs of coal. See The Party's Over by Heinberg and The Long Emergency by Kunstler for a widely divergent viewpoint.

He explains why solar-powered cars are impractical but should have explicitly make it clear that he's referring only to photovoltaics upon the vehicles themselves and not to broader strategies of solar powered transportation (e.g. solar charging of batteries or fuel cells). I often had the sense that he wanted me to unconsciously draw broad conclusions from narrowly specific examples. Later, he returns to autos in much better detail.

He is dismissive of photovoltaic power as not yet economically viable today (economics, not physics). (Isn't there some sort of Moore's Law for photovoltaics???) But his economics don't include the macroeconomic principal of externalities, like the environmental, human, and military costs of fossil-power electricity that are borne by societies, nations, or the whole planet rather than the individual. One of the functions of govenment policy is to provide incentives to bring the individual's actions into concert with a globally wholistic highest benefit (e.g. tax incentives for solar).

His later chapters do discuss photovoltaic advances and slightly touch on externalites by explaining carbon credits. He even mentions the "tragedy of the commons" in passing. Likewise, I find many of my criticisms at least partially addressed when he revisits a subject in later chapters, so that by the end of the book it felt more complete. Topics are scattered and much is repeated.

I'm appalled by his shameful treatment of recycling, which he categorizes as a "nonsolution." He says, "...you don't want to recycle newspapers or use biodegradable plastics--at least not as far as global warming is concerned." Granted, a pile of newspapers kept in your basement will sequester carbon, but the inattentive reader may interpret this as a license to discard those papers, where they will burn or rot, releasing their carbon, while more trees are cut down to replace them.

Worse is his treatment of plastics, which he considers to be merely an asthetic nuisance. While it's true that plastic waste sequesters carbon, plastics break into microscopic particles which still retain their hydrocarbon chains, and these are working their way up the ocean's food chain, killing both by lining stomachs with indigestible particles and by leaching phthalates and other deadly chemicals that have made their way up the chain to humans. Regions of the ocean now contain 46 times more plastic than plankton, and the plastic-induced diminishment of ocean life is NOT carbon neutral. For a primer, see the plastics campaign at greensangha.org.

Further, he completely ignores recycling of other substances. For example, recycling of aluminum saves vast amounts of energy. His dismissal of recycling isn't physics and isn't truthful. One wonders whether he has an ulterior motive or is simply lazy. Like much of this book, take it as one man's opinions and not as peer-reviewed science.

Nor can I forgive his cavalier dismissal of population pressure and derisive laughter at Malthus.

I was more impressed with his treatment of global warming, where I thought he was balanced and had an agenda for uncovering the whole truth, for better or worse. He debunks some evidence, supports others, acknowledges uncertainties, warns against propaganda in either direction, and agrees that we should error on the side of caution.

As a believer in anthropogenic climate change, I was dismayed but educated by his treatment of the widely publicized graphs of CO2 & temperature for the past 600,000 years. We've seen that CO2 concentration and temperature are tightly correlated, and I had been led to believe that evidence was stronger for causality in the direction of CO2 forcing temperature (greenhouse effect). He gives a mechanism for reverse causality: that warmer oceanic waters release their stores of CO2 while cooler waters absorb more, and this is substantiated by an 800 year lag. Further, he points out that the most salient feature, the large swings every 100,000 years, are indisputably caused by a wobble in the Earth's orbit. So the largest feature of this "smoking gun" evidence is in fact proven to be causality in the opposite direction from that implied by the likes of Al Gore. I humbly concede the point.

In defense of his balanced perspective on global warming, he says, "The real danger in shouting that the sky is falling is that it might not fall right away and people will lose interest."

In regards to energy & climate, he wisely says, "emphasis must be on technologies that the developing world can afford," by which he may mean we must develop carbon sequestration technology for developing nations to scrub their coal emissions.

Overall, many of the facts are interesting, and I can agree with his political policy conclusions half the time. Most irritating is his pro-nuclear position, which he failed to substantiate in any meaningful detail.

