The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, The Fall of a Science and What Comes Next
Published: 2008-02-28
Publisher: Penguin
Pages: 416 (Paperback)
Publisher: Penguin
Pages: 416 (Paperback)
New from: £5.16
Used from: £4.75
Description
Presents an account of the state of modern physics: of how we got from Einstein and Relativity through quantum mechanics to the strange and bizarre predictions of string theory, full of unseen dimensions and multiple universes.
Presents an account of the state of modern physics: of how we got from Einstein and Relativity through quantum mechanics to the strange and bizarre predictions of string theory, full of unseen dimensions and multiple universes.
Similar Products
Not Even Wrong: The Failure of String Theory and the Continuing Challenge to Unify the Laws of Physics
Three Roads to Quantum Gravity (Science Masters)
The Life of the Cosmos
Not Even Wrong: The Failure of String Theory and the Continuing Challenge to Unify the Laws of Physics
Three Roads to Quantum Gravity (Science Masters)
The Life of the Cosmos
Product Reviews
By Turns Both Brilliant and Utterly Banal
The Trouble with Physics is a manifesto for fixing the scientific method and it is by turns both quite brilliant and utterly banal.
Using the apparently intractable difficulties confronting string theorists as a foundation, Smolin argues that scientists' uncritical reliance on string theory has led to a period of stagnation in theoretical physics which, coupled with the theory's lack of testable predictions, renders the approach unable to provide the answers to five fundamental questions in science.
Smolin begins by outlining these unanswered questions, explaining why solving them is important for our comprehensive understanding of nature and carefully builds the case against string theory as a unifying theory of physics. Later, he extends his arguments to incorporate the exacerbating problems of the socio-scientific hierarchy and an anachronistic education system, painting a gloomy picture of the current state of scientific endeavour and offering an even more dire prognosis.
The final section of the book is devoted to Smolin's solution to these problems: the "ethical and imaginative community" (pp.301-301) through which he seeks to democratize science and embrace the scientific renegades (seers) as part of mainstream physics in an attempt re-energise the discipline.
In principle, I am sympathetic to Smolin's position: however, it seems to me that there are shortcomings in his treatment of the subject that, in part, nullify his arguments.
One could not help but think that, by focussing on string theory alone as the root of physicists' troubles, Smolin is guilty of cherry picking his arguments, particularly in light of his acknowledgement of (and participation in) competing lines of research. I freely confess that I lack the education and experience to gainsay his conclusions, but I have a healthy suspicion of naked assertion and, despite his assiduous (and, I believe, sincere) attempts at balancing his arguments, as one reads on, it becomes clear that Smolin's relationship with string theory and string theorists is, at best, ambivalent. Of course, this does not mean that Smolin is wrong, only that, in my opinion, he does not do enough to make his argument watertight, making his position a simple argument from authority.
Nonetheless, Smolin is an expert (and an authority) and there can be little doubt that he is a gifted scientist, but he appears less assured on philosophical grounds and is occasionally culpable of the sort of nebulous thinking that results in a failure to articulate his arguments coherently. In some cases, he even contradicts the main premise of his own work, unsure whether consensus in science is a bad thing (as it seems to be in string theory) or a good thing (when everyone agrees with him p.295). In another intellectual sleight of hand, he arbitrarily elevates Feyerabend over Popper (p.296 & note 5 p.369) despite arguing throughout the book that falsifiability (a central tenet of Popper's work) is critical to the truthfulness of a scientific concept.
Whilst these flaws might be damaging to Smolin's overall position, they are certainly not fatal and there are moments of lucidity in the book that make the cover price worthwhile in their own right. For instance, Smolin's introduction to string theory is an enjoyable and accessible read and his treatment of the Anthropic principle (ch.11 pp.161-176) is superb.
At face value, Smolin makes a compelling case that uncritical acceptance of string theory has halted progress and stifled debate in the scientific community. However, one can make the equally valid observation that it "twas ever thus": religion hampered scientific progress for centuries and society has often driven the scientific agenda through political dogma and waging war. In the final analysis, progress may have been slowed but it continued.
Overall, this is a thought provoking and thoroughly enjoyable book. If you are interested in the machinations of academia, this is the book for you!
[2010-09-01]
Physics needs a dreamer
The first thing to say is that the first British edition of this book was in 2007, so some of it may not be up to date.
That said, the trouble with physics, according to Smolin, is that in the 200 years up to 1975 major advances were made about every 25 years, but since 1975 there have been none. This period coincides with Smolin's professional career as a physicist.
Smolin indentifies five major problems that faced physicists in 1975, none of which have been solved. The first was the need to reconcile relativity with quantum mechanics. Various theories were put forward, but the dominant one was string theory, which Smolin explains as well as is possible, I guess, without maths.
Smolin complains that string theory is not really a theory at all, in that it makes no predictions and, therfore, cannot be tested by experiment. Nevertheless, it has become the dominant theory in university physics departments, to the extent that no young physicist can expect to get a post, at least in American universities, who does not subscribe to it.
