Scan barcode
tanja_alina_berg's review against another edition
4.0
This is a book easy to read, sprinkled with humour. Despite this I'm left wondering whether I understood anything at all. Stephen Hawking delves into the origin of the universe and its laws that support our existence so wonderfully. One of the problems with physics is its inability to combine quantum theory with Newton's law of gravity (among other things). With the M-theory, things can be explained separately, giving truth in a patchwork of overlapping theories instead of a single unified one. "The grand design" doesn't explain anything in any depth and appears deceptively simple. I'm perplexed enough to want to continue with Brian Greene's "the Hidden Reality" which appears to tackle many of the same problems - quantum theory, multiple universes - in greater detail. I'm not sure it will help my understanding much, but it might satisfy some of my infinite curiosity on the mysteries of deep space, eventhough I can't hope to grasp all the details. If you never read above your level, how can you hope to make any progress?
mattdcbusreader's review against another edition
challenging
funny
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.5
vkurup's review against another edition
3.0
I listened to the audiobook. I probably would have like the actual book more. It's tough to concentrate on quantum theory while driving :)
lovespeakseverylanguage's review against another edition
4.0
My first Stephen Hawking book - it feels like I’ve arrived! (…someplace nerdy
britineurope's review against another edition
4.0
This was a very accessible and gentle introduction to some of the bigger concepts in Physics. As a complete novice, I found it engaging even if the attempts at humour were entirely dry and I would imagine some readers found the tone Mlodinow/Hawking used as very condescending. For me it was about the right length and provided information at the right points to not overload a reader like myself who needed time to absorb these new concepts. All in all a really good example of a popular science book.
The things that I didn't like were mainly just general points - Mlodinow gets to play second fiddle while Hawking takes all the glory? Whether this was the publisher's decision because they thought it would sell more copies or otherwise, shame on them for not giving equal precedence. The second was that in the first illustration of the double-slit experiment, the authors don't explain that this has to be viewed almost in 2D, not allowing for the buckyballs to take alternative paths around. I had to get a PhD friend to clarify, as this raises obvious questions that then are not elaborated on when the next 3D illustration is shown of the double-slit. There are also some very grand statements made about Philosophy at the beginning of the book that Hawking then contradicts a few chapters after. I'm also sure that the edition didn't need to be that glossy for the sake of a couple of second-rate graphics. The damn thing is only thin and weighs the same as a small hippopotamus...
The things that I didn't like were mainly just general points - Mlodinow gets to play second fiddle while Hawking takes all the glory? Whether this was the publisher's decision because they thought it would sell more copies or otherwise, shame on them for not giving equal precedence. The second was that in the first illustration of the double-slit experiment, the authors don't explain that this has to be viewed almost in 2D, not allowing for the buckyballs to take alternative paths around. I had to get a PhD friend to clarify, as this raises obvious questions that then are not elaborated on when the next 3D illustration is shown of the double-slit. There are also some very grand statements made about Philosophy at the beginning of the book that Hawking then contradicts a few chapters after. I'm also sure that the edition didn't need to be that glossy for the sake of a couple of second-rate graphics. The damn thing is only thin and weighs the same as a small hippopotamus...
breezkneez94's review against another edition
5.0
Did I understand all of this book? No, I’m not going to lie. But it was very accessible with good use of analogy and I did learn some interesting things.
eronn's review against another edition
Fascinating and incredibly stupid all at once. Hawking again does a great job of teaching very complex ideas in very understandable and even memorable ways. That portion of the book was amazing. What was stupid was the inclusion of a great deal of philosophy (from the opening line of the book on) in what was supposedly a purely scientific answer to design theory. Hawking and Co. have great mathematical arguments and insights but they cannot escape from a creator. It was interesting that the last few chapters talked a lot about the "creation" - not a term you would expect if everything just randomly popped into existence. And that popping into existence thing - it only works if there is already a space with zero energy - but if there is a space like that then you already have a universe (blast!) which means that ultimately all this book does is push the need for a Creator one step further away from us but no closer to being gone.
teejay76's review against another edition
4.0
This book was wonderful. A bit of a review in some parts but superbly enlightening in others. I will admit to having to reread certain parts because it sounded all too alike to a DC Comics summer crossover event when discussing multiverses and alternate histories. It was even worse to have to shed those comic misunderstandings to grasp the beginnings of understanding regarding what they actually mean and how they affect humanity.
Another part I think that may have been a bit overblown, or sensationalized, in the media to help sell the book is what Hawking does and does not say about the existence of God in his work. He begins with the goal to answer two questions: "Where did the universe come from" and "How/why can humans exist within the laws of the universe?"
It is a scientific book, no religion bashing like you'll find in a Dawkins, Hitchens or Harris book. Hawking isn't saying that God does not exist, what he does say is that there is no need for God to explain the universe. As for the human life part, he explains that many other universes were created spontaneously from nothing and all the universes have different laws of nature and we happen to live in one that has laws that are friendly to our existence.
I love that we have a brilliant astrophysicist who can explain complex material in a way that a neaderthal like me can understand.
Another part I think that may have been a bit overblown, or sensationalized, in the media to help sell the book is what Hawking does and does not say about the existence of God in his work. He begins with the goal to answer two questions: "Where did the universe come from" and "How/why can humans exist within the laws of the universe?"
It is a scientific book, no religion bashing like you'll find in a Dawkins, Hitchens or Harris book. Hawking isn't saying that God does not exist, what he does say is that there is no need for God to explain the universe. As for the human life part, he explains that many other universes were created spontaneously from nothing and all the universes have different laws of nature and we happen to live in one that has laws that are friendly to our existence.
I love that we have a brilliant astrophysicist who can explain complex material in a way that a neaderthal like me can understand.