In this groundbreaking book, the renowned theoretical physicist Lee Smolin argues that physics — the basis for all other sciences — has lost its way. For more. The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next. Lee Smolin, Author. Houghton Mifflin $ Abstract. Lee Smolin’s casual accounting of special and general relativity in The Trouble with Physics raises an interesting question: is it possible to develop a.
|Published (Last):||9 March 2004|
|PDF File Size:||5.21 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.27 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science and What Comes Next
I am afraid not to thhe the dialectic principle of these two points: Refresh and try again. It is a hypothesis that has yet to be upheld by observational evidence.
Theory is meaningless if it models what does not real world obtain. Gravity is a wave not a particle, Structures in space time are no more equivelent to judgment than to the Tao. Tom Banks has discussed ideas along these lines. They are what you want once an approach has been defined, i. By a factor of about three. There is trouble in physics all right, which makes this an exciting time to be alive working on a better theory.
An excellent review composed of a stream of unbiased and uncynical eith on string theory ans string theorists. You argue that young PhD students simply smoljn what convinces them.
Certainly there are many complex mathematical structures that are eminently reasonable. This book attempts to explain why physics is in such a sorry state, and why no new revolutionary ideas have been put forward in the past few decades — certainly nothing that can be compared with relativity or quantum physics. I presume that my understanding of, and interest in physics are above the average population, but I had a hard time with some parts of the book.
He was a graduate student at Harvard during the same years that I was an undergraduate there, and describes well that place and time. My point was not to attack other people than you. I left The Elegant Universe feeling invigorated about physics  but sour on string theory.
The Trouble With Physics – Cosmic Variance : Cosmic Variance
Smolin asserts that these tendencies are very close to a phenomenon called “groupthink”, where witj in a community is pressured to think in the same way. Even though I could not avoid having the impression that the evaluation of promises and drawbacks in this part is less careful than in the previous part about string theory, it is an exciting journey! He’s an inspiring guy.
If I could go back and do it all over again, I’d run with the math skills I had garnered back in the day msolin with a speculative bent honed whilst seated, chin-in-hand, upon the toilet, and try to go all the way to the end as a bona fide physicist—and I might have run into Smolin himself on the well-watered fields of the University of Waterloo! I could be wrong on this point, though.
Similarly, in asymptotically AdS space, there is a group of global symmetries, and bona fide observables transform in nontrivial representations of that symmetry group. No amout of clever problem-solving will help. We understand this in many different calculations, some rigorous, some not, some involving the behavior of operator products, some involving the behavior of path integrals. Hi Lambchop, wow, you had a guide!
The book feels honest, insightful and sincere. The problem of quantum gravity 2.
Although there are things about string theory that irk me, I am sometimes tempted to let theorists do what they want while I go about my own business. In the book, Smolin controversially claims that string theory makes no new testable predictions;  that it has no coherent mathematical formulation; and that it has not been mathematically proved finite. This is an argument about style; in particular, how we should set about inventing new theories. His research interests include theoretical aspects of cosmology, field theory, and gravitation.
To be completely clear, one possibility is still that the Hamiltonian formulation these results refer to do not have a low energy limit that reproduces classical GR.
To qualify my review a little better, before I read this book I read: And btw, what does this have to do with the post above? The terms have become so ambiguous that people can get emotionally hysterical arguing about points ill defined – again I say tomato you say tomatoe. View all 17 comments. They do not necessarily have strong technical skills, but they are visionaries, and are not willing to “follow the crowd”.