PDF Download Physics For the Rest of Us, by Roger S. Jones
Don't bother if you don't have sufficient time to visit guide shop as well as search for the favourite publication to read. Nowadays, the online publication Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones is pertaining to provide ease of checking out behavior. You may not require to go outdoors to browse the publication Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones Searching as well as downloading and install guide qualify Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones in this short article will provide you much better solution. Yeah, on the internet publication Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones is a kind of electronic publication that you could obtain in the link download provided.
Physics For the Rest of Us, by Roger S. Jones
PDF Download Physics For the Rest of Us, by Roger S. Jones
Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones. The developed technology, nowadays support everything the human requirements. It includes the day-to-day tasks, tasks, workplace, home entertainment, and a lot more. Among them is the great net connection as well as computer system. This condition will certainly reduce you to support among your hobbies, reviewing routine. So, do you have willing to review this publication Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones now?
When obtaining this book Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones as referral to read, you could gain not only inspiration but also brand-new knowledge as well as driving lessons. It has greater than usual perks to take. What kind of book that you review it will work for you? So, why need to obtain this book qualified Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones in this short article? As in web link download, you can get the book Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones by online.
When obtaining guide Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones by online, you can read them any place you are. Yeah, also you are in the train, bus, hesitating list, or various other places, on-line e-book Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones can be your excellent close friend. Each time is a great time to read. It will certainly enhance your expertise, enjoyable, amusing, lesson, as well as encounter without spending even more money. This is why on the internet book Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones comes to be most really wanted.
Be the very first which are reviewing this Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones Based on some factors, reviewing this e-book will certainly provide more advantages. Also you require to read it step by step, page by web page, you could complete it whenever and also wherever you have time. Again, this online e-book Physics For The Rest Of Us, By Roger S. Jones will certainly provide you easy of reading time and also activity. It likewise provides the experience that is economical to get to as well as get significantly for far better life.
Ten basic ideas of 20th-century physics that everyone should know... and how they have shaped our culture and consciousness.
- Sales Rank: #1164911 in Books
- Published on: 1993-09-01
- Original language: English
- Number of items: 1
- Dimensions: 8.80" h x .88" w x 6.00" l,
- Binding: Paperback
- 384 pages
From Publishers Weekly
An introduction to basic concepts of modern physics and their relation to everyday life.
Copyright 1993 Reed Business Information, Inc.
About the Author
McGraw-Hill authors represent the leading experts in their fields and are dedicated to improving the lives, careers, and interests of readers worldwide
Most helpful customer reviews
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful.
Physics...and then some
By Phil D
In Physics for the Rest of Us: Ten Basic Ideas of Twentieth-Century Physics That Everyone Should Know…and How They Have Shaped Our Culture and Consciousness (1992), Roger S. Jones takes “the rest of us” (i.e., non-physicists) on a tour of modern physics, which includes not merely a survey of its fundamental principles and milestone achievements, but also its underpinning assumptions, broader implications, and its relationship to disciplines such as philosophy, theology, and art. Jones served as Professor of Physics at the University of Minnesota where he taught from 1967 to 1999, and perhaps as an extension of his desire to educate, he published another popular treatment of physics under the title, Physics as Metaphor (1982), which offered an “idealistic reevaluation of the physical world [which] rejects the myth of reality as external to the human mind.” Physics as Metaphor could be considered Jones’ anti-realist coming-out party, where he undoubtedly rattled the realist sensibilities of the broader physics community by observing, “It is mind that we see reflected in matter. Physical science is a metaphor with which the scientist, like the poet, creates and extends meaning and value in the quest for understanding and purpose.”
Physics for the Rest of Us (henceforth, Physics) is no less provocative in light of similar abstract reflections, yet it is also sufficiently concrete in its attempts to describe and illustrate the quantifiable aspects of physical theories and their practical outworking. Nevertheless, it seems that Jones has a clear motivation to stimulate the critical faculty of his readers’ minds. For example, he endeavors to debunk the notion that science is exclusively a subject for experts; specifically, he reasons that one need not have scientific expertise in order to judge science from a “broadly humanistic and cultural point of view.” Jones would like to see people embrace and understand physics to the extent that they feel neither intimidated nor alienated by it and, thus, might successfully “understand and judge its values, uses and dangers.” Jones also seems motivated by a desire to put science in its place (namely, to bring it back to the liberal arts departments of the university), and he also wants to challenge science’s “modern priesthood” status by exposing its many foundational assumptions which are hidden from onlookers and scientists alike. Relatedly, he wants to raise public awareness of “the religious role that science plays in our lives” in an effort to stop the “idolatry” surrounding the science establishment which will most certainly result in the “destruction of our souls.” In fact, Jones is unapologetic in this respect, to some reviewers’ disappointment. For instance, one reader remarks in dismay that Jones’ wanderings from facts, figures, and function in order to pursue “more abstract questions and subjects generally left to philosophers and religion” is a downfall of Physics. Understandably, readers expecting lessons involving ‘just the facts’, may be disappointed to discover that Jones not only casts a much wider net, but that he also takes implicit aim at a scientific community which has largely succumbed to believing its own hype about the objective existence of such truth-laden entities.
