5 comments about Beyond Einstein: The Cosmic Quest for the Theory of the Universe.

1. This isn't Kaku's best book-its one of his earlier efforts and his writing skills have gotten quite a bit better since then. However I still recommend this book. At the time I read it, I was studying electrical engineering in college and one day I ran into a friend in the student union. He started talking about all this physics stuff he was reading and how it was blowing his mind. It was like he had been through a religious conversion. He promised to let me borrow the book and it was Kaku's Beyond Einstein. A very easy read, Kaku got me hooked on physics right away, exposing me to ideas like extra dimensions and grand unified theories of particle physics I had never heard of in my engineering studies. He follows the standard historical treatment, talking about Maxwell, Einstein and the development of quantum mechanics. While it is a bit "breezy", its thoroughly enjoyable reading filled with historical antecdotes and nice descriptions of Einsteins spacetime warps. Then after the big bang he heads into his favorite topic, talking about extra dimensions and string theory. I was so hooked by this I began buying up every pop physics book I could find and soon changed my major from electrical engineering to math/physics. After reading Kaku engineering actually seemed mundane. Anyway, like I said this isn't Kaku's best book because his writing style has matured and he writes a lot better now. But the book is a gem that I recommend to those interested in science.



2. This fascinating book will take you through the realm of cosmology, physics, and the world of mathematics. However, the book at times can be hard to understand because it uses very hard language and refers to several theories and scientist. It is necessary to have small background knowledge in physics and in many of the scientists and theories the book mentions. It mentions scientist such as Einstein, Heisenberg, Bohr, Hawkins, Newton, Maxwell, Feynman, Glashow, Nambu, and many more. The book mainly talks about the Theory of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics; however, it does mention several other theories too. It talks about Quantum Mechanics and Einstein's theories in detail; therefore, those theories are easy to follow. Nevertheless, once the book starts talking about all the theories that came in response to Quantum Mechanics and the Grand Unifying Theory the book becomes hard to follow. This book tells the history of how several theories have evolved and are being developed to create one theory that unites the four fundamental forces of the world. The four fundamental forces are electromagnetism, gravity, weak nuclear force, and strong nuclear force. All these forces are very different, however, with the Superstring Theory; all these forces will be unified. I recommend this book because it will change you perception of the universe all everything that is around us. It will baffle your mind with new ideas that seem to be science fiction, yet are somewhat true. This book is also a great book to learn the basis of the theory of Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and many more astonishing theories that have shaped the way we view space, time, and the world.



3. I really liked this book. It found it easier to understand (and less gee-whiz) than Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe (paperback and CD). Kaku and his co-writer presented a very clear description of what hyperspace would look like to four-dimensional creatures such as ourselves. (This was the first clear layman's description I have read.) I only wish I understood better the quantum mechanics that "vanquished" Newton's and Einstein's propositions about gravity in very small spaces; perhaps some drawings would have helped. In addition, perhaps a chart or diagram of basic sub-atomic particles would have helped.
   
   Nevertheless, I was intrigued by the book. Thompson's co-writing makes it intelligible to lay persons such as myself. The one element that Kaku leaves out is whether string or superstring theory is "testable." In dimensions of the size of 10^-18 cm, perhaps we cannot really make testable predictions, as Greene asserts in his book and CD.



4. This volume takes you through Kaluza-Klein formalism and there is some math that must be understood for an insightful experience. Some of the material is dated, and Dr. Kaku's string theory has taken a beating in the scientific community of late.
   
   However, this book is still one of the best introductions to the fifth dimension and the integration of time, electromagnetism, and gravitation.
   
   There are books that are best described as mind candy; Dr. Kaku's works are a brain feast that will nourish your intellect and imagination for as long as your remain lucid.



5. I can only give this book a very lukewarm endorsement. My two complaints were that it is sketchy and somewhat out of date.
   
   Sketchy --- By sketchy I mean that it does not explain anything in depth. This book just skims the surface of string theory and most of the subjects covered are discussed just superficially. This is not, in and of itself, a necessarily bad thing. In fact, for some audiences it is actually a desirable feature. High school students and those who just want a brief introduction to string theory and some aspects of modern physics may find this just what they want, but those who want a somewhat more in depth discussion will be disappointed. While superficial, the book does give an overviews of many subjects, namely: quantum mechanics, relativity theory, QED (and the difficulties with renormalization), the Standard Model (and its deficiencies) and cosmological features such as dark matter, dark energy, black holes and the big bang theory. There are also a lot of thumbnail biographies of people like Evariste Galois, Stephen Hawking and Vera Rubin scattered throughout the book.
   
   The book is largely about superstring theory, but there is no clear distinction between this and string theory. (I think that the former refers to the fact that superstring theory incorporates supersymmetry into string theory, but this is never stated in this book.) There is a discussion of symmetry, but Noether's theorem (a major reason for considering symmetry) is never mentioned. In contrast to the obvious enthusiasm shown by the authors for superstring theory, it is not a theory ascribed to by the majority of physicists. While the authors do admit that there is no experimental verification for superstring theory, they neglect many other criticisms. For example, Lee Smolin (who is never referenced in this book) and others have pointed out that there are many, many, variations of string theory, but no way to determine which is the right one (or if any one of them is correct). The above-mentioned criticisms should not, however, be taken as a completely negative assessment of this book. As has been mentioned, a lot of material is covered, although in not as detailed or balanced a manner as I would have liked. You, however, may be looking for as less detailed treatment of and this would then be a good book for you. The style is breezy and informal and you can learn a lot from the time spent with this book.
   
