Auf ein Miniaturbild klicken, um zu Google Books zu gelangen.
Lädt ... Fields of Color: The theory that escaped Einsteinvon Rodney A. Brooks
Keine Lädt ...
Melde dich bei LibraryThing an um herauszufinden, ob du dieses Buch mögen würdest. Keine aktuelle Diskussion zu diesem Buch. keine Rezensionen | Rezension hinzufügen
This book describes Quantum Field Theory for a lay audience, without equations. QFT is the only physics theory that makes sense and that dispels or resolves the paradoxes of relativity and quantum mechanics that have confused and mystified so many people. Keine Bibliotheksbeschreibungen gefunden. |
Aktuelle DiskussionenKeine
Google Books — Lädt ... GenresMelvil Decimal System (DDC)530.143Natural sciences and mathematics Physics Physics Theoretical Physics Field And String TheoriesKlassifikation der Library of Congress [LCC] (USA)BewertungDurchschnitt:
Bist das du?Werde ein LibraryThing-Autor. |
This is just preliminary review, since I haven't finished the book (and may never).
Briefly, Brooks thinks that by spraying little circles of various colored inks on the page to represent the various fields, for instance, gravity field, blue, electromagnetic, green, and so on that this will lead to a greater understanding of QFT. Well, it doesn't for me.
He says a field is a "property or condition of space". That's it. He then goes on in the book by implying fields are real. But they are not. They are a mental concept just like spacetime.
First we must define "space". The dictionary has numerous definitions but I will pick the ones I think are relevant to the cosmos and the world of the very tiny.
1. An empty area (usually bounded in some way between things)
2. Any location outside the Earth's atmosphere
Thus, to say a property or condition of space is to say a field is a property of something that is empty. Right away, there is a contradiction, hence, a field is a mental concept only.
The book is essentially a history of relativity and quantum theory since no mathematics are involved. The style of the book is very annoying to me. Extensive quotes are generally indented and in smaller type face but Brooks has quotes in bold face which, in my way of thinking, means emphasis. In this book, they are not.
Also, very annoying for me is the use of common nouns for objects in our Solar System such as "the earth", "the moon", and "the sun". This is an error of British English lasting for 100s of years. To see how ridiculous this usage is imagine if we said "the venus", "the jupiter".
Those objects in our Solar System have proper noun names: Earth, Luna, and Sol.
More on this book if I finish it. ( )