Thus, the book is largely a critique of string theory, and the way universities fail to encourage theorists with original ideas. Physicists, he says, are of two kinds. There are the craftsmen and the dreamers. At the moment the craftsmen are in the ascendant, but Smolin thinks that something important is being missed, and what physics needs is a dreamer or seer to identify what this is.
[2010-08-30]
the problem with string theory
This book is essentially a diatribe against the strangelhold string theory has held on the theoretical physics community for the last thirty years. Three decades ago string theorists thought they would solve all the probelms of the universe in eighteen months, but in fact they are still trying to make the equations add up, and there is no sign of a unification of relativity and quantum machanics, no explanation for dark matter or dark energy. Any solutions they come up with require multiple spatial dimensions and infinite variations of the theory. They have produced nothing that can be tested and have made no predictions. Yet it remains nearly impossible to get a job in a physics dept unless you are a string theorist. They hang on with blind faith in the sheer beauty of their theory. This is all according to Smolin, of course, and there will be a counter argument that isn't expressed here. There is a bit of score settling in this book. Smolin recounts papers that were rejected, conference lectures that were ignored, but there is little sign of bitterness, just a desparate sense that physics might have spent the last thirty years exploring an exquisite cul-de-sac, and frustration at the fact that we are going through perhaps the longest period in the history of science without a major breakthrough in our understanding of the universe. A very compelling, readable book. Inevitably there are huge amounts that a layman has to take on trust - and some chapters will leave you reeling, but we don't read these books to become geniuses, just to get a grasp of what is going on in that highyl specialised community.
[2010-08-23]
very handy book
being both, practising scientist and uni reader (one of my subjects deals with science and epistemology), i find this book quite inspiring and useful. i am not physicist (am chemist), but i pretty do understand smolin's points on string theory dead-end. his most valuable idea comes when he says that science is done by human beings and no precise scientific method could save us from making mistakes, even cheating and other "features" of human social interacting. smolin is definitely no post-modern babbler or constructivist; he is honest man of science, who sees all the appealing but fake road signs leading many ambitious and intelligent people into research&development rather than into science. good science is a proper method in combination with honest approach to understand and to apply (exactly in this order). economical pushes (selling qualification for education; immediately and directly profiting science) are on one side understandable, but on the other, they twist and limit the science into mere business. yes, one must be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, but also should not throw the baby out with the bath water. ok, too many proverbs. anyway, thumbs up for lee smolin and his courage to say all the things and for all he is doing in the field. any scientist should so.
[2010-04-14]
Readable and thought-provoking
As much, if not more, about the scientists than the science. This book exposes the bandwagon which "string theory" has become, and challenges the idea that there will ever be a solution. Recommended reading for any physics undergraduate thinking of a career in what the author expects to be a dead-end. For the rest of us, a highly readable book about how the way which modern science funding can encourage more and more students into the same blind alley, overlooking perhaps less-trodden paths into the future.
[2009-10-09]
By Turns Both Brilliant and Utterly Banal
The Trouble with Physics is a manifesto for fixing the scientific method and it is by turns both quite brilliant and utterly banal.
Using the apparently intractable difficulties confronting string theorists as a foundation, Smolin argues that scientists' uncritical reliance on string theory has led to a period of stagnation in theoretical physics which, coupled with the theory's lack of testable predictions, renders the approach unable to provide the answers to five fundamental questions in science.
Smolin begins by outlining these unanswered questions, explaining why solving them is important for our comprehensive understanding of nature and carefully builds the case against string theory as a unifying theory of physics. Later, he extends his arguments to incorporate the exacerbating problems of the socio-scientific hierarchy and an anachronistic education system, painting a gloomy picture of the current state of scientific endeavour and offering an even more dire prognosis.
The final section of the book is devoted to Smolin's solution to these problems: the "ethical and imaginative community" (pp.301-301) through which he seeks to democratize science and embrace the scientific renegades (seers) as part of mainstream physics in an attempt re-energise the discipline.
In principle, I am sympathetic to Smolin's position: however, it seems to me that there are shortcomings in his treatment of the subject that, in part, nullify his arguments.
One could not help but think that, by focussing on string theory alone as the root of physicists' troubles, Smolin is guilty of cherry picking his arguments, particularly in light of his acknowledgement of (and participation in) competing lines of research. I freely confess that I lack the education and experience to gainsay his conclusions, but I have a healthy suspicion of naked assertion and, despite his assiduous (and, I believe, sincere) attempts at balancing his arguments, as one reads on, it becomes clear that Smolin's relationship with string theory and string theorists is, at best, ambivalent. Of course, this does not mean that Smolin is wrong, only that, in my opinion, he does not do enough to make his argument watertight, making his position a simple argument from authority.