   Somewhat out of date --- The cover of the book states that it has been revised and updated, but it seems that it has only been updated to 1995. (There is another version of the book, with a slightly different sub-title which was published in 1998, so some of the following comments may not apply as much to this 1998 version.) Twelve years is a long time for a subject like string theory. The authors tout superstring theory as the most up to date idea, but it has now being supplanted by M theory. This need not be a problem if one is interested in superstring theory as of 1995 and if one takes some of the claims put forward by the authors with a grain if salt, but this is a problem if you want something more closely resembling the current view of particle physics. As a general rule I think that one should only spend time with modern physics books, prepared for a general audience, that were written within the last 5 years (at the outside). I wish that I had paid more attention to my own rule, but the revised and updated statement above the title of the book fooled me. To be forewarned is to be forearmed.

5 comments about The Mothman Prophecies.

1. Books about the paranormal I never find to be entirely satisfying; you get teased and left to make up your own mind. I get drawn to this kind of material for some reason, always hoping to get some answers, to figure it out, to fit this into my theistic worldview. A year ago I got my first taste of satisfaction, from the book "Lights in the sky and little green men", in which the authors concluded that residual UFO's, the ones that cannot be explained away, are in fact real, but are not physical but spiritual.
   
   John Keel, with The Mothman Prophecies, arrives at a somewhat similar conclusion. He scoffs at the idea that these are visitors from other planets, but is less convinced that they are from the spiritual realm, at least as commonly understood by Christians. His bizarre thirteen month set of experiences centered on Point Pleasant, West Virginia in 1966-1967, culminating in the tragedy of the bridge collapse, has left him certain of nothing. He does seem to see a continuity between paranormal experiences throughout history and those of today, with poltergeists, demons, Bigfoot, Nessie, UFOs, and Men in Black all falling under the same explanatory umbrella, whatever that may be. Possibly an independent spiritual world exists, or possibly these are psychic imprints and pollution, echoes that play back in certain geographical locations, like a record stuck, playing back the same groove over and over.
   
   You are not going to get closure from this book, but his account is gripping and his speculations are thoughtful and intelligent. To repeat an overused phrase, you are not going to want to put it down.



2. The Mothman Prophecies is one of the few books that I've felt compelled to read several times. It's scary, thrilling, and intensely interesting, at least to a "paranomal" buff such as myself. And all of this in a nonfiction book. Perhaps truth really is stranger than fiction!
   
   It seems some people don't like John Keel's writing style, as it seems rather scatterbrained. I believe this is deliberate, as the different subcategories of subject matter, such as the men in black, UFOs, the Mothman itself, etc., are touched on briefly, repeatedly intertwined with other subcategories of phenomena that were encountered during Keel's Point Pleasant adventure. This sylistic decision necessitated a temporally scattered book, in the interest of spreading out the aforementioned, varying subject matter.
   
   The less informed typically negatively assess the eyewitness reports given in this book. Yes, it is odd that these alleged extra-dimensional beings possess a mixture sophisticated technology, and patently unsophisticated, contemporary human technology of the time. It isn't right to lambaste Keel or his interviewees over this subject matter of their testimony. The mixture of the low and high tech has been seen in most UFO contact cases of the last 130 years. Ultimately, this supports the theory, unpopular with many of the tinfoil hat wearers who give UFOlogists a bad name, that the UFO phenomena have probably absolutely nothing to do with aliens.
   
   There are many strange features of the varied stories in this book. If you keep an open mind, you may find them just as entertaining as I do!



3. This book is very informative and worth a read if you're interested in this legend and the multiple events that took place. However, I must say the book is unorganized as it seems to jump from story to story and repeat itself in some details and events. All in all I thouroughly enjoyed this book though.



4. The Mothman Prophecies is a book by author John A. Keel which claims to tell the true story of mysterious events occurring in the eastern United States during the late 1960s. The tale is told entirely from Keel's vantage point as a first-hand investigator (and experiencer) of the paranormal happenings in question.
   
   I must say that I began reading The Mothman Prophecies with certain expectations. I had previously been exposed to the exploits of the infamous mothman by various authors in other cryptozoology texts. There was no question that this book would be the authoritative, original source material from which most other writers have since taken inspiration. I was surprised, however, at the diversity of the matter which awaited me.
   
   On the positive side, Keel is an excellent and engaging author. He writes colorfully, and offers a work that will not likely bore any of his audience. It's also nearly impossible to argue that this story isn't a "must read" for those interested in the Mothman, or any of the number of other strange incidents which Keel documents here. Having had the unique privilege of investigating and experiencing these events in person, as they were happening, the author boasts a definite authority and purity in documentation. It's obvious that The Mothman Prophecies has heavily influenced many modern researchers in various fields of the unexplained, making it an entry hard to ignore on any serious paranormalist's reading list. I must also say that, even if one were to discount its potential as a true story, the book does make a fairly good classic sci-fi page turner in its own right.
   
