Scan barcode
aaronmunger's review against another edition
4.0
A stark contrast to the conventional "Einstein couldn't handle quantum mechanics" view, showing that Bohr's side was quite successful in stopping anyone from looking deeper at Einstein's questions.
It was a lot of names to take in and the timeline kept jumping back to the beginning, but it was an entertaining look at history.
It was a lot of names to take in and the timeline kept jumping back to the beginning, but it was an entertaining look at history.
jasonfurman's review against another edition
5.0
An excellent book that does not answer the title question—but is mostly convincing that the question is worth asking and that we can make scientific progress in addressing it. The book is well written with an interspersing of human stories, scientific description, and Becker’s own more original analysis/arguments/interpretation of the historical field of “quantum foundations”, which is to say understanding what the weird equations of quantum mechanics mean.
Unlike most histories of science, Adam Becker’s book in some ways is about failure and going badly off track not success. Specifically, the failure of physicists to think seriously about the origins and meanings of quantum mechanics, the marginalization of those who tried to, and the problems that come from physicists acting as amateur philosophers without being aware of major developments in philosophy (like realism overcoming logical positivism/empiricism).
Adam Becker borders on scathing on Bohr and the circle’s around him’s devleopment of what came to be called the “Copenhagen Interpretation” of quantum mechanics. The interpretation centered around probabilistic waves becoming deterministic particles when they are somehow measured by a measuring apparatus that is itself deterministic. In effect, they were assuming that classical mechanics applied to large objects but quantum mechanics to small ones. And more to the point, they were taking an attitude that has been described as “shut up and calculate.”
Becker has four arguments against the Copenhagen interpretation: (i) that it was actually a lot of different interpretations by a lot of different people and never actually a single interpretation; (ii) that all of these failed basic tests of logical consistency; (iii) that all of this was reinforced by Bohr’s charisma and his circle’s antagonism to challenging the intreptation; and (iv) that this is consequential because it inhibits the devlopment of new scientific questions and potential experiments.
Becker then develops some of the alternative interpretations at great length together with mini-biograophies and descriptions of the process of discovery, placing the most emphasis on Bohm’s deterministic pilot waves idea, Everett’s Many Worlds hypothesis and Bell’s inequality. He then rushes briefly through some other ideas towards the end of the book, including superdeterminism, and information theory.
The biographies he tells of these scientists—including Bohr’s exile to Brazil, Everett’s greater interest in drinking/womanizing than in physics, and Bell publishing in a random journal rather than a top one—is not just ancillary entertainment but a core part of the argument. Most science stories are about progress and triumph. This one is to some degree about contingency and chance and the ways it can lead science astray. Bohr’s charisma vs. the problems of the alternative messengers are treated as historical accidents that affected the ability to have a more full debate/research program on the foundations of quantum mechanics. When this was combined with incentives (e.g., all the funding for physics coming from the military) the effects were powerful.
One strength of Becker’s book is his serious intergration of analytic philosophy, his excellent explanations of it, and his relating this to developments in quantum mechanics. He takes the reader through the establishment of logical positivism/empiricism/falsifiability as theories, shows how they were linked to/supported the Copenhagen interpretation, but then shows how these theories have since been superseded in philosophy by a recognition that you cannot just limit yourself to testing empirical predictions but have to embed these tests in a broader theory of underlying reality. Becker is very critical of physicists who are still in a positivist mold which he views as being unaware of the last 50 years of developments in analytical philosophy.
Becker’s book leaves me partially convinced by his conclusion but only partially. He is convincing that the Copenhagen interpretation is wrong/incoherent but is less convincing about the utility of developing alternatives. The proliferation of so many alternatives, the inability to decide between them, and the lack of any large convincing progresss that came out their development leave me wondering whether their marginalization is a self-fulfilling prophecy or maybe inherent in their approach. That said, given uncertainty about where/how we will make scientific progress continuing along the path of better understanding the reality underlying the weirdness of quantum mechanics seems like a worthwhile activity for at least a small fraction of physicists—and Becker is completely convincing that outdated philosophy and internally inconsistent arguments should not be used to deter these investigations.
Unlike most histories of science, Adam Becker’s book in some ways is about failure and going badly off track not success. Specifically, the failure of physicists to think seriously about the origins and meanings of quantum mechanics, the marginalization of those who tried to, and the problems that come from physicists acting as amateur philosophers without being aware of major developments in philosophy (like realism overcoming logical positivism/empiricism).
Adam Becker borders on scathing on Bohr and the circle’s around him’s devleopment of what came to be called the “Copenhagen Interpretation” of quantum mechanics. The interpretation centered around probabilistic waves becoming deterministic particles when they are somehow measured by a measuring apparatus that is itself deterministic. In effect, they were assuming that classical mechanics applied to large objects but quantum mechanics to small ones. And more to the point, they were taking an attitude that has been described as “shut up and calculate.”