In conclusion, I highly recommend reading this but strongly caution against forming belief systems or policy positions based solely upon it. Read it warily, and take it to be yet one more source of data for open-minded appraisal.

EASY TO READ-SUPER INFORMATIVE, November 16, 2009
I enjoyed this book immensely. In a smooth writing style, mostly devoid of technical mumbo jumbo, the author explains the basic physics behind the key scientific issues facing the world today. Things like nuclear waste, and global warming, terrorists and dirty bombs, the energy crisis and the whole truth about coal, space travel and airport security, solar power and the end of oil and, of course, the all time biggie: the green house effect and global warming. There's also a whole section devoted to spy satellites and GPS. Can a spy satellite really see you sunbathing in the privacy of your back yard? The answer to that questions might amaze you. What's the difference between LEO satellites, MEO satellites and GEO satellites? Do you know anything about GPS? Do you even care about GPS? If spy satellites and GPS are something you'd like to know more about then this book is definitely the place to get the straight skinny. And the list goes on and on. This thing is packed with juicy information. If you think you know it all, don't bother. But if you're open to the unbiased, nonpolitical truth from someone who really knows his stuff, then you should read this short, but highly informative book. I promise, it's easy to read.

The author, Richard A. Muller, professor of physics at UC Berkeley and past winner of the "Genius Award," takes the position that his book was written for future presidents. Maybe even you. So, if you were the president, what would you do if you heard that a dirty bomb had just gone off in the local park? Panic? Evacuate the citizens? Head for the presidential bomb shelter? Undecided? Or, take calm, cool action because you read Physics for Future Presidents, and you are especially familiar with the section called "The Terrorist Dirty Bomb." No problem. You know the secret truth about dirty bombs and, therefore, you know enough to take the appropriate action. And, like I said in the first paragraph, dirty bombs are only one section. For any of you who follow the debate about Global Warming, maybe you think Al Gore fudged his numbers just a tad in his movie, "An Inconvenient Truth." Well, there's a very informative section on this subject too. That's not surprising. The current political arena in replete with heated debate over this hot topic. But the author makes it emphatically clear that in order to make informed policy decisions you must have all the facts. To quote, "It is important not to be misled by the pervasive misinformation that pollutes this field." You decide.

The bottom line is that this book covers about everything scientific a president should be aware of in order to talk intelligently with his or her advisors, the American people, and world leaders. In my opinion, reading this book should not just be recommended. It should be required. I give it five stars.


... Read more

Editorial Review

Reviews

science with a personality, May 14, 2008
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." Albert Einstein

Yup, that just about sums up what's going on here, proving the Einstein's smaller theories were pretty solid as well. The physical world and its inhabitants are once again anthropomorphed and grouped by association. We get the Old School dudes (Mass, Weight, Density, &c.), the Hot Stuff (Energy, Entropy...), the Wave Gang (Sound, Frequency...), the Light Crew (Radio, Microwave...), and so on. It's all here, each aspect with its own spread, a first-person breakdown on the one side and a graffiti-like cartoon portrait on the other. There's also a "first discovered" box and a short historical list of how or when they were famously employed.

As with Basher and Green's previous book "The Periodic Table: Elements With Style," I think this book works best in the classroom as a supplemental text (though used correctly they could be primary) with wide appeal. A great introduction for budding young scientists to the basics of physics, a playful refresher for older young scientists, and an easily digestible crash-course for adults who need the background to keep up with their budding young scientists.

Great introduction to physics old and new..., June 25, 2008
My six year old plowed through this book in one afternoon... he knew he'd love it because the Periodic Table version is an old favorite. The information is clear, concise, and engaging, the pictures appealing to my little Pokemon fan. I love that we had a whole discussion of strong vs. weak force at dinner last night. Not really a textbook, but a fantastic introduction to physics for kids who read well on thier own.