   Enjoyment and intrigue aside, I did develop some rather serious criticisms of The Mothman Prophecies which I feel could negatively impact some readers. As with most texts, the degree to which these cons influence your personal experience will vary.
   
   First off, Keel blatantly and repeatedly breaks one of the cardinal rules of good scientific documentation; he continuously introduces theories and opinions into his writing. The Mothman Prophecies is laced with personal interpretations of the phenomena being witnessed. In fact, something that really surprised me on several occasions, were the seamless way in which the author would offer what are essentially his beliefs as solid fact, with nary a disclaimer. It's not uncommon for paranormal investigators to attempt to draw conclusions from their works, but this goes well beyond that. Keels repeatedly debunks and downplays certain popular institutions, including UFO groups and alien visitation theories, while simultaneously replacing them with his own views. He ironically disclaims one ideology as being scientifically unsupportable, while concurrently supplanting it with his own, equally unsupported, theories. Keel regularly writes in a very matter-of-fact manner with explanations for curiosities that I do not believe have ever been accounted for scientifically, even to this day.
   
   The lack of good scientific method is also not limited to the frequent disclosure of Keel's convictions. I additionally found myself curious how someone as dedicated to investigating the paranormal as the author must have been, could still be so unprepared to gather any data other than witness statements and personal observations. Throughout the book, Keel documents a multitude of occasions where he witnessed anomalous objects and individuals, both by chance and by intent. All this time, he never mentions taking a single photograph or measurement of those in question. In one chapter, we hear how he repeatedly visits a certain hilltop at night to view a recurring colorful orb in the distance, yet he apparently never thought to take photographs, nor to simply go and wait in the location where these lights actually appeared. His lack of ability to take advantage of the seemingly ubiquitous and predictable phenomena makes the sheer legitimacy of some of the accounts suspect.
   
   Getting back to expectations, having already learned of the Mothman character from other sources, I had come into The Mothman Prophecies expecting to read an exhaustive, authoritative volume of documentation on one of my personal favorite cryptids. I was rather surprised to discover, then, that the Mothman creature really only plays a limited roll in the proceedings. This book is absolutely not the standard investigators report that one might expect to find on other monsters such as Sasquatch or Nessie. Mothman here is little more than a supporting character in a large cast of humans, weirdos, monsters, and anomalous objects. The majority of the book, particularly the latter half, is actually spent away from the Mothman, and enters into a huge variety of lights in the sky, men-in-black, UFO contactees, phone tapping, and lots of miscellaneous strangeness. In fact, Keel relates such a variety of bizarre happenings from this period in his life, that it may greatly strain ones ability to believe that the story is the least bit sane and true. The author, rather than being the normal independent observer, actually becomes the central character in what would more easily be viewed as an old school sci-fi tale, had the cover of the book not disclaimed it to be "based on a true events."
   
   My final gripe, although smaller than the aforementioned bits, is that the writing style here has a tendency to be disjointed. Characters seem to pop up in various chapters, often for only a paragraph or two at a time. It makes remembering exactly who is where and doing what across chapters more confusing than it should be, and occasionally detracts from the ability to follow the overall story. The chapters, likewise, are somewhat hit or miss. They don't seem to follow any specific convention, some based on people, others on a block of time, and still others on a specific phenomena. The chapters themselves are also subdivided into numbered sections, in a way which at times felt arbitrary and pointless. While there are no doubt multiple ways to tell a complex and chronological story of this nature, it would have been nice had the author and editors simply picked one theme and stuck with it.
   
   Ultimately, The Mothman Prophecies is an interesting work, to say the least. If you want a good paranormal story, you certainly need to look no further. Additionally, if you're in the market for a first-hand account of the origin of the Mothman or even the other paranormal events around Point Pleasant in the late 1960s, this is really a must read. On the other hand, if you're a scientifically minded individual looking for responsible investigation of the unexplained, you're likely to be disappointed by Keel's very human (and very biased) manner of recounting events, which greatly stains belief and credibility.
   
   Rating: 3.5/5
   
   --
   Matt LaPlante
   8/3/2008



5. This book, to me, starts out a little slow, in that the author focuses solely on THE mothman and peoples' accounts with him (what he looked like, did, etc.). For about the first 100 pages the author pretty much lists interviews and 1st hand accounts with contactees and their experiences. Though, after the 100th page or so (I don't know what it is about the 100th page for me), the book gets really interesting. Things start happening personally to John Keel himself. It seems as though, the more he begins to find out, and the deeper he goes into things, the more things begin to get in his way and stop him. It becomes apparent that someone or something doesn't want him to know what he knows.. Yet he persists. A very good book which lives up to its name.

5 comments about Endless Universe: Beyond the Big Bang.

1. Great read on a great subject and a fast read!
   Not only does this book contain a lot of info on the evolution of the universe, it also touches on the exciting ideas of M-theory and "branes", flurting the idea that two, higher dimensional, branes may have collided to create the beginning of our universe. But, as you'll see, it may NOT have been THE beginning as we think of it!!! Unlike some other popular reads, this book is pretty focused on the Big Bang vs. the "Big Splat"... Very interesting for anyone looking for a focused read on THE BEGINNING. Highly recommended. The tone of the book is great and easy to read.