Becker has four arguments against the Copenhagen interpretation: (i) that it was actually a lot of different interpretations by a lot of different people and never actually a single interpretation; (ii) that all of these failed basic tests of logical consistency; (iii) that all of this was reinforced by Bohr’s charisma and his circle’s antagonism to challenging the intreptation; and (iv) that this is consequential because it inhibits the devlopment of new scientific questions and potential experiments.
Becker then develops some of the alternative interpretations at great length together with mini-biograophies and descriptions of the process of discovery, placing the most emphasis on Bohm’s deterministic pilot waves idea, Everett’s Many Worlds hypothesis and Bell’s inequality. He then rushes briefly through some other ideas towards the end of the book, including superdeterminism, and information theory.
The biographies he tells of these scientists—including Bohr’s exile to Brazil, Everett’s greater interest in drinking/womanizing than in physics, and Bell publishing in a random journal rather than a top one—is not just ancillary entertainment but a core part of the argument. Most science stories are about progress and triumph. This one is to some degree about contingency and chance and the ways it can lead science astray. Bohr’s charisma vs. the problems of the alternative messengers are treated as historical accidents that affected the ability to have a more full debate/research program on the foundations of quantum mechanics. When this was combined with incentives (e.g., all the funding for physics coming from the military) the effects were powerful.
One strength of Becker’s book is his serious intergration of analytic philosophy, his excellent explanations of it, and his relating this to developments in quantum mechanics. He takes the reader through the establishment of logical positivism/empiricism/falsifiability as theories, shows how they were linked to/supported the Copenhagen interpretation, but then shows how these theories have since been superseded in philosophy by a recognition that you cannot just limit yourself to testing empirical predictions but have to embed these tests in a broader theory of underlying reality. Becker is very critical of physicists who are still in a positivist mold which he views as being unaware of the last 50 years of developments in analytical philosophy.
Becker’s book leaves me partially convinced by his conclusion but only partially. He is convincing that the Copenhagen interpretation is wrong/incoherent but is less convincing about the utility of developing alternatives. The proliferation of so many alternatives, the inability to decide between them, and the lack of any large convincing progresss that came out their development leave me wondering whether their marginalization is a self-fulfilling prophecy or maybe inherent in their approach. That said, given uncertainty about where/how we will make scientific progress continuing along the path of better understanding the reality underlying the weirdness of quantum mechanics seems like a worthwhile activity for at least a small fraction of physicists—and Becker is completely convincing that outdated philosophy and internally inconsistent arguments should not be used to deter these investigations.
thomcat's review against another edition
5.0
Great summary of the state of Quantum Physics, including most of the history from Einstein/Bohr to the present (aka 2018). No math, but references and notes in the back can lead you there. Unfortunately, no simple answer to the title question.
Thought experiments and metaphors give insight into the competing theories. Chapters focus on history and implications, with some chronological overlap. It was interesting to read about papers lost or buried for years, and just how much ostracism the Copenhagen interpretation folks used against anyone who didn't fall in line. This is sold as a "popular science" book, but goes deep enough to really teach - again, with no math or other deep science knowledge required.
I learned a few things, though I graduated with a minor in Physics. I did not know about the steep ramp up of physics after WWII, or the recent decline. The sections on Philosophy were unexpected, but I can see the conjunction now - we are talking about Reality after all, and what can't be measured must be surmised. I did not realize early physicists were so involved with the philosophers.
Even in 2018, quantum physics was deeply involved in modern transistors and storage media. Quantum tunneling impacts my work daily, and I would have liked to see more about this impact to the real world. 30 years ago we were talking about Planck limits to measurement, and they don't make an appearance here. String theory is mentioned only at the end. These last two are much deeper than popular science, so I get it.
Recommended. Rating? It's a great history, but I wanted a little more. 4½ stars.
Thought experiments and metaphors give insight into the competing theories. Chapters focus on history and implications, with some chronological overlap. It was interesting to read about papers lost or buried for years, and just how much ostracism the Copenhagen interpretation folks used against anyone who didn't fall in line. This is sold as a "popular science" book, but goes deep enough to really teach - again, with no math or other deep science knowledge required.
I learned a few things, though I graduated with a minor in Physics. I did not know about the steep ramp up of physics after WWII, or the recent decline. The sections on Philosophy were unexpected, but I can see the conjunction now - we are talking about Reality after all, and what can't be measured must be surmised. I did not realize early physicists were so involved with the philosophers.
