I must read more of his series to come to a more reasoned conclusion about this theory. Thomas sheds some fascinating light on the conundrum of the apparent incompatibility of relativity and quantum mechanics. Physicists know that there has to be a unifying theory that brings the two theories together. The Higgs field is proposed as the way in which particles gain mass - a fundamental property of matter. So, would I recommend this book? I downloaded this from Amazon because it was 99 cents, and I'm still not sure I got my money's worth. The author describes how some quantum systems decohere due to interactions with the environment. The author seems to have an out of date view of entropy, presuming entropy naturally always increases.
It might not be all correct, but it does indeed have some interesting ideas here and there. The general theory of relativity describes the behavior of very large things, and quantum theory the behavior of very small things. Oh wait, Newton tied the force felt by an apple falling to the ground to the force that keeps the Earth in orbit around the sun using math. Thomas has serious delusions of grandeur and wants us to ogle like school children at every statement he makes. This educational 217-page book includes the following ten chapters: 1. Both have reputations for complexity.
I see that some reviewers did not like the 'repetitiveness' of the book. An idea which is so simple it has been hidden in plain sight. Thomas claims that there is and provides an interesting narrative in support of it. That is the whole book. But the basic ideas behind them are, in fact, simple and comprehensible by anyone. A uniquely simple, yet brilliant perspective.
Unraveling the twisted threads of the most current debates on relativity, quantum mechanics, and gravity, she explores some of the most fundamental questions posed by Nature. That was an incredibly complex concept reduced to a mathematical equation. The lack of absolutes in the universe. Specifically he says that the fact that both measurements needs a well defined observer points to some sort of unity between the two theories. Of course this is a pop-sci book which avoid equations like fire but the problem is that as far as I know Andrew Thomas is not a practicing physicist so there is no body of peer-reviewed work that supports this hypothesis. The same cannot be said for environmental decoherence which remains perfectly linear throughout the observation process. Could he have stumbled onto an intuitive explanation of what is essentially theory of everything? If read the first way this is quite good, probably deserving 4 stars or more but if read the other way, and the author wants it to be read that way, it is at best oversimplified and at worst misleading.
This also points at another problem in this book. I applaud the author's ideas and thought process - he just needs to remember that the people interested in his book are probably smarter than he thinks. Remember the golden rule: Nature does the best it can with the tools available to it. So it fell between two stools. The book tackles questions as broad as the meaning of quantum entanglement and as specific and timely as why governments worldwide are spending billions of dollars developing quantum technology research. On the plus side, this book includes the best introduction to quantum mechanics I've been exposed to so far.
I almost feel like he's speaking to me as if I'm a small child who easily forgets everything a second after I read it. Suitable for the intellectually curious at all levels and assuming no background beyond basic high-school math, these 24 half-hour lectures cover recent developments at the forefront of particle physics and cosmology. In this exciting and significant book, Andrew Thomas clearly illustrates the simplicity which lies behind nature at its fundamental level. Yes, if you can stay calm through the redundancy of the writing and the slightly negative tone. Apparently we're all too strung up to see simplicity. This idea is basically what Thomas offers as a first principle, which could explain modern physics. He then concludes basically by his own definition that nothing in the universe can be absolute, then further concludes everything in the universe must be relative.
All famous physicists started out the with beautiful, intuitive ideas but they had the sense to not to only trust their own intuitions and put the ideas through the wringer of mathematical rigor and peer review before announcing it to the world but the author has somehow decided that he is above this process. The soft-spoken Wheeler, though conservative in appearance, was a raging nonconformist full of wild ideas about the universe. I'm not an astrophysicist or a particle physicist so I cannot credibly argue about the underlying science of this book. Yet the world's top physicists have been overlooking it. His observations were so well expressed that I find myself reevaluating my own position on multiple parallel universes. One of the world's leading theoretical physicists, Lisa Randall provides astonishing scientific possibilities that, until recently, were restricted to the realm of science fiction. There is a beauty that I believe reflects its Creator.
You will read many of the same sentences over and over again -and it's not just the sentences- the author is constantly reminding you of every Interesting and Irritating It was very hard for me to decide on a rating for this book. Somehow, however, warning lights kept flashing in my head as he presents his version of the Grand Unified Theory. It explained quantum physics in a way that I understood, without a bunch of equations and gobbledygook about strange particles. Every week headlines announce new breakthroughs in our understanding of the universe, new technologies that will transform our environment, new medical advances that will extend our lives. I have no doubt that many of the topics he talked about have much more complex and nuanced depths.