5 comments about Mass Control: Engineering Human Consciousness.

1. Recently, through amazon.com, I have become aware of a phenomenon called mind-control. After reading about it in "Acid Dreams" by Martin Lee, I knew that the American Government and the CIA coercively tested people with mind-controlling substances such as LSD. I knew of it, but hadn't really thought about it.

   I would come to learn through reading this book (and others) that this phenomenon did not begin in the US, but rather in Nazi Germany during World War II. People placed in concentration camps under the Nazi regime were used for scientific "experiments" by doctors, inclduing the infamous Josef Mengele. After the war, many Nazis escaped to the United States through the help of rich and powerful British and Americans.

   At the height of the cold war, America was in competition with Russia regarding technological advancement. Russian Soviets began testing their people with mind-control techniques. When the American government learned of this, they did everything in their power to be one step ahead of the Soviets and began their own mind-control tests - by, among others, the Nazi scientists who were "invited" to America.

   What were the results of theses tests? Who were the people that were being tested with mind-control? What happened to them? Moreover, are there mind-control tests still being conducted today? By whom? Why? You will find all the answers in this book. And it is shocking and disturbing.

   The purpose of this book is NOT to illicit human emotions, but rather to tell the truth - relying on factual evidence. It is not science fiction; it is reality. And the real world is very scary. The proposed "New World Order" is even scarier. Jim Keith spells it all out thoroughly in each chapter.

   This is a highly informative and well-researched book . I recommend - no, urge YOU to read it. Remember: The truth will set you free. And our freedom is at stake. It's up to each of us to do what we can in order to truly live in the "land of the free."

   Begin with reading this book.




2. Jim Keith meticulously researched this book, ... I challenge anyone who thinks this is a work of "fiction" to come to that conclusion after first visiting the following websites where you can learn a lot of factual information about the MKULTRA program which verifies what Keith is saying: ... Website of John Mecca who is under MKULTRA Mind Control and who is trying hard to warn people. ...That is the website of Advocacy Committee Human Experimentation Survivors- and Mind Control These are people who have suffered the torment of the damned at the hands of the CIA, which is doing the bidding of the Illuminati to set the stage for forcing us into a psychocivilized society with everyone to be put under electronic mind control.Check out this website which shows actual US patents on Mind Control/Behavioral Modification Technology.... and this is only the tip of the iceburg because its the declassified stuff: ...

   Check out this free online book: Blueprint for a Prison Planet- The Plan to Microchip Humanity: ...

   Check out ...Anti NSA Section, last bullet pointed item is a lawsuit of John St.Claire Akwei vs NSA. In it he details NSA's scientific capabilities for doing Remote Neural Monitoring. Akwei is one of thousands of victims of CIA black ops human experimentation.

   Also, I happen to know that Jim Keith was killed for writing this book. He is no longer alive. He was a friend of mine, and what happened to him could happen to me at any time for trying to expose the same things. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. The people who gave this book bad reviews are either fools or NSA debunkers who don't want people to read the book.




3. First of all, i wasn't sent out here by the "Illuminati," i couldn't tell you if they really exist or not.
   
   But I will tell you that Jim Keith died because he broke his knee and didn't go to the hospital when it happened, he died of a blood clot during surgery. (...)
   
   Persoanlly, I believe that a few of the things Keith has brought up in this book are correct. I'm sure there is CIA experimenting and other crooked things going on, and i think microchip implants are a bigger threat than people realize. But that does not mean that this should be looked at as a gospel.



4. We are compelled to ... copy and paste almost the whole another's reader review, where I found almost all what we are not only thinking but directly first hand KNOWING, not only as "firm believer" rather as working to "collect proofs" and helping direct victims on this field.
   "To convince me of their point of view by eliciting emotion rather than reason...": how much I think this to be a mighty favour for changing real facts to mere lined up suggestions. "I tend to regard every word that follows with considerable suspicion. I'm querky that way, having learned long ago that emotion is the fastest way to short circuit reason.": thanks Cathy (Oregon, USA) for your words!
   "Agenda?, October 17, 2001
   Reviewer: Cathy (Oregon, USA) - See all my reviews
   ...Hey, I'm a firm believer that the U.S. government lies and performs harmful experiments on it's citizens on a regular basis. We have proof of that, lots of it. That said, when some one attempts to convince me of their point of view by eliciting emotion rather than reason, as Mr. Keith does, I tend to regard every word that follows with considerable suspicion. I'm querky that way, having learned long ago that emotion is the fastest way to short circuit reason.
   Mr. Keith buries us in references and offical sounding partial quotes from important people and important sounding people hoping that we the reader won't notice the constant use of buz words meant to elicit emotion rather than reason. "The Elite", "greed", "world wide conspiracy", the "ruling class", "eminent stuffed shirts". On and on, over and over, emotional buz words meant to illicit the we vs them response, where "we", the reader, are good and "they" are evil. Again, in order to elicit the "oh, my god" from us, he uses phrases such as "may have been a member of", without ever offering any proof of actual membership in this awful organization or "it has been reported", but he never tells us who reported these awful things.
   This book was especially dissapointing for me, because for the most part I agree with the idea that there are "beings" trying to control our thought. As if our "free press" doesn't do a superb job already. I admit that I finally gave up on this book some where around chapter 10. I'd just had it. I suspect that there are truths to be found here, but I was unable to get past Mr. Keith's style to find any. Maybe you can get past this, obviously from some of the previous reviews, some readers don't even notice it. Me, I'm the suspicious type and this book caused me to think that maybe there is LESS, not MORE with respect to the idea of mind control."



5. CIA fundeded psychiatric studies, programs and experiments using mind control and brainwashing. Subliminal messages, mkultra, haarp, LSD experiments, electro-magnetic brainwave manipulation. I'm a little skeptical of the "I was a mind controlled sex slave for world elites" and the satanic ritual abuse claims but other than those all this stuff is documented and checks out pretty well. Its depressing to see just how evil the us government is, but nothing surprises me anymore.

5 comments about The Large, the Small and the Human Mind.

1. Turned off by the strong AI type point of view of consciousness, yet looking for a scientific explanation, I have repeatedly turned to Penrose's work hoping he would have enlightening ideas. At first, he seems to be on the right track, but when he starts making conclusions, things go awry.
   As a biology student, I can say that his understanding of biology seems mediocre at best. And physics may be even worse - in fact his skepticism about the "flatness" of the universe has recently been rendered bascially obsolete.
   I feel that the unified brain quantum undulation camp, if you will (penrose, zohar) paint themselves into a frightful corner. For instance, penrose never explains why his microtubule ideas would apply to the brain in particular...we've got oodles of them in every cell in our body! Basically, these ideas try to strike out against the strong AI poing of view, but actually create a new version of it! It's not the neuron construction, they say, instead it's a mechanism even more arbitrarily linked to the brain!
   Penrose seems to be a great mathematician...and should stick to that. Still searching for explanations...