Even in 2018, quantum physics was deeply involved in modern transistors and storage media. Quantum tunneling impacts my work daily, and I would have liked to see more about this impact to the real world. 30 years ago we were talking about Planck limits to measurement, and they don't make an appearance here. String theory is mentioned only at the end. These last two are much deeper than popular science, so I get it.
Recommended. Rating? It's a great history, but I wanted a little more. 4½ stars.
pavram's review against another edition
5.0
Sjajna popnauka koja za svoj predmet uzima povremeno gangsterske sukobe u naučnoj zajednici oko toga koja interpretacija kvantne mehanike je zapravo najbliža istini. Svoj fokus Beker više baca na nešto što na površini izgleda apsurdno – naime, da nauka povremeno može biti vrlo dogmatska. Ili da makar to mogu biti naučnici koji se njom bave.
Veliki akteri u burnoj istoriji ove nauke ovde su u prvom planu i može se tu puno toga naučiti, shvatiti, doznati, jer Beker koncizno prelazi preko naučnih osnova – a posebno Belove teoreme - dominantno se baveći filozofskim implikacijama kvantnog sveta na ovaj naš klasični (šmrc jednačine šmrc). Svakako ono što najviše vredi ovde je neverovatan uvid u iza kulisa naučnih krugova jedne fascinantne oblasti koja danas kroz misreprezentacije sačinjava 90% popularnog sajfaj sadržaja. Prapočeci i počeci, kulminacije i obrti, istorija kvantne mehanike lako se može uporediti sa istorijom čovečanstva na mikro, mezo i makro nivou, jer, kako to obično biva, i naukom se bavi neko ko mora na svakih dva sata u toalet.
5-
Veliki akteri u burnoj istoriji ove nauke ovde su u prvom planu i može se tu puno toga naučiti, shvatiti, doznati, jer Beker koncizno prelazi preko naučnih osnova – a posebno Belove teoreme - dominantno se baveći filozofskim implikacijama kvantnog sveta na ovaj naš klasični (šmrc jednačine šmrc). Svakako ono što najviše vredi ovde je neverovatan uvid u iza kulisa naučnih krugova jedne fascinantne oblasti koja danas kroz misreprezentacije sačinjava 90% popularnog sajfaj sadržaja. Prapočeci i počeci, kulminacije i obrti, istorija kvantne mehanike lako se može uporediti sa istorijom čovečanstva na mikro, mezo i makro nivou, jer, kako to obično biva, i naukom se bavi neko ko mora na svakih dva sata u toalet.
5-
edgeworthstan2000's review against another edition
4.0
I love that each chapter ends on a cliffhanger. Made for very compelling reading and a "just one more chapter" late into the night kind of experience.
In a way, I didn't learn anything from this book. Before reading it, I knew that relativity and quantum mechanics aren't compatible. After reading it, I still know that. I just know a bit more about the players and the history. But the fault is largely mine -- I'm really at my limit here, not having any sort of background in physics.
Halfway through, I started to be bothered by the lack of women. Marie Curie and Chien-Shiung Wu are mentioned but surely there were others? And then - boom - at the end he mentions the bias and names one more -- Grete Hermann -- whose work went unnoticed for decades. Why not bring her up in the main body of the book & describe her research instead of reproducing the bias and then pointing it out?
Anyway, in another world, I am a physicist. Not this one.
In a way, I didn't learn anything from this book. Before reading it, I knew that relativity and quantum mechanics aren't compatible. After reading it, I still know that. I just know a bit more about the players and the history. But the fault is largely mine -- I'm really at my limit here, not having any sort of background in physics.
Halfway through, I started to be bothered by the lack of women. Marie Curie and Chien-Shiung Wu are mentioned but surely there were others? And then - boom - at the end he mentions the bias and names one more -- Grete Hermann -- whose work went unnoticed for decades. Why not bring her up in the main body of the book & describe her research instead of reproducing the bias and then pointing it out?
Anyway, in another world, I am a physicist. Not this one.
sarah_caldwell83's review against another edition
5.0
I discovered this book after hearing an interview with the author on Alie Ward’s podcast Ologies. I think Becker’s approach to quantum foundations is fascinating and I’d recommend it to anyone curious about the different interpretations of quantum physics. I loved the inclusion of history, culture, and philosophy in this book, and as someone without a background in physics, I appreciated his succinct explanations of complicated concepts and all the diagrams.
quigonchuy's review against another edition
4.0
I enjoyed reading this. And this is on me, but I thought it was going to be about the nature of reality and quantum physics. It was more like a history of physics and quantum physics, and how the ideas have changed over time. About who pioneered what interpretations and ideas and what not, instead of actually about the science. Despite that, it was well written and I enjoyed learning about that.