Great Book, January 18, 2009
My son is 12, and he is a bookworm. He is also interested in science. I saw this book, and I thought that it would make a perfect stocking stuffer for him. I love buying things for my children that are not only fun for them, but that are good for them too. My son likes this book, and I think it'll definitely give him a headstart when he begins learning this in school.

great little guidebook!, January 17, 2009
I have good news for fans of the quirky kid's guide to chemistry, "The Periodic Table, Elements with Style". Kingfisher Publishing has produced two related books, which cover biology and physics. The artist known simply as Basher has teamed up with a new writing partner, Dan Green. These pocket sized guidebooks are captivating and make a real impression on kids. Because the books are formatted in the same way, I am reviewing them together.

Both books have about 120 pages plus a glossary. The left hand page usually has a topic, a few bullet points on it, and two paragraphs presenting information from the point of view of the topic. Each subject has it's own personality and the right hand page has a personified illustration of that subject. In the Biology book, Sperm, for instance, says, "I'm a little guy with a big job." For those who wish to consider the appropriateness of the books for younger children, he does get a bit more specific. "I Start out in one of the two testes, a man's sperm factories, and travel upstream towards the penis... If everything is going swimmingly, I enter a female body and it takes an hour or so to get to Egg." The whimsical cartoony illustration shows a smiling tadpole-like creature wearing sunglasses. There is also a tiny, simplified 1" tall rendering of the male reproductive system. The information on Egg and Baby in Womb is also quite simple but may be upsetting to some. "Biology, Life as We Know It" also contains a small pull out poster of the body systems. Some examples of other topics in the biology book include Skin, Nails, Reptiles, Liver, and Flower.

The physics book is titled, "Physics, Why Matter Matters" and it has definitions of terms like Kinetic Energy, Frequency, Alpha Particle, and Gravity. The introduction notes, "Physics is all about knowing -or trying to find out- what makes the universe tick. It started out with some naturally nosy people who wanted to know..." The description of Force says that it, "Gangs up with Mass and Acceleration to push things about." Infrared boasts, "You can run but you can't hide. I'm the original heatseeker and I'm out to give you a good grilling!"

These books might help older students memorize details just as well as they inform and entertain younger children. Highly recommended!

Kids Xmas present, January 7, 2009
Good product to help my kid in school, as a Chemistry major I liked the depth and scope of this product and the manner in which it relates the material to younger audinces!

Fantastic for the Classroom, September 3, 2008
I teach 5th grade and my students are in love with these books as well as The Periodic Table: Elements with Style. It makes it easy for them to understand. They borrow the books from me daily and it really triggers an interest in science for them. These books have been so successful in my classroom I pre-ordered the biology version coming out in September. I can't say enough good things about it/them.

Another Science Hit!, May 19, 2008
The only drawback to this book is the fact that now my 6 year old knows what alpha particles are and I have no idea. This is another outstanding science book for children that not only teaches but excites them about the subject matter as well. The book arrived in the mail last week and on the first day my son read the entire book. Never fear however the subject matter is introduced well enough to entertain and inform in that first reading, however it is physics. He has and will I am sure continue reading, understanding a little more each time. He was disappointed that Physics did not come with a poster like The Periodic Table: Elements with Style. I do recommend reading the book thoroughly, if like me you are not into physics, before your child does. The conversations go better when you don't have to look everything up.

Rocket Physics, March 28, 2009
This book will provide an excellent foundation for children. This book broke things down to the simplest form possible and my 3 year old like it a lot.

Very Cute & Educational!, March 8, 2009
I purchased this book for me and my 12 year old daughter. We loved it so much that I purchased another 1 for my sister's family. My daughter showed this book to her Science teacher and he loved it! If you purchase this book you will not be disappointed! The information is easy to understand and remember and the pictures are very very cute!