2. Let me first say something about Roger Penrose. One notices how certain other mathematicians and mathematical physicists speak of him. He is not only admired and respected; it seems that he is positively enjoyed! This may be a bit surprising when one notices that Penrose is something of a thorn in the side of several popular ideas in contemporary physics (and psychology). Cosmic inflation theories and ideas regarding the fundamental nature of quantum uncertainty find a formidable and articulate critic in the Oxford mathematician. Of the somewhat less popular, but ever fanciful "many-worlds" interpretation of quantum superpositioning, Penrose says "[the 'many-worlds' view] is not a very economical description of the Universe but I think things are rather worse than that for the many-worlds description. It is not just its lack of economy that worries me. The main problem is that it does not really solve the problem." He brings the same mental rapier to what he has called "the missing science" of mind and to the idea of computational / artificial intelligence. It is the problem of superpositioning described by Schrodinger and the decoherence caused by quantum measurement that prompt Penrose's search for an 'objective reduction' (OR) of quantum state vectors, the key ingredient in a "revolutionary" physical theory that remains a mystery. He speculates that this physical mystery may be related to the mystery of consciousness. He is unconvincing in this regard, but his ideas and arguments are quite interesting.
   Well, let me now take this a bit further. Penrose also seems to terribly irk certain others! In particular he really raises the hackles of proponents of strong AI and the Dawkins/Dennett camp of 'consciousness-is-merely-mechanism' dogmatists. His views are much closer to those of perhaps most mathematicians and philosophers and stand on a deeper logical footing than do the doctrines that the human mind is mere biology. Let me say that I agree with Penrose in that the 'simple biology' view is never going to win this argument for reasons that can be demonstrated by the application of mathematical logic. To say that Penrose "doesn't understand biology" is to miss the point. The author freely admits, "there is a good deal of speculation in many of these ideas". Of course there is; science is largely -- we might even say wholly -- speculation. A more perceptive analysis would suggest that those committed to a rigid materialistic aesthetic don't understand (don't want to understand) the mathematics. Those who summarily dismiss Penrose do so unwisely. Given his contributions to mathematics (e.g., Penrose tiling, computability, mathematical logic) and his stature within the mathematics community, and given that the history of mathematics is essentially written by mathematicians, Roger Penrose may come to be considered the greatest mathematician of his generation. Given his work on black holes and space-time geometry (he recognizes the apparent "flatness" of the universe but suggests a more elegant geometry to describe that flatness), he may be one of his day's greatest physicists as well. Should his hunch ("OR") one day prove "true", his stature would approach that of a Newton or Einstein. The point being that any scientist who avoids or ignores Penrose's views, or is inclined to dismiss them by erroneously characterizing them, does so, as I say, unwisely.
   Chapters 4, 5, and 6 are challenges to Penrose from A. Shimony, N. Cartwright, and S. Hawking, respectively. Apart from Shimony's discussion of A. N. Whitehead's views, its not on a par with the author's discourses; Cartwright suggests that nature may be a mess of "patchwork" laws (her view itself seems a horrible mess), and Hawking is disappointingly flippant. Penrose certainly meets these challenges.
   I must say that the "controversy" over Penrose's Platonism is nothing less than nonsensical. Hawking complains "basically, he's a Platonist," as though calling him an offensive name and thereby granting the reader cause to disregard Penrose's arguments. That's unfortunate. Most of history's great minds have been Platonists; even Aristotle*, so often cited as the philosophical godfather of reductionism, was arguably a Platonist. Augustine, Kepler, Descartes, Pascal, Newton, Leibniz, Kant, Linnaeus, Einstein*, Schrödinger, Gödel, Whitehead -- the list of Platonists is long and impressive. As Penrose has said, "... it is my direct personal impression that the considerable majority of working mathematicians are at least 'weak' Platonists." Yet it seems as if some who call themselves "positivists" feel a calling to be science's mind-police. I suggest that this should be the real controversy... So-called positivists would do well to honesty consider Gödel's observation that the idea that mind/mentality is simply material is nothing more than the "prejudice of our time."
   There is a rather child-like glee in the way Penrose sees and uses mathematics. His investigations and speculations are those of an extremely astute mind having fun! In his aggressive curiosity, his boldness, his clear-eyed honesty about the frailties of human thought and the limits of science, it seems to me that Penrose is something of a treasure and an inspiration. As he candidly states, "... the world-view that present-day physicists tend to present may well be grossly overstated as to its closeness to completion, or even to its correctness!" This volume presents a concise look at the Penrose ideas/arguments and even if nothing much ever comes of these arguments, they present a shining example of the kind of creative thinking that moves science into new frontiers.
   *(footnote: While recognizing that it can easily be argued that Aristotle and Einstein were not "strong" Platonists, it seems obvious to me that they were each Platonists in some fundamental ways. I consider them to have been "weak" Platonists.)



3. As my background is mainly in the brain sciences, I was most interested in what Penrose had to say about consciousness and the brain in this book, so I'll concentrate mostly on the chapter that had to do with that. This is not to say I didn't enjoy the other chapters, just that I'm not as qualified to critique those as I am the one on the brain. There has been a lot of speculation in recent years about such things as computability and the brain, quantum consciousness, and so on, and I was interested to find out what Penrose might have to say about that.

   One of Penrose's major ideas in this chapter is his demonstration that consciousness, although perhaps mathematical, isn't computable, in the sense that you could program a computer to simulate it. Penrose uses the example of geometric tilings or polyominos that are deterministic in their coverage of the Euclidean plane, but that aren't computable, to show this. Since, as Penrose points out, there are plenty of mathematical concepts that aren't computable and that can't be done on a computer, but that the human mind can understand, Penrose concludes that there is something beyond computability in both pure mathematics and the human brain.

   This is interesting, and Penrose might be right about that. However, I must point out that while consciousness itself may not be computable (and I'm not really prepared to conclude this for sure at this point, because of what I'm about to say), nevertheless, many aspects of the brain's functioning have been shown to be computable, so I'd like to discuss that briefly.

