O.T. Hawking and The Grand Design [Archive]

Dekonick

12-05-2010, 08:49 AM

I will admit that winter is here. I just read Hawkings book The Grand Design. Now, at least, I understand what is critical about having a circular orbit and not an elliptical one... among other interesting theories and philosophies... but I still don't get quantum mechanics. I am not a math whiz, at least not to the degree necessary to do the proofs etc... to self teach myself from any higher level physics books... so I am asking here...

I know we have a plethora of brilliant cyclists who frequent this forum - any advice on future reading to help me 'get it'?

Neutonian physics make sense... but quantum mechanics just leave me scratching my head... I believe it but I want to understand.

M Theory looks promising... FWIW

gasman

12-05-2010, 09:32 AM

Dek- I took Quantum mechanics on my way to getting a physical chemistry degree in college but even though I could go through the math (barely) my understanding was skin deep at best. I felt very lucky to get a "B".
In the last several years I've read a number of good books that us laypeople can understand. You have to look at quantum mechanics as describing what happens on a really, really small level and the big problem (among many) in physics is seeing how it fits in with general relativity and the universe in general. I haven't read Hawking's new book but his first was excellent.
a couple of books I really enjoyed are by Brian Greene. The first is "The Elegant Universe" He uses a lot of drawings and analogies to make different theories understandable. But you will be humbled by the endnotes where he spells out the math. I'd look at the equations and felt lucky to even know what a couple of the terms meant. The equations went right over my head.
His second book "The Fabric of the Cosmos" goes more into what is space and time.
A final book I enjoyed is by Lisa Randall called "Warped Passages" she writes about the nature of the universe, time and space.
There are some older books by authors like Timothy Ferris while good they don't mention dark energy or dark matter. Considering that they (dark energy/matter ) are about 95% of the energy/matter in the universe you lose a bit of perspective without them.
sorry to have rambled on so long. I love the subject but I think very few people in the world really understand all of this. My knowledge will always be superficial since I'll never get the math.

2LeftCleats

12-05-2010, 09:54 AM

Agree with the above. I read the Greene books and got a little more knowledge. But when trying to understand complex ideas, it's helpful to be able to find something simple and concrete with which to compare. Quantum physics is totally unrelatable to any real world experiences and so trying to comprehend strings and multiverses is just very hard.

Dekonick

12-05-2010, 10:34 AM

Tell me about it! I am a nerd at heart - and, despite my poor grammar, spelling, and punctuation, feel that I have a good grasp on most things science related. General and organic chemistry, biology, physiology, cell bio, etc... all make sense! Quantum physics is fascinating... but the math is beyond me. While Hawking dumbs down a lot of the physics he describes, (I wish he included the equations in his writings - even if only in an appendix) I find that it helps one get the concepts. I am still not quite there - especially where string theory hints at 10 dimensions, 4 of which we experience with the remaining six 'curled up' whatever that means... and then the bit about the multiverse, a quantum event sparking the big bang and starting time, (in our universe) etc...

I really want to get this... as much as I want my Hors back.

FlashUNC

12-05-2010, 12:45 PM

Its a bit from left field, but one book I would recommend is the Physics of Star Trek.

I forget the author, but it does a great job of breaking down some of the more obscure physics concepts they sort of blithely toss about the show, and provides real world analogies for the extreme physics out there, including quantum mechanics, string theory, all that fun stuff.

His chapters on warp drive and wormholes are particularly good.

rcnute

12-05-2010, 12:49 PM

At first I thought this was going to be about falconry.

dogdriver

12-05-2010, 12:49 PM

As an engineer friend once said to me, "That thing is so complicated that even the guy who built it doesn't know how it works."

A parallel to QM...

RPS

12-05-2010, 03:11 PM

I believe it but I want to understand.
Would understanding it change our lives? Dumb and happy works well too. ;)

Ahneida Ride

12-05-2010, 05:47 PM

"Do not worry about your difficulties in Mathematics.
I can assure you mine are still greater."