2. Steinhardt and Turok masterfully outline and simplify their "cyclic model" of the universe in Endless Universe. This book could also serve as an introduction to M Theory, which unifies numerous string theories. Even if you don't buy their theory, you should buy this book because it addresses a number of issues that the traditional big bang theory (or the "inflationary model") fails at answering or explaining. Although the authors' own theory seems a bit far fetched (the first two stages of the model take only a few billion years while the "dark energy" stage takes a trillion), it is a needed rebuttal to the shortcomings of the inflationary model.



3. The big bang theory of the origin of the universe has been almost unchallenged for about half a century. Once the discovery of cosmic background in 1963 disposed of the steady-state model proposed by Fred Hoyle and Thomas Gold in the 1950s, it was essentially the only game in town. Oscillatory models never entirely went away, but the inflationary model seemed to explain nearly all the data. At the same time it had some flaws that would not go away: it left the first second after the big bang a total mystery; it left the highly homogeneous distribution of matter and energy after the violent beginning unexplained; it seemed to require absurdly precise values for the physical constants (giving apparent support to the "strong anthropic principle", allowing some physicists to claim that the universe must have been designed by an external intelligence so that it could have us living in it); it failed to explain the origin of the "dark energy" driving the expansion; and so on. Any one of these difficulties could probably be explained away in terms of incomplete knowledge and understanding, but taken together they require so many arbitrary assumptions that it becomes hard to escape the conclusion that the big bang universe has become a patchwork of arbitrary assumptions, added ad hoc to cope with a series of problems.
   
   Paul Steinhardt and Neil Turok have developed an alternative way of seeing the universe, in which the big bang was not the beginning but simply a cataclysmic moment in a history of cycles, with no beginning and no end, and in their book they explain all this in terms that are by no means too difficult for the non-physicist to understand. Their model explains everything that the inflationary model explains, but it does so on the basis of fewer and less arbitrary assumptions. It is too soon to feel confident they are right, but if they are right they provide two comforting thoughts for non-physicists: we no longer need to think of time as something that began for unexplained reasons 14 billion years ago, but can return to thinking of it as something that stretches as far back into the past and future as we like to consider, and we don't have to take the strong anthropic principle as a serious argument for an intelligent designer.
   
   This is a book that I enjoyed enormously. If I could give it six stars I would.



4. The book presents an interesting alternative to the mainstream theory of the inflationary big bang cosmology. It even indicates possibilities for experimentally deciding between the two theories.
   What also discerns this book from many popular science books is that the two authors present not only their ideas, but also tha path by which these were reached. This not only makes the book very readable, but is also demonstrates the trial and error process which characterizes real science.



5. "Endless Universe - Beyond the Big Bang" by Dr. Paul J. Steinhardt and Dr. Neil Turok." Can any one tell me please how much distance there is between the dimensional membranes (brains)? I can't find a physicist that seems to know!
   
   Each new scientific data point seems to throw a curve ball on our best laid plans and theories. The newest discovery (announced Sept 2008) that our universe seems to be rushing into a suck-hole by some "unseen force" at 2-million miles an hour, really puts a crimp in Steinhardt and Turok thesis of two flat planes ("brains" - short for membrains) of energy colliding in multiple points on a large scale ever trillion years and starting us all over again.
   
   I liked their idea and fair treatment of the scientific method (conjecture, observation, proof) and new interpretation for old and new data. But how can we possibly integrate in these latest released observations of the giant suck-hole way, way out there on the edge?
   
   http://www.peaceandconflictresolution.org/

5 comments about Witness to Roswell: Unmasking the 60-Year Cover-Up.

1. I've just finished reading Witness to Roswell. The book is absolutely excellent. Very well written and well researched. This is one of those books where you start reading it, and can't put it down. I haven't found many of those in my lifetime, but this is certainly one.



2. The authors of Witness to Roswell have put together the most comprehensive telling of the Roswell story to date. Although their account of Mack Brazel's discovery of unusual debris and the subsequent well known events is rather general, they do summarize these events, set out in great detail elsewhere, well.
   
   The majority of the book then focuses on information, much of it new, obtained from numerous other witnesses to the events in Roswell in 1947 (hence the title of the book). Clearly the authors have exerted substantial sustained effort to track down any remaining potential witnesses. They are particularly good at bringing together reports of numerous servicemen involved in various small aspects of the incident. When these bits of the story are put together, they add up to a powerful argument for something far beyond the crash of a weather balloon (the book also contains an interesting presentation of the successive stages of government cover-up attempts).
   Adding more information about some of the "debunked" witnesses would have given a fuller picture of the story as it has developed over the years, but no matter which side of the debate one chooses, this book supplies information needed to discuss the Roswell Incident intelligently.
   
   -Lynn Michelsohn, author of Roswell, Your Travel Guide to the UFO Capital of the World!.



3. Overall this book was well written and documented. The co-authors used good background and detail to substantiate their findings and ideas. I recommend the book for Roswell Conspiracy buffs like myself. Undeniably something landed or happened there in 1947. Whether its a flying saucer or a weather balloon the government or someone does not want the public to become privy to all the info regarding this event. Kudos to the writers for their work and perseverance in obtaining the interviews and accounts of key witnesses who helped moblize and carry out orders given to them at that time.
   Well worth the time to read.