   For example, sensory neurophysiology has been shown to be both quite mathematical and computational as a result of the work of a pioneering mathematician by the name of David Marr 25 years ago, whose ideas revolutionized neurobiology almost overnight, after which the field was never the same. Marr examined a number of different fundamental sensory mechanisms, and showed, for the first time, that the way in which the visual system was processing light information was consistent with the operation of certain sophisticated spatial-frequency filtering transforms that are well-known in many engineering applications. To mention just a few of his important ideas, Marr's demonstrations that retinal receptive-field geometry could be derived by Fourier transformation of spatial-frequency sensitivity data, that edges and contours could be detected by finding zero crossings in the light gradient by taking the Laplacian or second directional derivative, that excitatory and inhibitory receptive fields could be constructed from "DOG" functions (the difference of two Gaussians), and that the visual system used a two-dimensional convolution integral with a Gaussian prefilter as an operator for bandwidth optimization on the retinal light distribution, were more powerful than anything that had been seen up to that time.

   It was as if vision research suddenly acquired its own Newtonian Principia Mathematica, or perhaps General Relativity Theory, in terms of the new explanatory power Marr's theories provided. Basically, in one fell swoop sensory neurobiology also became an area of theoretical physics rather than purely biology, giving the area a rigor and elegance never before seen--an amazing achievement for a young man who died so prematurely from leukemia at the age of 36.

   The main point of all this is that all of these mechanisms are both mathematical and computable, although the way in which they're done in the brain is probably more like how a computer would use numerical analysis to solve a differential equation, rather than using the original equations in a purely analytical way themselves. Since Marr's time, there has been further progress in this area, such as the great Bela Julesz's demonstrations that the visual system can extract and compute binocular disparity cues point-by-point for depth information from abstract, non-representational pictures or textures such as random-dot stereograms, the extension of Marr's ideas about monochromatic edge detection into color edge detection, the mathematical bases of non-linear visual field distortions present in optical illusions, and many other areas.

   Furthermore, in the last few years, the nature of consciousness itself has been shown to be composed of many different separate mechanisms in the brain that are being coordinated in time in order for consciousness to occur. It simply isn't one process or central program that runs in the brain, nor is there a "master" brain center that one can point to where it can be said that consciousness resides. I'm sure the progress of this research will also have implications for ideas about the nature and computability of consciousness.

   So overall, a fascinating and enjoyable discussion about the brain and consciousness by Penrose, even if I don't completely accept one of his major ideas about it for the reasons that I discuss above.




4. Penrose concisely manages to give us an overview about 3 somehow interconnected fields, the mathematically described large-scale world, the deterministic quantum microcosm and the recently emergent mind science. His major aspiration is to see the new generation of scientists erecting a bridge between the quantum world and the always controversial substance of conscience.

   Having in his mind (in a neo-platonic way) the idealistic nature of mathematics that apply to the physical world as a well-justified model, he firstly presents some themes from cosmology and abstract mathematics (e.g. hyperbolic, Riemann geometry), and why, in his opinion, Guth's inflationary universe theory, has weak points (see also Penrose's book- Difficulties with inflationary cosmology) In chapter 2 ,quantum physics related, he gives us interesting examples (the paradox& puzzles reference shows his great sense of humor) and explain us how wavefunction's reduction can assist us to deal with the probabilistic nature of events in this level.
   In the most interesting third one, he is concerned to lay an in-depth foundation between quantum procedures through neurons, so as to explain his main belief - brain function (that creates conscience) can't be simulated through A.I. Even though I tend to prefer J.Searle opinion (presented in his book Mind,Brain & Science) Penrose's points are adequately justified, thus leaving an open window for Free Will.

   In the next three chapters certain Penrose's point's are opposed from Shimony (physician, philosopher) Nancy Cartwright(logician, philosopher) and the renowned Steven Hawking.
   Shimony in a formalistic language, but slightly excessive for the common reader, finally makes a conjecture about a hyperselection law, in order to avoid quantum dualism, while Mrs Cartwright sets a contronversy against the usefulness of a perception that sets Physics the only explanatory science for mind theory and not for example Biology.(which for Penrose is reduced to Physics)
   Hawking denies an indispensable and direct correlation between quantum gravity and the yet inextricable conscience and in chapter 7 Penrose responds to all so as to end this dialectically fair and fruitful discussion.

   Overall this was worth my time, not only for this subject's great interest but because Penrose explains his thesis, clearly and distinctly.The uprising need for 'popular' science is reflected and adequately satisfied through this lucid book which succinctly presents a contemporary overview in a 'hot' scientific field.

   Even non-expert readers (no special background in maths or physics is needed) will be able to follow and admire the ongoing revolution of scientific thought.Given it was written in'97 I'm looking forward and will benevolently embrace another similar work of a splendid thinker such as Penrose




5. I see others have praised this book richly and a couple others poorly. One reviewer said one needed to be a mathematician and a physicist to understand the book. It would certainly help, but Penrose describes enough about the function of the math concepts he invokes so that I can follow him (and even in maths one has to have studied things like those density matrices to really understand in depth). I do understand about computability and problems which have been proven non-computable, and I think he is possibly right, that 'mind', because it shares/crosses the quantum/macro world boundaries, cannot be easily mathematically described without finding a 'bridge' between those worlds. I found his description/hypothesis about the microtubules fascinating (and again I am not a biologist but I am not disturbed that he didn't try to explain or prove his hunch regarding the possible functioning of these structures).
   I appreciated the book for the wonderfully clear style as well as the content.

5 comments about The Life of Isaac Newton (Canto original series).

1. This book was very enjoyable and a great source of information. I did not know much about the Jewish Holidays before reading this book. I now have some wonderful insights for their Holidays and the importance they play in their lives and their faith. I am LDS (Mormon) and the Temple, as the House of the Lord, is very important to me. This book help me to understand the importance of the Temple and the role it played from the time of Moses down to the time of Jesus Christ and into our very own time. This book is very good at explaining the ceremonies and the assosicated Holidays. I recommend this book to all.



2. This book tells us Isaac Newton in detail. It tells us about his life as a man, philosopher, theologian, alchemist, scientist and public figure. It tells us how he interact with other scientist and how his ancestors were like. I've learned many things about Newton that I didn't know before. Before I read this book I didn't know that he had involved with alchemy or theology. This book convinces me why Newton is one of the greatest scientists in history



3. The Life of Isaac Newton, by Richard Westfall, addresses the life and work of one of the greatest scientists of all time. Indeed, many consider Isaac Newton to be the greatest scientist of all time, because his work was the culmination of the Scientific Revolution. Westfall covers Newton's unhappy childhood, from which he escaped to Cambridge University where he emerged as a solitary, studious individual. Newton's genius found expression during the anni mirabilis, 1664-1666, when Cambridge was closed due to the plague. During these years, Newton explored a wide range of scientific issues, including mathematical physics, optics, mechanics, and celestial dynamics. He expanded upon Descartes' geometry, to develop the calculus. He conducted experiments with light, concluding that white light is made up of a series of colors. Newton also pursued studies of the movement of objects, following up on the work of Gallileo. Westfall covers Newton's lengthy career at Cambridge, where he devoted his life to his studies, avoiding most relationships and incurring animosity and resentment among many of his fellow scientists, including Robert Hooke. Newton's masterpiece was the Principia, in which he laid out his three laws of motion: inertia; acceleration; and action and reaction. Newton also presented the laws of universal gravitation. Westfall was compelled to write this biography - which is a shortened version of his larger, more technical study - to share the unfolding of the amazing genius who discovered so many of the laws underlying the physical world. This book is worth reading because it provides in an accessible form insights into the discoveries in the fields of mathematics and physics that ushered in the world of modern science.