An Excelent Introduction to Physics, August 10, 2010
Physics is oftentimes considered the hardest of the hard sciences, and to many people it is one of the most difficult subjects to master. It is also my own chosen profession, and something that I am very passionate about. I find it to be an enormously fascinating subject, and I always appreciate new ways of sharing my knowledge of the subject with my students, friends and acquaintances. In my professional life of a college professor I find it continuously challenging to present the most important Physics concepts in such a way that is both accessible to the intended audience and it does justice to the field. Unfortunately even in the higher education there has been an increasing pressure to dilute various subjects in order to make them more "relevant" to the modern students. These attempts, however well-intended they may be, have the consequence of creating more and more generations of scientifically illiterate citizens. Fortunately, this small book does not subscribe to this misguided approach to science. The concepts and ideas are as part of the traditional Physics curriculum as they come. They are introduced in a playful, amusing way, and yet each short description is completely accurate and relevant. There are a few facts and numbers that help with describing each one of the concepts, but they are only given in sidebars and don't constitute the bulk of the material. In my opinion this is a pedagogically well founded way of presenting these concepts to someone for the first time. The illustrations in the book are extremely well done and serve the purpose of personifying various physical concepts and quantities. This may be particularly appealing to the young readers. I would also recommend this book even to the older audience that perhaps has not heard of some of these concepts, or has not really thought about Physics in many years. Overall this is an excellent low-level introduction to Physics. ... Read more

Editorial Review

From One of the Most Brilliant Minds of Our Time
Comes a Book that Clarifies His Most Important Ideas

Stephen Hawking’s worldwide bestseller, A Brief History of Time, remains one of the landmark volumes in scientific writing of our time. But for years readers have asked for a more accessible formulation of its key concepts—the nature of space and time, the role of God in creation, and the history and future of the universe.

Professor Hawking’s response is this new work that will guide nonscientists everywhere in the ongoing search for the tantalizing secrets at the heart of time and space.…

Although “briefer,” this book is much more than a mere explanation of Hawking’s earlier work. A Briefer History of Time both clarifies and expands on the great subjects of the original, and records the latest developments in the field—from string theory to the search for a unified theory of all the forces of physics. Thirty-seven full-color illustrations enhance the text and make A Briefer History of Time an exhilarating and must-have addition in its own right to the great literature of science and ideas.

... Read more

Reviews

Gets somewhat caught in the switches, November 4, 2005
I do not have a science background, and I did not read a Brief History of Time when it was originally published or thereafter. So this review is written to a fairly small category of potential readers -- those like me with an interest in modern physics but without much background.

I thought the book was exceptionally well written, and it was outstanding in places. It was certainly a very fun read, and I think it achieves a very lofty goal -- making liberal arts grads like me understand both the desirability and potential implications of reconciling general relativity and quantum physics. But, overall, I thought it tried to walk too fine a tightrope between discussing complex subjects and at the same time attempting to be as conversational and accessible as possible. That is a lofty goal -- hard to achieve I think. The reality is that some of these concepts are very very difficult to the uninitiated, so the cursory treatment the authors sometimes give them, in their attempt to make the book accessible and to live up to the "briefER" in the title, actually at times makes the book harder to understand, not easier. It is most acute in the book's introduction to uncertainty, quantum physics, and understanding the implications of interference experiments. More detail, not less, was needed here to reach the authors' goal of accessibility. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't seeking a text heavily laden with mathematics or equations. I just think the overriding editorial doctrine with this book was to condense wherever possible, and that is just not always possible or desirable.

All that said, the book achieves it purpose: To take some of the amazing intelligence and insight of one of the world's most important thinkers, squeeze it into understandable packets, and give us ordinary folk some insight into the exciting times in which anyone interested in the Universe and its fundamental questions live. But to steal a little from Einstein, I thought the authors didn't quite follow the second half of his famous exhortation to make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler.

A Science Classic Now made Accessible to Everyone!!, December 9, 2005
+++++

"In this book are lucid revelations on the frontiers of physics, astronomy, cosmology [the study of the universe as a whole], and courage [Dr. Stephen Hawking has ALS, also called Lou Gehrig's disease or motor neuron disease contracted when he was young and now is wheelchair bound]. This is also a book about God...or perhaps about the absence of God. The word God fills these pages. Hawking embarks on a quest to answer Einstein's famous question about whether God had any choice in creating the universe. Hawking is attempting, as he explicitly states, to understand the mind of God. And this makes all the more unexpected the conclusion of the effort, at least so far: a universe with no edge in space, no beginning or end in time, and nothing for a Creator to do."