4. Anyone who writes a book about UFO's should take note that THIS is the way you write a convincing, serious book on the topic. The only way in which a person could possibly "debunk" this book is by accusing the authors of making up all of the witnesses' accounts. Otherwise, it would be virtually impossible to reach any conclusion other than the one that the authors reach--namely, that the Roswell crash was that of an extraterrestrial craft, and that there were PLENTY of people who can (and could) attest to this.
   I should add that this book is well written, well edited, has plenty of photographs (mostly of people), has adequate footnotes, has an index, and has an up-to-date bibliography. These are all components that most readers expect to find in a serious treatise (on ANY subject), but that we fail to see in MANY UFO books written in recent years.
   So, my congratulations to the authors Carey and Schmitt, who have given us the most convincing and best-researched book on the Roswell incident EVER.
   My only disappointment is that the supposed "second" crash on the Plains of San Agustin was not included at all in this book. But, the authors were busy focusing on the one near Roswell and Corona. The Plains of San Agustin crash was possibly unrelated, anyway, so we'll leave that topic for someone else to write about.



5. While the book is an interesting read, for me, it could have been half as long and told the same story. The authors tell individual parts of the story multiple times, each time including more details from a different witnesses perspective. While this certainly "builds" their case, it creates a somewhat repetitious book, IMO.
   
   Overall, however, I recommend the book. The list of witnesses is credible, and the overall tone of the book makes it easy to believe that a UFO really did crash in New Mexico with "creatures" aboard. In fact, it's easier to believe than the "official" government stories.

5 comments about Handbook of Model Rocketry, 7th Edition (NAR Official Handbook).

1. This is without a doubt the best book on model rocketry I've ever seen, and I read it from cover to cover. It deals with every aspect of rocketry in a very accessible manner (for example, presenting formulas for various calculations, but not requiring their use). It is organized so that the reader can focus on single aspects of a rocketry program (for example, separate chapters on aerodynamics, rocket propulsion, recovery systems, altitude measurement). I am a science teacher and coach to two Team America Rocketry Challenge teams, and I keep copies of this book available for my teams as reference. I wish it had more information on electronic payloads, but that is a more advanced topic, so it is very forgivable. If you own only one book on rocketry, this is the one to buy.



2. As an adult Model Rocketeer for the past 16 years, I can say that every Rocketeer should have this in their library. It is indeed "the Bible" of Model Rocketry. It is a goldmine of information and technical know-how, and will lead a beginning Rocketeer on the right path. Even someone who's just curious about Model Rocketry will learn a lot from it.



3. It goes into so much detail from glues to auerodynamics to calculations of height and stability. I would reccomend it to a beginner and an experienced model rocketeer.



4. The 7th edition of this great handbook is getting a little "long in the tooth" now, but it is still essential reading for anyone who wants to get into model rocketry, regardless of whether you're main interest is low, mid or high power rockets. Of all the books about model rocketry that I own, G. Harry Stine's handbook is the best value for money.



5. This is a wonderful way to introduce kids into the value of math. They will learn about aero dynamics to boot. It's not a 'math' book, it's just that you have to learn a few formulas to be able to do the more entertaining projects. Harry does a great job of explaining the how's and why's of Rocket science in an entertaining way. He also throws a little history in there. This print is older but it hasn't changed much. If you find a cheap copy, snatch it up.

5 comments about Maps of Time: An Introduction to Big History (California World History Library).

1. Intellectually stimulating, rapid-fire journey, the "powers of 10" movie specialized for history buffs. Some of the material I found superficial/generalized to be of substance, but the author acknowledges that can be the nature of Big History. An ambitious book which talks directly to ideas that most historians only philosophically discuss. A charge of inductive reasoning would not be far fetched, ie. cherry picking of facts to support prefigured models. Excellent overview of Big History and World History ideas and methods and themes. Annotated bibliographies at the end of each chapter, and large one at the end of the book, are very good for further exploration, most book recommendations are recent (1990s and early 2000s). Despite criticisms learned some new and important perspectives and recommend it highly.



2. The book is not always easy, but well worth reading. It debates the different theories about life, the Universe and everything, through zooming in. The first part is about the big bang en the formation of stars, than follows the geological processes that formed the earth, the evolution of live, humans and our history. It ends with the 20 th century and possible futures. What I liked most about this book, was that it did not present a clear story, but gave the facts, and the different theories (different stories) that might come with those facts.
   It was for me the book at the center of my expending library, because it comes with a extensive bibliography from which I'm now selecting books about the different parts of the big everything to continue reading.
   The best book I've read in years (and I read a lot of (non)fiction books, about a large variaty of subjects).



3. David Christian had a great ambition with this book: to write the history of everything there has ever been. In other words, it describes not only human history but also natural history from the very first beginning. Of course, I had read this on the cover but I had not quite anticipated how elaborate and detailedly the author would describe the formation of the cosmos from the moment of the big bang. I had expected the book to go rather briefly through this part of history and to move on quickly to human history. But I was pleasantly surprised because this first part of the book turned out to be the most fascinating part, as far as I am concerned. The rest of the book is quite interesting too, I must add. The plan and ambition of this book are great, the way the author has worked them out, too. If you liked THE HUMAN WEB by JR McNeill and William H. McNeill, you may like MAPS OF TIME even more. If you admired A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME by Stephen Hawking, you may admire this book just as much.