4. Newton has been a fascinating figure for me, ever since I read a condensed history about him in one of those INTRODUCTION TO series, I think that one was on Quantum Physics. What fascinated me about Newton was his singleness of mind, a genius who devoted himself almost entirely to the pursuit of knowledge.
   
   Westfall's book is a condensation of an earlier book _Never at Rest_ which I have not had the pleasure of reading. Westfall presents the life of Newton warts and all. It describes his rise to prominence in the scientific world of his time and all the events leading to his most significant publication, the Principia.
   
   What was new to me was Newton's arguments with Hooke and his behavior toward Flamsteed which diminish the man's greatness, in my mind at least. What may be interesting to readers of Newton, the man, rather than the Scientist, are his `latter years' in public service at the Mint.
   
   Overall, I think Westfall kept the proper balance between presenting the works and person of the life of Newton. A worthwhile read.



5. Westfall's "Life of Isaac Newton" is everything the other reviewers say in regards to it being a good ABRIDGED biography of Newton. True, it is based in thorough scholarship and has served for the basis for many other Newton biographies to follow. But I would strongly caution any historian, whether by hobby or profession, to solely consult this book when referencing or discussing Newton. Westfall's abridged version lacks any mention of references (unless you count the very incomplete bibliographical essay at the end) in either footnotes, endnotes, or a comprehensive bibliography. In order to trace his references, one must consult his much more complete "Never at Rest", which is, altogether, a much more academic book. Don't get me wrong, "The Life of Isaac Newton" is easy to read and a good foundational text but should not serve as an authority on Newton, but rather a companion to a more authoritative text on Newton.
   Aside from the historiographical issues in this book, if it is to serve as an introduction to early modern science, it might also help readers to know that they should read, at some point, some sort of text that deals with British history from the Sixteenth through Eighteenth centuries, as Wesfall provides no historical or political background in which to understand Newton. Based on my own reading of books to suit this purpose I would recommend Simon Schama's "History of Britain, vol. 2"; "Leviathan and the Air-pump" by Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer; "Leviathan" by Thomas Hobbes, or "The Scientific Revolution" also by Steven Shapin (which would be less of a cultural or political history but a good introduction to the issues with history of science in the seventeenth century).
   As an alternative to Westfall's abridged version, I would also suggest (though he is not an academic, he is a pretty well-regarded science journalist with a very readable style) James Gleick's "Isaac Newton" which is a little shorter and more in depth in some regards (and does completely cite references).

5 comments about Gravitation (Physics Series).

1. Still very useful as a reference, but frustrating for beginners, because the book is far too verbose and assumes a certain mind-set. The authors mix the physical and mathematical notation of differential geometry, but it is doubtful if a reader mainly interested in physics will benefit from the latter. In short, MTW is good for in-depth treatment and competence, but to get started, for example the book by d'Inverno is far more efficient. Also, for the price you should get a properly bound book...



2. The Author attempts the very remarkable objective of satisfying everybody's needs in one single book. For that purpose the book is divided into track 1 and track 2 sections. Unfortunately, this attempt is, in my opinion, not completely successful. Advanced GR readers will surely find too many trivial topics in the book, while beginners will have difficulties even with track 1 pages. My review will provide the advanced beginner's point of view. I read all track 1 sections and a few track 2 at the beginning of the book.
   
   The first part of the book where geometrical objects, one forms and tensors are described is very pedagogical. However, as more advanced topics are introduced you are left with the unease feeling that something important is left behind. The answer is clear, what is missing is track 2 contents, but track 2 are much more difficult to read. By reading just track 1 sections you are led too fast to the deeper results of GR. The treatment is too superficial and a lot of results are taken for granted; or referred to track 2 pages.
   
   There are a lot of exercises and examples in the book. However, few exercises are solved and the examples frequently refer to sideways difficult physical topics, surely not meant to clarify the main text.
   
   The huge size of the book adds up to its reading difficulties. It is heavy and overwhelming. I usually try to reduce costs by choosing paperback editions, but the size of this book could justify a hardcover version.
   
   In summary I must say this is not a book for beginners. I found its writing style confusing and my knowledge in GR was little improved by reading track 1 sections. To my discharge I must say I read without difficulties Foster & Nightingale's and Carroll's but could not get through Wald's. My recommendation would be to start with Foster's, then continue with Carrols's and next, what's next? Misner's is surely not a good third step.
   
   The book may be more appropriate for advanced students. I intend to follow the author's suggestions and make a second reading including the most interesting track 2 sections.



3. As a child I used to ask my father "Does space go on forever? And if it doesn't, what is on the otherside??' My father of course had no idea. It has since been a subtle quest of mine to fine answers to these questions. I, as well as every person on this planet, have heard Einstein's name thousands of times while growing up. He is a legend; having been dead for several decades still his face is on a poster in every mathematics room I've ever entered.
   But, though I've known his name since I was 3, I did not learn what it was that made him so special, or what E=MC^2 means until I was 18 years old. In my opinion, special and general relativity should be taught to every preschooler until this aspect of the universe BECOMES intuitive.
   
   Anyways, to the book. Having only a small background in calculus (Calc I, II and multivariable calculus) and having never taken an advanced physics class past newtonian mechanics with calculus applications, I do not have the skills necessary to decipher this book - but I do not intend to put it down until I have deciphered it and understand every bit of it.
   
   In order to learn this book, one MUST have mastered differential calculus (differential equations); without it you will find yourself lost. Also, a background in Relativity is a must. A small background will get you by - read The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene. And then you may tackle this beast. If you complete this book, you may consider yourself one of maybe half a percent of the world who truely understands Einstein's amazing accomplishments and you will understand why it is that his face is the face you have come to know as the stereotypical mad scientist.