Albert Einstein
US (German-born) physicist (1879 - 1955)

http://www.allposters.com/-sp/Einstein-Do-Not-Worry-Posters_i118622_.htm

benb

12-06-2010, 09:32 AM

Not everyone's brain is made the same.. I think there is a subset of concepts that each person is going to understand. For some folks that subset may be larger then others, but there is something everyone is going to fail at.. success in life may just be understanding where your strengths are.

I had quantum mechanics in college and it was freaking hard as hell for me.. I forgot most of it, as I didn't actually need it for my degree and I certainly haven't needed it again. I didn't really "get" it all that well but I don't let it bother me.

I studied computer science.. I remember seeing people wash out very early freshman year and trying to help people. There were some core concepts that some people just completely couldn't understand, it's like their brains just didn't work that way. And these were all very smart people who were used to being at the top of their class and having no trouble with anything. I think quantum physics is definitely one of those concepts.

Writing is actually one of these concepts as well.. there are definitely loads of brilliant engineers & scientists who have a really hard time with writing.

I've never read any of hawking's books.. is he a good writer? I.e. is it entertaining? Or is pretty dry like most physics stuff?

gasman

12-06-2010, 10:04 AM

Hawkings books are well written and easy to understand.
Brian Greene and Lisa Randall are more in depth.
I agree that quantum mechanics was freakin hard-way harder than anything else I've studied.

drewski

12-06-2010, 10:12 AM

At first I thought this was going to be about falconry.

I was hoping it was about Hawkind and Lemmy Kilmininster. A band
he played withe beforee being famous for Motorhead.

:crap:

MadRocketSci

12-06-2010, 12:14 PM

building a background in partial differential equations (PDE's), wave functions, and statistics might help out. It seems quantum mechanics is a lot about seeing if the math is consistent with wild-a$$ guesses. These guesses are not typically based on normal intuition based on everyday experience and observation, which is what makes this a difficult subject.

Can give Michio Kaku's books a try too....

SamIAm

12-06-2010, 12:51 PM

You might check out the Feynman Lecture Series, Volume 3.

xjoex

12-06-2010, 01:35 PM

JMerring

12-06-2010, 04:09 PM

I studied computer science.. I remember seeing people wash out very early freshman year and trying to help people. There were some core concepts that some people just completely couldn't understand, it's like their brains just didn't work that way. And these were all very smart people who were used to being at the top of their class and having no trouble with anything. I think quantum physics is definitely one of those concepts.

that was me and statistics in college - that sh1t just didn't make sense to me. i wikid quantum mechanics and this is what came up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics. i got lost as soon as the second sentence began.

RPS

12-06-2010, 04:30 PM

that was me and statistics in college - that sh1t just didn't make sense to me. i wikid quantum mechanics and this is what came up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics. i got lost as soon as the second sentence began.
I�m guessing you didn't enjoy quantum thermodynamics based on statistics. ;)
Statistical mechanics
Statistical mechanics (or statistical thermodynamics) emerged only with the development of atomic and molecular theories in the late 19th century and early 20th century, giving thermodynamics a molecular interpretation. This field relates the microscopic properties of individual atoms and molecules to the macroscopic or bulk properties of materials that can be observed in everyday life, thereby explaining thermodynamics as a natural result of statistics and mechanics (classical and quantum) at the microscopic level. This statistical approach is in contrast to classical thermodynamics, which is a more phenomenological approach.

Dekonick

12-06-2010, 05:35 PM

I found that Isaac Asimov explains advanced topics in an easy to read and understand manner (he does have a PHD in chem, not just any ol' sci fi writer).

Anyhow he has a series of scientific books, his guide to earth and space may be interesting.
http://www.amazon.com/Isaac-Asimovs-Guide-Earth-Space/dp/0449220591/ref=pd_sim_b_1

-Joe

I have read many of his books - including his scientific books. A great writer and scientist.

Actually, I am starting to get the concept now... after another day and half of another book. Something just clicked in my head... and it is starting to make sense... even though it makes no sense at all... IF and it is a big IF... srting theory can be made to work with 4 dimensions we will have a unified theory. I still have a hard time grasping how we can live in a universe with 10 dimensions and not have any way to prove it. I get the concepts of them being curled up, so they appear 'flat' and thus not able to be 'seen' or such that they are huge so we are just not aware... but the math (I am taking a leap of faith with the math) seems to have too many inconsistencies. It is definitely some neato chit... and I am going to have a good year or more learning the math alone. I am determined to 'get it' as the more I understand the neater the universe becomes. I am beginning to think I missed the boat and should have gone for a chemistry or physics concentration and grad school... guess that will just have to wait another 10 years until I retire...

