Scan barcode
daed's review against another edition
3.0
No es un mal libro, pero tiene partes difíciles de seguir y entender que no me permitieron disfrutarlo tanto.
rodhilton's review against another edition
4.0
The question is one of the oldest ones humanity has: why is anything here? Why is there something rather than nothing? For many years, we thought we got here by an act of creation, but scientists discovered we evolved over millions of years from simple-celled organisms. Then the question was, how did the simple organisms come to exist? For years, the answer to that was God, but once again the scientific method gave us the real answer of abiogenesis, showing how organic life arose from inorganic matter. But then the question became, how did the inorganic matter get here? Once again, the gaps were filled, and cosmologists showed us that the matter was, once upon a time, all within a hot and extremely dense point that expanded out. But with the big bang gaining acceptance among the mainstream, the question became "well how did all of that matter get into that state? Why is there anything at all, rather than just nothing?"
Physics professor Lawrence Krauss sets out to explain the answer to this question as well. He explains the foundations of cosmological research, detailing in layman's terms exactly how theoretical physicists and cosmologists even go about answering these kinds of questions in the first place He goes onto discuss a great deal of his own research in the area, as well as the generally-accepted prevailing views within the scientific community.
I'm not going to lie and say I understood everything in this book. This is pretty heavy and complex stuff and, though Krauss does a great job of boiling things down for mainstream readers, quite a bit went over my head. In terms of readability, Krauss's book is a bit tougher to digest than a book by Dawkins or Feynman, but easier to digest than one by Hawking. It could just be that the subject of the book is inherently more complex, but I definitely need to go back and re-read it at some point.
The book is well-written and fascinating, covering a subject that I've rarely seen covered elsewhere. Krauss's passion for this subject comes across easily, really driving readers to continue the book. I definitely recommend reading it, but prepare to read it twice.
Physics professor Lawrence Krauss sets out to explain the answer to this question as well. He explains the foundations of cosmological research, detailing in layman's terms exactly how theoretical physicists and cosmologists even go about answering these kinds of questions in the first place He goes onto discuss a great deal of his own research in the area, as well as the generally-accepted prevailing views within the scientific community.
I'm not going to lie and say I understood everything in this book. This is pretty heavy and complex stuff and, though Krauss does a great job of boiling things down for mainstream readers, quite a bit went over my head. In terms of readability, Krauss's book is a bit tougher to digest than a book by Dawkins or Feynman, but easier to digest than one by Hawking. It could just be that the subject of the book is inherently more complex, but I definitely need to go back and re-read it at some point.
The book is well-written and fascinating, covering a subject that I've rarely seen covered elsewhere. Krauss's passion for this subject comes across easily, really driving readers to continue the book. I definitely recommend reading it, but prepare to read it twice.
hvgge's review against another edition
3.0
I learned a lot and became more curious about cosmology. I am glad I read the book.
3 stars because the book does not fulfill its promise. The book lays out the author’s knowledge of cosmology and physics at length. Only towards the end of the book does he starts addressing the question, but not really because he does not really like the question. You can tell it would force him to go outside of physics and cosmology, like philosophy, and he does not want to venture out there. Ultimately, he answers with something along the lines of “perhaps nothingness is an unstable state”. Ok, fair.
The book just does not fulfill its promise of taking a serious shot at all aspects of the question. Don’t get me wrong: you definitely learn a lot of cosmology and physics that are relevant to the question from reading the book.
3 stars because the book does not fulfill its promise. The book lays out the author’s knowledge of cosmology and physics at length. Only towards the end of the book does he starts addressing the question, but not really because he does not really like the question. You can tell it would force him to go outside of physics and cosmology, like philosophy, and he does not want to venture out there. Ultimately, he answers with something along the lines of “perhaps nothingness is an unstable state”. Ok, fair.
The book just does not fulfill its promise of taking a serious shot at all aspects of the question. Don’t get me wrong: you definitely learn a lot of cosmology and physics that are relevant to the question from reading the book.
jenniferstringer's review against another edition
3.0
I picked up this book based on the title, and I have to say I was disappointed. I was interested in a purely out of logic’s sake, and not interested in a theist vs. atheist debate. Gratefully, he tells us upfront that he is not going to answer it and I suppose could have stopped right there. I had read a couple of biographies of Einstein and thought I might be up for the intellectual challenge of cosmology, but it didn’t take long before the explanations went over my head. He does say we don’t know what we don’t know, and that is a HUGE caveat. Other explanations include: there is no such thing as nothing, it only appears as nothing (if that didn’t sound familiar). Even if there is “nothing,” the laws of physics are still in effect and perhaps laws still unknown can cause something from nothing – gravity could pull a particle from an alternate universe and then it would appear that something came from nothing. (But still, the particle came from somewhere…) So, just very unsatisfactory.
Also, self-righteousness is just as unattractive in atheists and it is in theists. Personally, I think you only belittle yourself when you attempt to belittle someone else. State your case as a scientist and let your reader come to his/her own conclusions. Anyway, that is my two cents.
I’m glad I plowed through, I think I caught a glimpse of some of the higher science involved, but maybe some better editing might have made this book more readable. In the end, I was put in a
Whitman frame of mind:
When I heard the learn’d astronomer,
When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me,
When I was shown the charts and diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them,
When I sitting heard the astronomer where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room,
How soon unaccountable I became tired and sick,
Till rising and gliding out I wander’d off by myself,
In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,
Look’d up in perfect silence at the stars.
Also, self-righteousness is just as unattractive in atheists and it is in theists. Personally, I think you only belittle yourself when you attempt to belittle someone else. State your case as a scientist and let your reader come to his/her own conclusions. Anyway, that is my two cents.
I’m glad I plowed through, I think I caught a glimpse of some of the higher science involved, but maybe some better editing might have made this book more readable. In the end, I was put in a
Whitman frame of mind:
When I heard the learn’d astronomer,
When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me,
When I was shown the charts and diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them,
When I sitting heard the astronomer where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room,
How soon unaccountable I became tired and sick,
Till rising and gliding out I wander’d off by myself,
In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,
Look’d up in perfect silence at the stars.
hank's review against another edition
4.0
I really wanted to give this a 5 star but the philosophy at the end got a bit convoluted and I couldn't follow it very well. Other than that, excellent. Great accessible science!