4. I have had access to this book for only about a month. Most physics-oriented books mix abstractness with errors, making their books of less value than being useless. Most mathematics books take the usual view: why make a subject comprehensible when with a little work, your book can be totally incomprehensible. The book "Gravitation" by Wheeler, Thorne, etc. is the best book I have seen both from the viewpoint of the mathematics, as well as Physics. Hoever, I still suggest using the book "Gravitation" with the books by Spain, Sokolnikoff, and Civita by your side (as a double check). I also suggest books that provide more comprehensive coverage of subjects such as Manifold theory and the Calculus of Variations, and even a book or two dealing with Differential Geometry.



5. No book comes close to this one in comprehensive detail about General Relativity. It includes great discussions and explanations of virtually all the ramifications of General Relativity, or opens options for more exploration. Math starts out at the Algebra level, and escalates far beyond my ability. Still much of the math can be followed by those like myself who have "math anxiety."
   
   Anyone who aspires to understand this portion of Einstein's genius can gain enormously from it.
   
   If you do not know these authors, they are at the forefront of enlarging the comprehension of General Relativity, and physics.

3 comments about Gravity.

1. A lovely reprinted Dover edition of a peral from Gamow. The original 1962 edition has been out of print for a number of years. This 2003 edition has added commentary and a fascinating bio of Gamow. He was born in Odessa, in what was then Russia, --before the Soviet Union. The story of his escape to the West is straight out of a thriller. Only it is real! Gamow was referred to by a journalist, some time during the Cold War, as "the only scientist in America with a real sense of humor". He can take the most technical stuff and make it simple. Fun too! The book:--Intellectual treats, whimsy, but deep. Illustrated with lovely drawings by Gamow himself. Much of it can be understood by a child, and other parts might require a little concentration. All of it is great fun. The author Gamow started in nuclear physics, during the Golden Age of Physics, worked with Niels Bohr, then later in the US, on the Manhattan Project during WWII, and after the war, he was professor in Boulder Colorado. He has a building on campus named after him! The books he wrote are pearls, and they have been equally popular with my parent's generation as with mine. Luckely some have been reprinted! Other Gamow titles: Biography of Physics, Atomic Energy [dedicated to the hope of lasting peace], Physics of the Strapless Evning Gown,...We are lucky that Dover has reprinted some of them. Gamow's list of scientific accomplishments includes a 1948 landmark paper on the origin of chemical elements, the Big Bang model, and later work with F. Crick on DNA and genetic coding.-- Do more Gamow editions, Dover!



2. George Gamow was a leading scientist of the 20th century, a man who's name frequents the pages of modern-day science. One of the great services offered by Dover Books is the manner in which they have made timeless books by the world's great scientists available at a reasonable price. I consider it remarkable that, for a few dollars, I could sit at Gamow's feet by reading "Gravity."
   
   This is a short book, barely 150 pages long. Written in the second half the 20th century (1960s) it doesn't have any new or particularly earth-shattering information, but information content isn't always the best way to measure a book; there's the delivery, too. And this book, this little gem, has one of the best deliveries I've seen. That's what I appreciated most about "Gravity," the nuances of Gamow's writing and explanatory style.
   
   Several weeks before I found Gamow's book in the bookstore, I'd planned a solo kayak trip down the Columbia River, from the town of Saint Helens to the Pacific Ocean. I was looking for something to read during breaks, and in the evening. This is an ideal book for leisure reading, it's not too involved, has very little mathematics, and yet has enough intellectual content that it leaves you feeling accomplished after an hour or two of study. If you've ever picked up a copy of Scientific American magazine and read some of the articles, that'll give you a pretty good idea of what's in this book. In fact, some of the material in the book is based on articles written by Gamow for Scientific American. My copy, stained with river water, has bleached, tattered, dog-eared pages.
   
   There's a short (6 pages) but interesting biography at the beginning of the book, followed by a preface to the Dover edition, followed in turn by Gamow's preface to the original edition. I enjoyed this introductory material for the light it shone on Gamow's life. I was humbled by the fact that, while I considered my trip down the Columbia River to be of some merit, Gamow had the nerve to attempt (unsuccessfully) escaping from the Soviet Union by paddling a kayak 170 miles across the Black Sea to Turkey.
   
   The first four chapters of Gamow's book follow the same outline used by my high school physics teacher, Mr. Lewis. The first chapter, titled "How things fall" is a historical recounting of Galileo, the tower of Pizza, and balls rolling on ramps, along with some stinging insight into the history of human thought. I particularly liked this commentary from Gamow:
   
   "For centuries Aristotelian philosophy and scholasticism dominated human thought. Scientific questions were answered by dialectic arguments (i.e. by just talking), and no attempt was made to check, by direct experiments, the correctness of the statements made."
   
   Galileo, of course, dispatched the dialectic arguments by conducting experiments, and in the process helped to establish the core scientific ideas of experimentation and observation.
   
   Following tradition Gamow explains gravity by tracing history, with key historical events relegated to various short chapters He begins with Galileo's experiments that showed how things fall at constant acceleration, independent of mass, and then moves to Newton's quantitative treatment and one of history's great insights: that the same force that makes apples fall to the ground also causes the moon to orbit the earth.
   
   You can't study physics without speaking the language, and the language of physics is mathematics. With that admission Gamow takes a brief hiatus from the physical manifestation of gravity to describe the most significant dialect of mathematics, the calculus. Still, this book shouldn't be thought of as mathematically intense. If you've mastered algebra you'll have no difficulty following Gamow's arguments, and indeed the book will help you with some of the preliminary concepts in calculus.
   
   With the basic physics and mathematics established as foundational material, Gamow uses these tools to explain planetary orbits, the motion of the spinning earth (the earth as a spinning top) tides, key concepts in celestial mechanics, and the notion of escape velocity. He ends his book with a short qualitative description of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity and then poses some unsolved problems associated with gravity.
   
   Two remarkable things struck me when reading Gamow's book. First, I'm amazed at how far we've come in understanding gravity and predicting the behavior of gravitational bodies. Second, I'm struck by the fact that, in spite of our best efforts, none of the unsolved problems described in Gamow's final chapter have been resolved.
   
   This isn't to say there haven't been wonderful discoveries since Gamow (black holes, for example), but we seem to be stuck when it comes to making the next great jump in our understanding of what, exactly, gravity is. Written in 1962, this clearly isn't a contemporary book in which you'll find the latest research. Read it for its historical value, and to understand key concepts in Newtonian physics, and for the love of science.



3. Had always heard that Gamow was quite the character. Like Feynman, his ability to distill intimidating concepts down to down to earth (npi) analogies is admirable. Recommend this one (originally written in the early 1960's) to anyone wishing to better understand physics, from Ptolemy through Einstein.