What sucks is it is hard to find co workers who share the same interest in this subject matter so I have to go it alone... and this is hardly a good topic to bring up at the gym or kid birthday parties...

This does make fantastic conversation material for long bike rides! Anyone interested??? Paul?? Smiley??? Avalon???

rugbysecondrow

12-06-2010, 05:50 PM

Can't I just stick to what I know, T & A? Dick and fart jokes? Sports commentary?
:banana:

I do have a book I flip through occasionally which has a nice collection of essays on physics, astronomy and mathematics. It's purely for conversational purposes, necessary for a renaissance man such as myself.

I have read many of his books - including his scientific books. A great writer and scientist.

Actually, I am starting to get the concept now... after another day and half of another book. Something just clicked in my head... and it is starting to make sense... even though it makes no sense at all... IF and it is a big IF... srting theory can be made to work with 4 dimensions we will have a unified theory. I still have a hard time grasping how we can live in a universe with 10 dimensions and not have any way to prove it. I get the concepts of them being curled up, so they appear 'flat' and thus not able to be 'seen' or such that they are huge so we are just not aware... but the math (I am taking a leap of faith with the math) seems to have too many inconsistencies. It is definitely some neato chit... and I am going to have a good year or more learning the math alone. I am determined to 'get it' as the more I understand the neater the universe becomes. I am beginning to think I missed the boat and should have gone for a chemistry or physics concentration and grad school... guess that will just have to wait another 10 years until I retire...

What sucks is it is hard to find co workers who share the same interest in this subject matter so I have to go it alone... and this is hardly a good topic to bring up at the gym or kid birthday parties...

This does make fantastic conversation material for long bike rides! Anyone interested??? Paul?? Smiley??? Avalon???

Ahneida Ride

12-06-2010, 06:00 PM

You might check out the Feynman Lecture Series, Volume 3.

Wasn't that series used at Stanford for Physics 101?

Physics is particularly difficult. One needs to comprehend both the
mathematics and the physical concepts.

Bud_E

12-06-2010, 06:04 PM

Probably too elementary for what you want and it glosses over the math but well written and explains the topic for "dummies" as well as anything else I've read: "Why E=Mc2 and Why You Should Care" by Cox and Forshaw.

Dekonick

12-06-2010, 06:35 PM

Wasn't that series used at Stanford for Physics 101?

Physics is particularly difficult. One needs to comprehend both the
mathematics and the physical concepts.

Yes - My father has a ton of those lectures (varied tpoics) on DVD. He is a retired aerospace engineer... and likes to revisit these subjects to keep a fresh perspective on science. As a side note, Carl Sagan worked with him on the Viking missions. Today my father and I were talking and one thing that came up was the recent discovery of 'life' on Titan. Dr. Sagan was a believer that there was abundant life in the universe, but we wouldn't even recognize much of it. What was discovered on Titan fits that description... who would ever think of arsenic based life v.s. carbon? My dad said he was certain Dr. Sagan would have been thrilled at the discovery. **edit** the microbe was discovered in California, but there are suspicions that similar life could be on Titan.

A side note... to keep this bike related... none of our bikes would be here today if the lighter elements hadn't collapsed and formed heavier elements and then been spewed into space to form into planets. Just think of the potential to improve bike materials with greater understanding that will come from the experiments at CERN! No matter, steel will always still be real!

gasman

12-06-2010, 07:53 PM

I have read many of his books - including his scientific books. A great writer and scientist.

Actually, I am starting to get the concept now... after another day and half of another book. Something just clicked in my head... and it is starting to make sense... even though it makes no sense at all... IF and it is a big IF... srting theory can be made to work with 4 dimensions we will have a unified theory. I still have a hard time grasping how we can live in a universe with 10 dimensions and not have any way to prove it. I get the concepts of them being curled up, so they appear 'flat' and thus not able to be 'seen' or such that they are huge so we are just not aware... but the math (I am taking a leap of faith with the math) seems to have too many inconsistencies. It is definitely some neato chit... and I am going to have a good year or more learning the math alone. I am determined to 'get it' as the more I understand the neater the universe becomes. I am beginning to think I missed the boat and should have gone for a chemistry or physics concentration and grad school... guess that will just have to wait another 10 years until I retire...