These are the words in the last paragraph of the introduction to Hawking's very first or original book "A Brief History of Time" (1988). These words were written by the late, great Dr. Carl Sagan. (In his introduction, Sagan calls Hawking a "legend.")

Nothing has changed with this new book with respect to what Sagan says above. But as a reader of Hawking's first book, I did notice welcome changes.

First, this new book is more concise. This does not mean this book is drastically shorter than the original. This new book is about twenty pages less than the original. Also this new book contains one more chapter than the original! What this book does is cut out extraneous technical detail from the original and focuses only on the most important concepts but still maintains the essence of the original. Thus, the book seems much more concise.

Next, and this is very important, this book is more accessible. The important concepts mentioned above, I found, are explained much more clearly thus increasing this book's readability in order to achieve Hawking's (and collaborator Leonard Mlodinow's) goal: "to share some of the excitement of...[scientific] discoveries, and the new picture of reality that is emerging as a result."

Third, this book is illustrated throughout with color illustrations. Actually, the original book was also illustrated but the new illustrations are, I feel, more easier to grasp. (I only have a complaint with the first illustration in this new book because it doesn't illustrate the point it's trying to make.)

Finally, this book is actually updated with respect to the latest theoretical and observational results! For example, this book describes recent progress that's been made in finding a complete unified theory of all the forces of physics and describes the progress made in string theory (technically called superstring theory). Observational material comes from the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite and by the Hubble Space Telescope. Thus, even though I read the original book, I still learned much from this book.

As with the original book, this book contains a helpful glossary and an appendix briefly outlining the lives of Albert Einstein (1879 to 1955), Galileo (1564 to 1642), and Sir Isaac Newton (1642 to 1727). (Notice that Newton was born in the same year Galileo died. Hawking was born in 1942, three hundred years after the death of Galileo.)

Here are the names of the chapter titles:

(1) Thinking about the universe.
(2) Our evolving picture of the universe (Discussion of Galileo starts here.)
(3) The nature of scientific theory.
(4) Newton's universe.
(5) Relativity. (Discussion of Einstein starts here.)
(6) Curved space.
(7) The expanding universe.
(8) The Big Bang, black holes, and the evolution of the universe. (It is thought that the Big Bang is how the universe began. A black hole is a region of space or more correctly space-time, where nothing, not even light can escape, because gravity is so strong.)
(9) Quantum Gravity. (This is a theory that merges quantum mechanics that is a theory that deals with the very small with general relativity that is a theory of the very large and that incorporates gravity.)
(10) Wormholes and time travel. (A wormhole is theoretically a thin tube of space or space-time connecting distant regions of the universe.)
(11) The forces of nature and the unification of gravity. (The forces of nature are electromagnetism, the weak force of radioactivity, the strong force that binds the atomic nucleus together, and gravity. The first three forces can be combined or unified but gravity seems to stand on its own.)
(12) Conclusion. (Last words in this chapter: "then we would know the mind of God.")

Finally, this book is not referenced. However since Hawking is Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University, a post once held by Newton and Sagan witnessed his accepting this position in 1974, I think I can safely take Hawking at his word.

In conclusion, this book is a reorganized version of a science classic that is now more accessible, more concise, better illustrated, and updated with the latest research. It is not to be missed!!

(first published 2005; acknowledgements; forward; 12 chapters; main narrative 160 pages; appendix; glossary; index)

+++++

Interesting and enlightening, December 15, 2005
I clearly remember when Stephen Hawking's first book, A Brief History of Time, came out in 1988. It was a great book that explained modern scientific cosmology in a way that I could really understand. That book became a worldwide bestseller, and with good reason! I still have my copy to this day.

And now, some seventeen years later, Stephen Hawking is back with this new book. A Briefer History of Time brings the reader up to date, and makes the narrative even easier to understand.