5 comments about Mr Tompkins in Paperback (Canto imprint) (containing Mr. Tompkins in Wonderland and Mr. Tompkins Explores the Atom).

1. A lovely reprinted edition of a peral from Gamow. The original edition has been out of print for a number of years. This 1993 edition has added commentary and a fascinating bio of Gamow. He was born in Odessa, in what was then Russia, --before the Soviet Union. The story of his escape to the West is straight out of a thriller. Only it is real! Gamow was referred to by a journalist, some time during the Cold War, as "the only scientist in America with a real sense of humor". He can take the most technical stuff and make it simple. Fun too! The book:--Intellectual treats, whimsy, but deep. Illustrated with lovely drawings by Gamow himself. Much of it can be understood by a child, and other parts might require a little concentration. All of it is great fun. Follow your imagination, and while you explore, you will learn about Einstein's theory of relativity. And in unexpected ways! You will see the wonders of physics thru the eyes of a child. With his unexpected thought experiments, Gamow has captured the imagination of generations of readers, and he has inspired a degree of curiosity that comes naturally to children.
   The author George Gamow started in nuclear physics, during the Golden Age of Physics, worked with Niels Bohr in Copenhagen, then later in the US, on the Manhattan Project during WWII; and after the War, he was professor in Boulder Colorado. He has a building on campus of The University of Colorado named after him! He is one of the few scientists who wrote popular books. They are precious pearls, and they have been equally popular with my parent's generation as with mine. For awhile they were out of print, but luckely some have now been reprinted in recent years!
   Other Gamow titles: Biography of Physics, Atomic Energy [dedicated to the hope of lasting peace], Physics of the Strapless Evning Gown,...We are lucky that Dover has reprinted some of them. Gamow's list of scientific accomplishments includes a 1948 landmark paper on the origin of chemical elements, the Big Bang model, and later work with F. Crick on DNA and genetic coding.-- Do more Gamow editions, Dover!
   Review by Palle Jorgensen, September 2003.



2. I'm a novice at this subject matter, and I've recently started reading introductory books on quantum physics for fun. I read, "The New Quantum Universe" prior to reading this. This easy to read book filled in some gaps that that I had. It helped me grasp some concepts that had otherwise passed over my head when reading the other book.

   I understand that this is a classic text and I can see why. It's fun to read, and provides a foundation for further understanding. It explains uncertaintity, radioactive decay, and electron shells especially well.

   I may not fully appreciate the concepts I was able to internalize from this book for quite some time. I can say that I strongly recommend it to the layman or anyone who's eager to understand some basics of this incredible field of study.




3. Here are Gamow's two 1940's Mr Tompkins books popularizing modern physics, in one tidy package. An earlier reviewer has suggested that this book be produced as an animated educational film, a good idea, but I picture it as being more of a computer enhanced live action video. The chapters on relativistic geometries and cosmological models could really be audio-visual treats, and it's hard to imagine a better basis for a script explaining the strange new world of physics to the interested lay public. The lions-share of what science now claims to know about the world was developed from a seemingly strange handful of theories thrashed out in the first three decades of the twentieth century. Gamow was both a party to this theoretical explosion and a gifted writer. Most of what has occurred in physics since these books were first published, has essentially been the refining of the ideas discussed here, so, for the most part, the science is still significant. But while Gamow had some important cosmological ideas -- he predicted the cosmic microwave background radiation, the discovery of which earned Wilson and Penzias a Noble Prize (in which Gamow should have shared, but did not) -- he also bet on the wrong horse when it came to cosmological models.
   Gamow cleverly and artfully presents the three basic cosmological models being argued from the 1930s through 1965.* The context is a night at the opera in which noted physicists sing the virtues of their respective theoretical opinions. First up is no other than the initial developer of the expanding universe ('big bang') model, the Belgian physicist and cleric, A. George Lemaitre. The Lemaitre universe is a majestically wondrous, one-off, elegant masterpiece. He sings, "Z' splendeur of z' origine. . . Worrk of Z' Lorrd!" Second is the oscillating or 'bouncing' model, and this piece is sung by Gamow, who at that time favored the concept of an eternally recycling universe (bang, expand, contract, re-bang, expand, contract, ->, etc). The third and last piece to be sung is of the Bondi-Gold self-maintaining or "steady state" universe, so famously preferred by Hoyle. Appropriately, this singer is generated mysteriously from intergalactic space, singing "Was never formed in time gone by. . . But is, has been. . .shall ever be. . ."
   Well, on this question we seem to have a winner, and no, it isn't Gamow's model. As Roger Penrose relates in the foreword, Gamow's bouncing universe and Hoyle's "steady state" model are both dead ducks these days. Seventy-five years of observation and mathematical fine-tuning have made something like Lemaitre's general understanding look like the only serious cosmological game in town. But don't hold that against this artful and thoroughly fun book. Gamow discounted the 'steady state', and most of the science here is still sound and relevant.
   *[File this under 'is there nothing new under the sun?': 1600 years ago, Augustine of Hippo recorded (City of God, Book XII) that classical cosmographies all distil into three basic models, the same three considered here by Gamow. (These same three models subsume the "innumerable universes" of Epicurus' speculation and of the recently famous so-called 'strong anthropic principle'.) Augustine bet on the right horse though, reasoning that the 'cycling' and 'eternal' models both seek finally to avoid rather than admit a true explanation. Only the universe-from-nothing (ex nihilo) model admits that the universe has an explanation -- albeit a grandly mysterious one.]
   This volume is classic science writing in a most entertaining package, it awaits some creative screenplay adaptor and video genius to make from it the best popular science audio-visual experience ever. Have at it.



4. It was a great transaction, Good prices, Great quality, and FAst delivery



5. I am nothing more than a humble interested amateur and my formal science education is limited to some advanced classes for my high school diploma many years ago. I picked up "Mr Tompkins" following a conversation with a physicist sitting next to me on a long flight. I found it to be an excellent introduction to modern physics in general and quantum mechanics in particular. I found it challenging and I wouldn't claim I understood every last detail, but it is definitely not necessary to have a profound knowledge of mathematical and physical concepts to read this book. The writing is witty, precise and thoroughly enjoyable. In fact I was so intrigued that I went and picked up two other books (Alice in Quantumland and Taking the Quantum Leap), both of which I found harder to read and not as suitable for the uninitiated as Mr Tompkins.

5 comments about Gravity: An Introduction to Einstein's General Relativity.

1. Let me just say, for an introductory textbook, nobody does it better than Hartle!
   
   Very motivating...keeps physics the central topic of discussion instead of wandering off topic.
   
   My only complaint is that Einstein's equation is introduced towards end of the book, giving it a false idea that it is "incomprehensible" which is not true.
   