4. The Maps of Time is a good concept; however, the view is slanted to a Marxist view of history. This becomes apparent as the book moves along although at first it isn't so clear.
   
   The first clue that the book is slanted is the absence of religion in the discussion. The book is all science all the way in its descriptions of the universe and its origins. What mention there is of religion, especially Christian concepts, is negative.
   
   
   
   As one moves through history the author makes statements that simply cannot be supported. For example, on page 174 the author states: "Studies of Homo habilis skulls show that their brains were not merely large than australopithecine brains; they were also organized differently. In particular, there are hints of the division of labor between left and right sides..." I hate to point out that a skull in and of itself isn't going to be able to tell a researcher how the brain was organized. And the author acknowledges this in the statement that there are "hints" of the division of labor. I am not trying to be especially nit picky but this is the kind of statement the author makes over and over. Things that cannot be shown are said to be absolute.
   
   As the book moves into ancient societies the author argues that progress came through interconnection between societies. As trade grew so did progress to more complex things and more complex societies. He also divides the world into tribute taking and consensual societies. He argues that tribute taking states see war as their main concern. In essence, like Marx, he argues that states develop as exploitative institutions where those at the top use those at the bottom. Those at the bottom do all the work and those at the top enjoy the fruits of their labor. He also thinks that men began to lead society because they were less vital than women outside the home, so as society developed power structures outside the home men naturally began to run these.
   
   I could go on, but the entire argument is flawed in so many ways it is hard to count them all. I would say that society developed as it did because of the need for protection. Even hunter gathers need protection from wild beasts and other tribes. Who is going to be doing the attacking? The biggest strongest men from the other tribe. Who will have to do the defending? The biggest strongest men from the tribe under attack. Those who go off to raid, or to protect, must be shown some honor from the group. If nothing else the men who fight will demand honor from the group, and eventually they will come to lead the group because protection is so vital. It may also be the leaders of the group are those with good ideas or whatever. It is not a given that exploiters came to lead society.
   
   Why settle down and farm? Is it because you want to be exploited? No, it is because you can do more with your life. The crops and animals will support you without needing to tramp about all year. Specialization will naturally grow out of such settlements because some people will be better at certain tasks, and as they improve their work they will be paid (given grain etc) which will take the place of working in the fields. This will be especially true in areas such as metal working. Someone has to mine the metal ore (which requires staying in one place), smelt the ore, and then make the metal objects such as swords, spear points etc. From this alone a group of non-farming individuals will develop which will exist as specialist within the group. The author believes specialization developed because of interconnection with other groups (trade etc) and because the elites desired it. I would argue it is a natural process of staying in one place.
   
   In my opinion society did not develop as set forth in the Maps of Time, and the book gives no other ideas as to how societies might have come about. The ONLY way it is described is a group of elitists pushing the "working class" into subjugation.
   
   As the author argues the interconnectedness of societies as the key to progress he also argues that Europe was a geographic hub and that was critical to its progress. Europe isn't the geographic hub of anything. In fact it sits on the edge of a huge landmass (Euro-Asia) apart from anything that would cross it naturally. However, Europe became a hub of trade and learning because of the Renaissance, the age of discovery and the industrial revolution. The key was a change in mindset, and all else followed that key change. Capitalist societies etc came about because the minds in Europe had changed, not because the economy had somehow changed. The fact that other parts of the world had no Renaissance is the key to why Europe emerged triumphant from the dark ages and eventually ruled the world.
   
   In essence, the author overlooks the importance of protection, war, religion, and thought processes in history. To his credit he includes economic factors (trade etc), the role of disease and the role of the types of government in directing history. Unfortunately he overstates the role of economic matters and government type in history. The author fails to effectively link the very long sections on the origins of the universe and our earth to history itself. More than half the book is taken up with physical history and pre-history, much of which is speculation. Little time is spent on ancient history, the foundations of democracy, the economic collapse of the middle ages in Europe, the development of the modern world, World Wars I and II etc. What good is knowing the physical history of the universe if it isn't tied to how we act and react in the modern world?
   
   In the end, I reject the premise of the book that history can be explained by science and Karl Marx's economic philosophy.
   
   AD2



5. Mostly this is a very good book, which is amazing considering how much Christian tries to do. It is well worth reading, though hard to follow in places. Having given it five stars, let me offer a few warnings for potential readers:
   
   Christian can be kind of fuzzy. For a book of history there are remarkably few dates, and I often found myself asking, "Just when did this take place?" I was also bothered by the way Christian didn't "define his terms." For example, a fair amount of the last part of the book talks about Europe becoming "commercial." But he never tells us just what he means by commercial, or how we can tell when one country is more commercial than another, or how we can tell whether a country has gotten a lot more commercial or just a little more commercial.
   
   I was especially frustrated by a section near the end. He seems to say, "The modern world is capitalist. The modern world has tremendous poverty. Therefore, capitalism has caused tremendous poverty." This seems silly. Most people would agree that capitalism involves well-defined and well-protected property rights, and a large amount of freedom to engage in economic transactions without interference by a government. By this standard, much of the world isn't all that capitalist. Moreover, in general, the less "capitalist" the country, the poorer it is. Blaming capitalism for poverty seems like blaming medicine when people refuse to allow their children to get vaccinated and then the kids get sick. No doubt Christian means something different by capitalism--but since he doesn't say what, it is impossible to know how to agree or disagree.
   