Nonetheless, Smolin is an expert (and an authority) and there can be little doubt that he is a gifted scientist, but he appears less assured on philosophical grounds and is occasionally culpable of the sort of nebulous thinking that results in a failure to articulate his arguments coherently. In some cases, he even contradicts the main premise of his own work, unsure whether consensus in science is a bad thing (as it seems to be in string theory) or a good thing (when everyone agrees with him p.295). In another intellectual sleight of hand, he arbitrarily elevates Feyerabend over Popper (p.296 & note 5 p.369) despite arguing throughout the book that falsifiability (a central tenet of Popper's work) is critical to the truthfulness of a scientific concept.
Whilst these flaws might be damaging to Smolin's overall position, they are certainly not fatal and there are moments of lucidity in the book that make the cover price worthwhile in their own right. For instance, Smolin's introduction to string theory is an enjoyable and accessible read and his treatment of the Anthropic principle (ch.11 pp.161-176) is superb.
At face value, Smolin makes a compelling case that uncritical acceptance of string theory has halted progress and stifled debate in the scientific community. However, one can make the equally valid observation that it "twas ever thus": religion hampered scientific progress for centuries and society has often driven the scientific agenda through political dogma and waging war. In the final analysis, progress may have been slowed but it continued.
Overall, this is a thought provoking and thoroughly enjoyable book. If you are interested in the machinations of academia, this is the book for you!
[2010-09-01]
Physics needs a dreamer
The first thing to say is that the first British edition of this book was in 2007, so some of it may not be up to date.
That said, the trouble with physics, according to Smolin, is that in the 200 years up to 1975 major advances were made about every 25 years, but since 1975 there have been none. This period coincides with Smolin's professional career as a physicist.
Smolin indentifies five major problems that faced physicists in 1975, none of which have been solved. The first was the need to reconcile relativity with quantum mechanics. Various theories were put forward, but the dominant one was string theory, which Smolin explains as well as is possible, I guess, without maths.
Smolin complains that string theory is not really a theory at all, in that it makes no predictions and, therfore, cannot be tested by experiment. Nevertheless, it has become the dominant theory in university physics departments, to the extent that no young physicist can expect to get a post, at least in American universities, who does not subscribe to it.
Thus, the book is largely a critique of string theory, and the way universities fail to encourage theorists with original ideas. Physicists, he says, are of two kinds. There are the craftsmen and the dreamers. At the moment the craftsmen are in the ascendant, but Smolin thinks that something important is being missed, and what physics needs is a dreamer or seer to identify what this is.
[2010-08-30]
the problem with string theory
This book is essentially a diatribe against the strangelhold string theory has held on the theoretical physics community for the last thirty years. Three decades ago string theorists thought they would solve all the probelms of the universe in eighteen months, but in fact they are still trying to make the equations add up, and there is no sign of a unification of relativity and quantum machanics, no explanation for dark matter or dark energy. Any solutions they come up with require multiple spatial dimensions and infinite variations of the theory. They have produced nothing that can be tested and have made no predictions. Yet it remains nearly impossible to get a job in a physics dept unless you are a string theorist. They hang on with blind faith in the sheer beauty of their theory. This is all according to Smolin, of course, and there will be a counter argument that isn't expressed here. There is a bit of score settling in this book. Smolin recounts papers that were rejected, conference lectures that were ignored, but there is little sign of bitterness, just a desparate sense that physics might have spent the last thirty years exploring an exquisite cul-de-sac, and frustration at the fact that we are going through perhaps the longest period in the history of science without a major breakthrough in our understanding of the universe. A very compelling, readable book. Inevitably there are huge amounts that a layman has to take on trust - and some chapters will leave you reeling, but we don't read these books to become geniuses, just to get a grasp of what is going on in that highyl specialised community.
[2010-08-23]
very handy book
being both, practising scientist and uni reader (one of my subjects deals with science and epistemology), i find this book quite inspiring and useful. i am not physicist (am chemist), but i pretty do understand smolin's points on string theory dead-end. his most valuable idea comes when he says that science is done by human beings and no precise scientific method could save us from making mistakes, even cheating and other "features" of human social interacting. smolin is definitely no post-modern babbler or constructivist; he is honest man of science, who sees all the appealing but fake road signs leading many ambitious and intelligent people into research&development rather than into science. good science is a proper method in combination with honest approach to understand and to apply (exactly in this order). economical pushes (selling qualification for education; immediately and directly profiting science) are on one side understandable, but on the other, they twist and limit the science into mere business. yes, one must be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, but also should not throw the baby out with the bath water. ok, too many proverbs. anyway, thumbs up for lee smolin and his courage to say all the things and for all he is doing in the field. any scientist should so.
[2010-04-14]
Readable and thought-provoking
As much, if not more, about the scientists than the science. This book exposes the bandwagon which "string theory" has become, and challenges the idea that there will ever be a solution. Recommended reading for any physics undergraduate thinking of a career in what the author expects to be a dead-end. For the rest of us, a highly readable book about how the way which modern science funding can encourage more and more students into the same blind alley, overlooking perhaps less-trodden paths into the future.
[2009-10-09]