   But really, great job Hartle!



2. When an author can write a book on a complicated subject so that anyone without prior knowledge can understand the content, he is truly a gifted writer. Gravity: An Intoduction to Einstein's General Relativity by James Hartle delivers. I studied calculus and had one course in non-calculus physics 35 years ago and was amazed at how much I could understand from this book. I am also reading "Relativity DeMystified" for a different perspective but Hartle is a true winner.
   
   One note: If relativity is your primary goal you can read chapters 1-9 and skip to 20 and then 21 (Curvature and the Einstein Equation) for a short cut, according to Appendix D (Pedagogical Strategy). Its all great stuff though, so take your time and enjoy.



3. Simply the best and clearest introduction to this fascinating topic. There's none better, or even remotely close, for clarity and comprehensiveness. I wish I could write as well as Hartle!



4. This product was exactly as described, in great condition and shipped in a timely manner.



5. It was probably my error, I suppose I did not read enough reviews about this text book, but I bought this book believing it would contain more text and less math. I was wrong! I read into about a third of the book and started losing interest. It is not that it is a bad book, nor am I saying it is not interesting, but the caveat here is ... interesting to who?
   
   I believe this book is aimed more at those with an interest in math and or the explanation of all theory at the mathematical level. I understand mathematics is the underlying point behind Einstein's theory of gravity, but I am not well educated in complicated mathematical formulas (they tend to put me to sleep) and when I purchased the book I was more interested in someone's explanation(s) of the underlying theories by way of the English language and not by way of mathematics. I prefer formulas be translated to English, similar to how computers translate lower-level assembly languages to higher-level languages for user-friendly interaction with a computer.
   
   Bottom line: Buy the book if you have at least a rudimentary background in mathematical formulas or if you are willing to read between the pages and pages of formulas to pick up the useful and informative information in the book. Otherwise, I suggest looking elsewhere.

5 comments about What Is Life?: with "Mind and Matter" and "Autobiographical Sketches".

1. This beautiful little book was based on a sequence of popular lectures given in Dublin during WWII, and in turn on an earlier paper given in Vienna. In the book Schrödinger coins the idea of a genetic code carried by linear molecules with his phrase 'code-script'. He asks how, in the absence of validity of a large n limit required by statistical physics for the validity of any macroscopic biological laws, can the chromsome molecules that carry the code-script yield stable genetic rules. Then, he gives the answer: chemical bonding as predicted by quantum theory ala Heitler-London (Schrödinger identifies quantum jumps in the chrosomes as the origin of mutations, which are also discrete). He refers to the chromosome fibers as linear 'aperiodic crystals' (to emphase their stability in the face of thermal fluctuations) and encourages physicists to study them: he boldly asserts that both the instructions and mechanism for generating organisms via molecular replication are contained in the chromosome molecules (and there is where the "complexity" lies). This book encouraged physicists to study problems of complexity long before the term complexity had become the catchword that it is today. Indeed, our first ideas of 'complexity' were developed parallel in the same era by Turing and von Neumann.

   Schrödinger is buried in Alpbach (Tirol), where he lectured and enjoyed the Alps frequently after WWII in a school organized by one of two brothers who, according to a very well-informed source, formed nearly the only Resistance in Austria during the war. On his grave is a pretty little plaque bearing the Schrödinger equation.

   This review refers to the 1969 edition of 'What is Life'.




2. What is Life? is an absolute classic. Schrodinger felt that life must be explainable by physics and chemistry, yet seemed to violate the normal behavior of entropy-- and he understood further that this was a remarkable wedge point to explore. He figured out the explanation: life is the result of evolution of genetic information, which selects for complex processes that by ordinary considerations would be very unlikely. He predicted that there must be a molecule capable of carrying the genetic information (incorrectly thinking it would be a protein.) His beautifully-written book was influential and timely. Within 4 years, Von Neumann elucidated the mechanisms involved in self-reproducing automata (illustrating his abstract discussion with a picture looking remarkably like DNA to the eyes of readers today); and within a decade, Watson and Crick grasped the structure of DNA. You should not read Schrodinger's book today as one of your first sources to understand life-- there has been remarkable progress in the 50 years since Watson and Crick-- but you should read it to gain appreciation for how science can be advanced when the time is ready and a wedge point, an apparent conflict between fundamental ideas, is analyzed.

   The volume also includes another lecture by Schrodinger, Mind and Matter, which is historically interesting in another way. In Schrodinger's day, the state of understanding had not advanced to the point where it was possible to make as useful conjectures about the structure of mind as of life, and he accordingly felt "[mind] may well be beyond human understanding."

   Readers interested in Schrodinger's book will also enjoy What is Thought?, published 2004. What is Thought? argues that mind must be explainable by computer science, that the fundamental issues are computational, and that there is again a wedge point: the question of how the workings of a computer, which are always purely syntactical, can correspond to meaning and understanding. The situation is parallel to the one that faced Schrodinger with respect to life in two respects: first, mind is the outcome of evolution, which has built thought processes that seem inconsistent with our standard science, and second, scientific research has advanced to the point where, if we focus on the wedge point, significant understanding is obtainable. What is Thought? brings to bear on the problem of mind core ideas from computational learning theory, complexity theory, and evolutionary computing, as well as molecular and evolutionary biology, cognitive science, and other areas. The result is a principled and concrete explanation, consistent with the vast array of available data, of how meaning, understanding, language, consciousness, and all the various aspects of mind arise from execution of an evolved computer program.




3. I'm wondering why scientists are allowed to give their opinion as scientists about topics they know nothing about as scientists. The beginning of the title ("What is Life") sounds like if Schrodinger can claim anything about the difference between mind and matter as a pure consequence of physics. Too bad, as the rest of the title might make you think that there will be some discussion about why and whether there might be a difference between mind and matter. What remains of mind when you stick to the physics? That would be a very nice question to think about, if only this was the topic of the book...but it's not what is done here.



4. Schroedinger, one of the great physicists of the 20th Century, applied the knowledge he gained in his own discipline to analyze human life. Based upon lectures that he gave in the 1940s, this brief book contains Schroedinger's fascinating speculations on the nature of life, several of which have proven prophetic (including the discovery of DNA). The reader comes away with the joy of having shared in the workings of a great mind.
   
   Perhaps the most impressive achievement of the book is that it can be readily understood by persons relatively untrained in science or mathematics.



5. In "What is Life?" monograph, Schrodinger brilliantly enlightens us with the true concept of life science. He proposes what himself calls "a naive physicist's ideas about organisms." Years before the discovery of double helix structure of DNA, Schrodinger beautifully details how the huge volume of information is related to the structure of what he calls "aperiodic crystal" (what we currently call it "protein structure."
   