   A major theme of the book is that for most of the last two thousand years, the richest areas of the world were southwest Asia (mesopotamia and Persia), south Asia (India) and east Asia (China). As late as 1800, a "man from Mars" would have reported back to his home planet that India and China, not Europe, were where people lived best. The book then seems to say that a century later, China and India were poverty-stricken. Yet aside from a reference to the Opium Wars (and some reading between the lines about population increase), there is no explanation of how such a monumental change happened.
   
   Sometimes Christian doesn't realize the power of simple arithmetic. If one farm family can produce enough food to feed one family, just about everyone has to be a farmer. If technology improves so that one farm family can feed two families, one half of the farm families will have to cease being farmers. If technology means one farm family can feed three, two thirds of the farm families have to get out of the ancestral business. Whether the process will be negative ("thrown off the land") or positive (peasants flee "the idiocy of rural life" for the increased stimulation and opportunity of urban areas) will depend on a lot of things, but the fact that it happens follows directly from the increased productivity. High agricultural productivity dooms a peasantry.

5 comments about A First Course in General Relativity.

1. I started reading this book at a friend's house about 1 year ago and after graduating and starting to miss physics, I decided to pick it up and try something I didn't get in school. This book does a great job of building a fundamental understand of what is going on(and doesn't shy away from the math). The best part is the different ways it can be read. It is written to leave a lot of the deep math(actually expanding the equations and seeing the results in a more concrete manner) to the reader's discretion. As a working person, this is a huge advantage, as it means I can read ahead to curvature while spending my weekends getting familiar with tensor math.
   
   I highly suggest this as a start for anyone that wants to get a feel for GR(not a pop culture feel, but a real understanding of the ideas and math) but doesn't always have the time to work through the math. I also have the Misner, Thorne and Wheeler book Gravitation, and while it gives a much more expansive study of GR, I don't find myself with the time required to read it.
   
   The only drawback is I feel it doesn't give the best intuition about tensors of a higher order than a one form. But that is probably due to my own lack of intuition in that area.
   
   For clarity, My relevant background in physics and math:
   ODE, PDE, Vector Calculus, Introductory Analysis and topology, QM, EM, Mechanics, Optics, Thermodynamics. I've never studied non-euclidean space or any real study of geometry beyond the most basic of real number line topology.



2. As background, I am a senior undergrad doing a thesis on black hole perturbations (following Chandrasekhar). This was the first book I got on GR, a little over a year ago, and I fell in love with it. It does a great job of quickly, though not completely painlessly, introducing you to GR. HOWEVER, as I now continue my ventures further, I find a lot of fundamental concepts lacking in my education. I went from this book onto parts of Wald: not a good idea IMO. I am currently paging through Lovelock and Rund and wishing the mathematical aspect had been introduced in Schutz as well as here. In the end, very nice, well explained intro to the concepts, but you NEED to either supplement with better mathematical explanation, or move quickly to higher book.



3. There are a lot of books on General Relativity. In approach they vary from no math, to essentially math books. This book is somewhere in the middle. It is said to be suitable for a one year course for beginning graduate students or for undergraduates in physics who have studied special relativity, vector calculus, and electrostatics.
   
   To enable such a student to follow the math in in this book the first part of the book reviews special relativity and vector analysis. Then the book has a section on Tensor Analysis, which was newly developed in Einstein's time when it was called tensor calculus. The treatment of these mathematical concepts in this book are, in my mind, sufficient for a review for a student that had studied them before, but will require some pretty good insight for a student that had not seen them before. This background information covers about a third of the book.
   
   Chapter 5 of the book starts out, 'Until now we have discussed only SR.' The next two thirds cover curvature, physics in a curved spacetime, the Einstein field equations, gravitational radiation (the biggest chapter in the book), and on to the rest of GR.
   
   By the end of the book the student has indeed completed a 'first course' in GR. There is still plenty more to go for the interested student specializing in this area.



4. Nice introduction to GR. Not extensive previous knowledge needed and as clear as it could be.



5. This book is a good introduction to relativity which does not pull punches mathematically speaking but still manages to be merciful to the beginner. I read this book with only a basic background in freshman college physics and calculus. It took me 2 6-month sessions over 2 years to go through it all in detail but it was worth it. It gave me a sufficient familiarity with the core concepts and underlying mathematics to consider tackling a more advanced book on relativity someday.

5 comments about The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?.

1. The cover of the book had a caption that read: The funniest book about physics ever written. Immediately springing to mind was the question, how many funny books on physics are there? Well, the cover of the book was correct. Professor Lederman, a Nobel Prize winner, managed to combine a detailed yet clear presentation of physics with a keen sense of humor. His disdain for theoretical physicists was actually quite funny. Lederman covered the history of physics, from the ancient Greeks up to modern times. While the book is a little outdated now (it was written in 1993) Lederman did update the preface in 2006. The only time that I got bogged down was when Lederman was discussing his own experiments. I feel that the book could have used more illustrations, particularly about particle accelerators. However, the web site http://particleadventure.org/ was very useful in clearing up much of my confusion. This book was well worth the investment of time and I was sad when I finished the book. I felt as if I were leaving an old friend and mentor in Professor Lederman.