What sucks is it is hard to find co workers who share the same interest in this subject matter so I have to go it alone... and this is hardly a good topic to bring up at the gym or kid birthday parties...

This does make fantastic conversation material for long bike rides! Anyone interested??? Paul?? Smiley??? Avalon???

Well Dek buddy i would spend some time discussing this if you weren't on the other coast. I have the same problem here. I did ride with a guy once that worked at Lawrence livermore and had a great time talking about cosmology and high energy physics.
P.S.-
String theory may not really be the answer-M theory may be closer to the answer.

rugbysecondrow

12-06-2010, 08:01 PM

Mike

Figure out how to send it to me via the Nook, sounds like a good read.

Dekonick

12-06-2010, 08:47 PM

It is a relatively easy read. Hawking is good at taking hard concepts and making them digestible. I will find a way to shoot it to ya...

Gas - agree on M-theory being a better bet. It makes more sense to develop a pattern of theories that work in certain environments and come full circle. I am just not sold on strings... mainly that somehow the extra dimensions don't work with me - especially when they still lead to negative numbers where you can't have them. Still a neat concept - and the math can work... but it looks like the string supporters are forcing the theory to work - like a square peg in a round hole. No tangible evidence. No way to test. Math that doesn't quite work... at least not with the universe as we know it... so lets add dimensions to let the numbers fall where we want them...

Sure wish I could get a job where I am paid lots of greenbacks to theorize something that can't be tested! :hello: :beer:

In all seriousness, string theory still may yield fruit... and I really need to learn the math to understand it fully... but it kind of looks like more math than science... except that it has promise...

:)

Winter is definitely here folks... my 4 mile run turned into 2.5 when the 40mph winds hit me while I was on an open, exposed, flat trail... in 30 degree temps... Made me think of the steady state with no movement other than required quantum fluctuations... now that is COLD!

:) I digress...

MadRocketSci

12-06-2010, 09:21 PM

Wasn't that series used at Stanford for Physics 101?

I believe he taught at Caltech....

MadRocketSci

12-21-2010, 05:50 PM

resurrecting this for some more suggestions...

Get itunes if you haven't already. Then look in the itunes store, go to itunes u, go to the list of universities, select stanford, and download the free lectures and seminars on the latest in cosmology/physics. enjoy!

Dekonick

12-21-2010, 08:38 PM

Thanks! I just finished 2 more books on string theory... M theory seems to have validity... now if they could just make some Higgs bosuns in CERN... we would have more validity to the possibility of string theory actually being the model for a unified theory.

Starting to get this chit... but the &^$%^ math is %$^^#&*(*)&&%*$&%$&^$^ :crap: :crap: :crap: (**&^$%&^$&^$% hard

victoryfactory

12-22-2010, 06:12 AM

The further science goes, the closer to truth it comes.

Although I don't study this subject directly, I love that people can go there.
I have always felt that
at some point this beautiful advanced science and the inner realizations of the
ancient seers who wrote the vedas and the upanishads must converge.
Just two ways of approaching the same subject.

VF

stephenmarklay

12-22-2010, 07:40 AM

I have not thought about this stuff for a long time...

Two books I read as an undergrad in physics were

http://www.amazon.com/Boojums-All-Way-through-Communicating/dp/0521388805

http://www.amazon.com/Dancing-Wu-Li-Masters-Overview/dp/055326382X

These books however are not going to be up to date with the new theories but do cover some of the basics and are interesting.

Mr. Squirrel

12-22-2010, 08:24 AM

mr. hawking has nice wheels. they remind me of closed string gravitons, which are basically the closed ends of open string photons. since the two ends of an open string can always meet and connect, forming a closed string, there are no string theories without closed strings. closed strings are wheels, and there are no wheels without squirrels. where does he ride?

mr. squirrel

Dekonick

12-22-2010, 09:18 AM