   The ideas are still fresh and everybody who really wants to start the REAL and TRUE molecular biology must read this classic. It is astonishing to see how this great thinker and physicist had elaborated, very correctly and properly, to use the statistical tools in physics (statistical physics) to explain the fundamentals of life.
   
   It is an absolute classic from a great legend. Please read and enjoy it.

5 comments about Gravity Is a Mystery (Let's-Read-and-Find-Out Science 2).

1. In 1990, my husband went to the library and brought home " gravity is a mystery" for our son to read. He loved it! It was his favorite book for weeks! Every night one of us would have to read it to him. This is a fun book that everyone should get a chance to read.



2. This book is as important as it is wonderful. It brings home the Big Secret about science that escapes most people: Science is about the unknown, not the known. There are lots of mysteries out there; the business of science is to change the unknown into the known, which is the lesson, I think, of Franklyn Branley's masterpiece.



3. Although this book will painlessly teach your four year old what science is and what that abstract concept, gravity, is, it is also excellent for a teenager who is struggling through a physics course. As Einstein said, you don't really understand a concept until you can explain it to your grandmother. Well, this is a book for Grandmother.



4. One of my older children brought this book home from a school book sale many years ago. It was a hit with both of my children for several years. Then, as they grew up, the book was put away in a box for another time.
   
   When I had another child, I got out that "box for another time" and stacked the books on a shelf. This one was amongst them, and onto a shelf it went, though I did't expect it to be of interest to him for several years yet.
   
   But lately, at 21 months, Jack has been asking for this book frequently -- and listening with interest to reading after reading! I doubt that the concept of "how much you weigh on Mars" makes much sense to him yet -- but the idea of gravity is one that he is working out, and Branley's explanations of the Earth pulling everything to its center is simple and seems to satisfy even at this age!
   
   Even better, the science is simple, but accurate so it's a good start on his physics education!



5. I bought my son several of the Let's Read and Find Out books for Christmas. He's a first grader going on 7 years. These are just absolutely fantastic books for introducing varoius difficult concepts. I like that they contain alot of information, but are still easy to understand. Hard to find something "not too young, not too old" for this age. We love them. This particular one was a favorite.

5 comments about The Story of Science: Newton at the Center.

1. I was sorely disappointed by the actual content- the text, the *words* which were supposed to communicate something of the glory and wonder of science to my children.
   
   The book had promise- I was impressed with a my first glance in the bookstore. It's beautifully laid out- lovely pictures, interesting sidebars- but once I sat down and tried to read the text, those sidebars were horribly, awfully distracting. I don't know who chose the formatting, but it's guaranteed to interrupt any chain of thought a reader might have. At least one 'sidebar' interrupted the flow of a passage in midsentence, then the 'sidebar' continued on, taking up two entire pages before returning to the next word in the interrupted sentence!
   
   It's like a commercial or a video game- distracting to the utmost. I also thought the writing was choppy, a little bit condescending, and very much designed to foster a sort of vacuous, uninformed arrogance in the student.
   
   Ancient history, says a well educated homeschooling father I've read from time to time, should not be taught as 'how the peasants lived back then,' because we really aren't any smarter than those who went before us. We stand on their shoulders so we have more information at our fingertips, information they discovered, but we are not smarter than they. It is a natural tendency to think that we are 'it,' that nobody has thought the thoughts we have, figured out the things that we know, and that we have advanced beyond any society before us. This is a superficial understanding at best, and a broad study of history should go a long way toward correcting that. Unfortunately, Hakim's book encourages that attitude. She does seem to teach science history along the lines of 'how the peasants lived.'
   
   At the beginning of her book she hubristically tells her students that when they finish reading her book they will know more than Isaac Newton. Since he invented Calculus, that's just a bizarre thing to say. She's feeding her readers a false image of what it means to 'know' and what knowledge is, and just who Isaac Newton really was. They will, perhaps, have more facts at their disposal, assuming they remember everything.
   
   They will know more history, since much of what is in her book happened after Newton's death. But will they have more knowledge than Isaac Newton? That is highly doubtful, and it does not do students any favors to confuse knowledge with a handy list of data points.



2. Although I agree that the sidebars are distracting, the book is a delight--and not at all condescending or arrogant. My homeschool daughter and I tried skipping the sidebars and returning to them after we had finished the text proper. It didn't work because the sidebars give anecdotal information that works best when read with the text proper. I'm guessing Ms. Hakim went through the same thought process before deciding on the layout. I do question that the text is meant for middle school. Although Ms. Hakim does write "to" that age level, the subject matter may be more appropriate for high school and thus benefit from a less familiar (although still conversational) style. I hope that Ms. Hakim will provide workbooks to accompany the books eventually. And, we are all waiting for the world history via Hakim!



3. My daughter is homeschooled, and after reading the entire History of US Series, I knew this science series would be a must. Honestly, I learned so much about US history than I ever learned in all my years of schooling through Ms. Hakim's books. Same with the "Story of Science" Series. Some may find the sidebars distracting, but we kind of made them into a separate lesson and learned a great deal of little-known facts. And it isn't only history or science - the author weaves a little bit of everything into these books in these sidebars. I really can't recommend her books enough. So far, they have been THE favorite resource in our four years of homeschooling!



4. I notice that one negative review has been repeated on multiple Joy Hakim books verbatim.
   
   I LIKE the sidebars and pictures. There is a ton of ART history and beautiful graphic design work in the books. Perhaps it is because my husband, son and I are all artists, but we particularly enjoyed the layout of the books. I felt a fusion of science with art in the presentation.
   
   The history is sound, well presented, and detailed enough in scope to touch on mathmatical concepts supporting the science.
   
   I'd reccomend this book for lovers of science history and for older homeschoolers. It is a bit too serious for younger homeschoolers. To me, this is more a book for a older preteen or teen audience.



5. I can't sing Hakim's praises enough - from her History of US series to the The Story of Science, all three volumes so far. I've been an avid science fan my whole life, but not a hard science major, and I gasped all the way through these books as I learned things I never knew, but thought I'd known, or finally understood things I'd known about but that had puzzled me. Get over the "distracting" sidebars - they didn't bother me at all and they were full of great stuff. I ate these books up and I was only reading them to preview for my homeschooler who hates math and is bored by science, but loves history. Joy Hakim has a wonderful ability to take a huge subject (all of US history, for instance, and the development and progress of scientific thought in this case) and make it manageable, new and a fun read. My daughter is discovering that science and math really are amazing and play a critical, pivotal role in the unfolding of human history.