2. The book was not effective for me, for a handful of reasons.
   
   1. To begin with, I found the book slow-paced (it takes more than a third of the book to get to the discovery of the electron).
   
   2. The authors' attempt at humor doesn't work for me. Example: "Nature uses these combinations, called molecules, to build planets, suns, viruses, mountations, paychecks, Valium, literary agents..." It's just not funny for me.
   
   3. The authors labor under the impression that the reader will both hate any math and not be able to understand it. Their attempt to explain a formula such as F=ma is to spell it out in words: "Eff equals em ay."
   
   4. The amount of material actually devoted to the God Particle (Higgs boson) is extremely small.
   
   5. There are many topics that would be improved with artwork at the level of a Scientific American article, but the only pieces of artwork in the whole book are a diagram of an American football play and a childish map that leads us from Democritus to Burger King.



3. So where is it written that a science book can't be illuminating, factual, current as well as historical, accurate and with some comedic relief?? My favorite line paraphrased: "Why did we title this book, The God Particle? Because, the publishers wouldn't let us call it The Goddamn Particle!" I sincerely hope someday he finds his Higgs Boson. A very interesting work, enjoy it!



4. As with most physics books we get a history lesson of the long road of discoveries that has led up to our current point in research, in this case the higgs boson. The history section is probably one of the best written in physics books but unfortunately that's not why I had read the book. The section that actually concerns the title of the book is actually pretty small. The second part of the book is more concerned with the authors history with Fermi lab, winning the nobel prize, interesting anecdotes and some friendships with other physicists. The God particle subject is very elusive in this book, as it is in the real world.



5. The book is a wonderful read of contemporary physics, but is out of date. I still give it 5 stars because the author clearly explains why books by Zukav, Capra and others, which are often used to argue that quantum physics explains how the mind affects the universe, or how the universe affects the mind, are fundamentally flawed - misunderstandings that abound in New Age metaphysics. Actually, it's easier to ground New Age theory in neuroscience (see Newberg's Born to Believe: God, Science, and the Origin of Ordinary and Extraordinary Beliefs. Although there is some intriguing evidence that our thoughts (although it's probably our body temperature since we find no evidence of thoughts transcending the brain) may have minute effects on the environment. But the emphasis is on the word "minute."

5 comments about UFOs and the National Security State: Chronology of a Coverup, 1941-1973.

1. I watched Richard Nolan on the History Channel talking about conspiracies and UFOS...He mesmerized me. The man knows a lot. Some said he is an insider, and others suggest that he is one of the big guys in government. I don't care what they say. There is one fact, Mr. Dolan is a walking encyclopedia. You can sense how much he knows from reading this book. It is the Alpha and Omega of UFOS. One of the finest publications about these phenomena. Do not miss this book.



2. Dolan is known for his investigative abilities and gathering "inside" information. And this book brings an enormous amount of facts and new discoveries. Always polite and well-spoken, Mr. Dolan is also pulverizing. His writings are characterized by academic flair, affirmative analytical theses and depth. Add this book to your library.



3. A great bench mark and reference for studies on Ufology. A lot of research went into this book.
   
   I had the chance to meet Mr. Dolan recently at one of his lectures where he stated that this book will be followed with volumes 2 and 3 that are now nearly complete. I am expecting that Dolan's 3-book set would fit very well into anyone's library on this subject.



4. Finally, someone with the educational background and thorough researching skills to give this topic the treatment it deserves. I found the historical accounts of the formation and activities of our national intelligence and military organizations as compelling, if not more so, than the UFO reports themselves. Every American citizen should read this.



5. I have read this book twice now and it is worth every moment. Very comprehensive study. Get this if you want a serious library about UFO's.

5 comments about Astronomy: A Self-Teaching Guide, Sixth Edition.

1. Obviously there are no people who are completely clueless about astronomy since we all were taught as children (at least I was) about the planets in our solar system and about other galaxies. Beyond that most people would not know much about astronomy; which is where this nice little book comes in handy. It has enough information on astronomy subjects without mathematics and without being textbook-like. I think the value of this book is the combination of illustrations and text that stimulate an interest to explore the topics (in another, more extensive book) if this is so desired. And if not, then it is still a good overview of astronomy. Good book for the price!



2. This book is a good introduction to astronomy, but, they put the answers for all the tests right next to (and often directly underneath) the questions. That makes it very hard to take the tests sincerely because it's so easy to accidentally glance at the answers.



3. I have always been fascinated with astronomy but the language/references have been a bit over my head sometimes. I am looking forward to becoming a more savvy "star gazer". The book seems to be what I have been looking for.



4. This book provides a stimulating introduction to astronomy for beginners. The sixth edition is updated with latest research into black holes, active galaxies and quasars, searches for life in space, origin and structure of our universe. I particularly like the many photos and diagrams included in the book for illustration and that each chapter is organized into small sections for easy learning.



5. This book is nicely laid-out. When you're finished with it, you will know your astronomy. It reads smoothly and is easy to carry around -- being a paperback. I recommend it.