Even though I am a non-science-type guy, I found this book understandable. But even more so, I found it to be a very enjoyable read! I loved the way that the authors unfold scientific cosmology through the use of a historical narrative, explaining how man's knowledge of the universe expanded and changed, until we reach the modern theories. I found this book to be both interesting and enlightening, and expect it to do as well as the original.

If there is one book that you simply *must* pick up and read this year, it is A Briefer History of Time. Get it today!

Too Brief, July 31, 2006
"A Briefer History of Time" is a graceful summary of spacetime physics, written entirely for non-scientific readers; it contains no formulas, and can be understood by any bright teenager. Before you run out and buy a copy, though, you should know that - due to the book's very short length and intended readership for a general audience - it is very elementary and covers its field in only the briefest of ways. If the reader has read any other popular treatment of this subject in the last few years, there will not be anything new in the "Briefer History."

Given Hawking's stature in the field, most readers would hope to get some kind of unique perspective or approach from this book. Unfortunately, as it is, the book offers little more than an incomplete run-through of a few basic ideas.

rather like plumbing, June 17, 2006
When I mentioned to my friend Carver Yu that I was reading this book, he scrunched up his face in the way that only a man who knows the field well can do and commented, `Well, of course, that book contains a fair bit of metaphysical speculation.'

Precisely.

That is what makes Hawking's attempt to simplify his original one-syllable-less A Brief History of Time such a beguiling reader for a non-specialist like me. Call it metaphysical speculation or call it a daring attempt to translate the astrophysicists' language into yours and mine without losing the power of asking us to imagine a world nearly completely different than the one we thought we lived in. Call it what you want, it's still a read well worth the effort it requires.

Don't shy away from finishing this book if you don't understand it all. Allow it the chance to paint an impressionistic portrait of what physicists--many of them justly awe-struck by the object of their inquiry--believe that they see `out there' when some of humanity's best minds ask the fundamental questions and follow the theories (theirs is a theory-rich pursuit) where they lead. Many of those theories, as Hawking describes them, will sound like nonsense. Unless sense is different than we thought.

When I was at Cambridge, I used to bicycle past the severely disabled Stephen Hawking in his wheelchair, followed by his personal nurse, as he wheeled between home and office, his mind no doubt drifting far from the concrete course of his wheelchair across the Commons. One wonders whether paragraphs of Briefer History and other of his works were taking shape as our paths crossed.

Metaphysical speculation for those who dare to imagine things they may not fully understand. Things like wormholes, peabrains, and a universe curved so severely that words almost fail in the explaing of it.

If that sounds provocative enough to justify the effort, this book is for you.

Physics is fun, well at least it used to be., January 30, 2006
I listened to the audio version which is well produced and well read.

Book vs. CD the material is the same (the audio version has text illustrations available on the last disk).

Physics used to be a science that mere mortals such as you and I, could aspire too. Certainly you needed mathematical skill, but with hard work and a creative mind you could understand and study the physical world around you. This was the case until early in the 20th century when Relativity and Quantum theories arose. At this point the mathematics involved truly become difficult and esoteric to the point were only a relative handful of people proficient in such mathematics could understand and develop further theories. Additionally, as our knowledge expanded, sub-specialization in physics created a further segregation of the material where even only a smaller few could understood the nuance and intricacies of their specific field.

In this milieu of high math and super specialization what is the curious lay person to do?

Read Stephen Hawking!

In his casual manner and efficient eloquent prose, he presents the current status of physics and cosmology such that you and I can actually understand the principles and theories. I will never understand the derivation of the theories but as Hawking explains I don't need to, through this book we do not become PhD students, simply guests at his dinner table discussing what he is thinking. What great minds like Hawking are thinking is infinitely more interesting than most other topics which come up at the average dinner table.

Somehow just understanding what these giants are working on makes me comfortable in my relative ignorance, while I can never understand how they know, I can understand what they know.

