View Single Post
Re: New forum/subforum suggestion: science/popular science book reviews
Old
  (#10 (permalink))
austintorn@aol.com
Grandmaster
austintorn@aol.com has a reputation beyond reputeaustintorn@aol.com has a reputation beyond reputeaustintorn@aol.com has a reputation beyond reputeaustintorn@aol.com has a reputation beyond reputeaustintorn@aol.com has a reputation beyond reputeaustintorn@aol.com has a reputation beyond reputeaustintorn@aol.com has a reputation beyond reputeaustintorn@aol.com has a reputation beyond repute
 
austintorn@aol.com's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 2,165
Thanks Given: 540
Thanked 1,077x in 817 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2007
Rep Power: 52
   
Awards Showcase
Member of the Quarter 
Total Awards: 1
Re: New forum/subforum suggestion: science/popular science book reviews - 11-27-2007, 03:19 AM

Often, a book can be boiled down to a few main points.

In 'The Trouble with Physics', by Lee Smolin, he notes that string theory is background-dependent; however, since the background evolves in time, such as gravity acting on itself, we really need a background-independent theory. M-"theory" wishes to be one such, but it doesn't exist even in name only, for the 'M' doesn't stand for anything yet and it isn't a theory!

String theory got any result it wanted by the choice of a background.

As for other parts of the book, he talks about Double Special Relativity, which I put in the eternally evolving universe thread.

The rest of the book was about how string theory wasted 30 years, although there were, as always, a few side benefits, like insights into math.
  
Reply With Quote