When I read the A Brief History of Time in 1988 I felt the same way and must admit at that time worried that Dr. Hawking would not live much longer due to the severity of his illness. It is very comforting that he and his mind and his desire to include and share with us his intimate yet wonderful knowledge of physics. He is among the select few that have the skill to educate the masses in science. Hawking, Sagan and Feynman benefit mankind not only with their science but with their dedication to teaching humanity.

The brief bios on Einstein, Galileo and Newton were an unexpected bonus.

This book really makes you think, October 19, 2005
This book takes on a nearly impossible task: explaining some of the most challenging questions facing theoretical physics--not to mention philosophers and theologians--today in a manner that everyone can understand. I'll admit that as a "non-science" type, some of this book went over my head. But it wasn't due to a lack of effort by the authors to keep things clear. In fact, the concepts that I found most difficult to follow were the most recent, least developed theories

What I found most interesting about this book is that it leaves you thinking about how small a part of this universe we are and how improbable our existence is. This book inspires many more questions about our universe than it tries to answer. This is a great book to read and discuss with others as a result.

A Great Starting Point on Theoretical Physics, May 18, 2007
Hawking's landmark bestseller, A Brief History of Time, was published in 1988, and an updated edition was released ten years later. It introduced readers around the world to the large-scale (and very small scale) questions that are central to astronomy, physics, and to our understanding of the universe at the most basic levels.

This new book (co-writtin with Leonard Mlodinow; nerds out there will be interested to know that Mlodinow wrote for Star Trek: The Next Generation) serves two purposes. First, it presents much of the material from Hawking's original book into a more accessible format, with less emphasis on mathematics and fewer technical details.

The second purpose is to update the reader on new discoveries made since the updated A Brief History of Time was published in the late 1990's, with string theory getting particular attention.

Making a book on theoretical physics that can be considered a "light read" is a daunting task, but Hawking's voice comes through with a clear, conversational tone and an easy confidence that inspires the reader to wrap their mind around the paradoxes of quantum mechanics and general relativity.

There are a few places where the book seems a bit too watered down. Discussions of FTL travel and time travel seem to be reluctantly thrown in because the authors knew there would be demand for these topics. Neither is addressed with much depth or enthusiasm.

The historical aspects of the book, on the other hand, are exceptionally well written, including brief biographical appendices on the lives of Einstein, Newton, and Galileo. Science has a rich history, and the team of Hawking and Mlodinow do a nice job of telling the stories behind the discoveries and theories.

The book is illustrated with computer-generated full-color graphics, which are a bit of a mixed bag. Some do a great job of illustrating a concept, while others seem to be thrown in just to break up the text.

Interestingly, while Hawking and Mlodinow do not specifically set forth their own religious viewpoints in this book, the spend a good deal of time acknowledging the possibility of the existence of God, and discussing the interplay between theoretical physics and the concept of a creator.

As a science teacher who is not specifically teaching physics (I teach chemistry), I found that A Briefer History of Time really raised my interest and enthusiasm while summarizing some concepts that I was out of practice with. I found myself discussing ideas from this book with my students the day after I started reading it.

In general, this is a great starting point or refresher for anyone with an interest in physics. If you are already familiar with the subject matter, you may still enjoy the historical details and the narrative voice, although there is not a great deal of technical depth.

Finally, I Almost Get It!, March 21, 2007
Amazingly Hawking and Mlodinaw discuss the concepts of energy, time, relativity, space, time travel, black holes, quantum gravity, wormholes and string theory using almost no equations, excepting Einstein's famous E=mc2. They use common sense and mundane examples to explain some of the most complex ideas ever pondered by humankind. Mlodinaw's famous humor rears its head at appropriate times, while the writing style is straightforward and easily comprehended. However, there are several sentences for which one has to go back and reread and think about before proceeding. But overall it's a fun book and leaves the layman with a rudimentary understanding of a very complex subject.

Welcome to our universe, August 14, 2006
A phenomenal description of the basics in physics and science. Hawkings new version is a tell all for Science beginners such as myself. After years of not understanding or not putting effort into understanding science I now have an excellent overview of why and how we exist. Definitely a great read! ... Read more