On a less inflammatory note, Jones is also motivated to see the advancement of participation in science education among public secondary schools, where physics has assumed the image of an elitist club for the smart kids. He recommends a more engaging and meaningful cross-disciplinary focus which explores the connections between physics and social, political, philosophical, religious, and artistic matters. His apparent passion for the topic of education is reflected by a stark change in his own career trajectory, where he transitioned from research to teaching, and was eventually awarded the Horace T. Morse Alumni Association Award for Outstanding Contributions to Undergraduate Education in 1995.
The book’s main purpose is to “combine a conceptual approach to modern physics with an explanation of its deeper meaning and philosophical significance” To accomplish this, Jones organizes Physics into twenty-two chapters which stagger its more concrete subjects (e.g., chapter 1, The Special Theory of Relativity), with abstract topics (e.g., chapter 2, Metaphors of Space and Time). The flow works well insofar as it engages those whose focus may tend to wander after several pages of relatively complex theoretical description; thus, the interplay of physics and philosophical reflection works nicely to keep readers of all persuasions interested and engaged.
Given its twenty-two chapters, Physics covers considerable ground. Einstein’s special and general theories of relatively are explained, while an interaction of metaphors of space and time (parts 1 and 2) buffer the handling of those respective theories. Helpfully, Jones is not content with merely describing theories and providing one or two corresponding illustrations, but rather he sets description and illustration in their historical context to provide insight into the significance of their origin and an awareness of the causal factors which led to their development. For example, most people may find it interesting that Einstein’s theories of special and general relativity were not the incidental outworking of a concurrent scientific project, but were rather the result of thought experiments. Jones observes how the thoughts themselves may seem strangely naïve to most (e.g., Einstein wondered why he was standing on the floor of an elevator, as opposed to one of its adjacent surfaces), yet “the answer [to such thoughts] reveals one of the best-kept secrets in science.”
Though focused primarily on achievements of the twentieth century, Physics also makes an excurses into “the mechanical worldview,” which endured for two centuries before its displacement by general relativity. Thus, in the process of a chapter-length historical survey, readers are acquainted with such notables as Descartes, Galileo, and Newton. Of course, no exposition of these giants (to include Einstein and his theories) would be complete without a subsequent chapter on Cosmology, which continues a trend of staggering insights into nature’s grandeur. Jones gives readers a glimpse of the incomprehensible immensity of the cosmos before explaining the big bang model, which he paints against the backdrop of its mid-century (but now outmoded) competitor, the steady-state model.
A chapter discussing the relationship between science and religion follows on the heels of cosmology. Here, Jones takes opportunity to juxtapose the conceptual implications of religious creation stories against those of science, where the latter entails a world “without fundamental meaning and purpose.” He also addresses an issue to which he refers to as “scientific idolatry,” where today’s “average person—including a good many scientists—treat the ideas, concepts and theories of science in exactly the same way that ancients treated their golden calves.” This idea is interacted with in more detail below, but it suffices to say here that he establishes his conclusion on the basis of theories and other unobservable postulates which are taken to be the case by faith. In that vein, he observes that doctrines of science today are respected and accepted as much today as ancient church doctrines were over a thousand years ago. To that effect, he states “The church fathers would have given their eyeteeth to command for medieval Catholicism the kind of obedience and blind faith that we freely lavish on science today.”
The subsequent chapters introduce quantum theory, including a survey of insights from such notables as Planck, Maxwell, Bohr, and Heisenberg. If readers regard the features of relativity as mind-boggling, they will certainly be amazed by the uncanny paradoxes of the quantum world, where waves and particles function simultaneously, and where particles called neutrinos pass through the earth in effortless motion. Any discussion of quantum mechanics would be incomplete without subsequent discourse on scientific realism, namely, the matter of “Objectivity, Measurement, and Reality” (the subject of chapter 12). Here, Jones expresses the view that regardless of one’s perspective (realist or anti-realist), quantum theory makes very accurate predictions about experimental observations. Such success notwithstanding, he also expresses concern that the quantitative descriptions that define physics are somehow regarded as more meaningful and objective than qualitative descriptions, and that this bias has carried over to the culture at large with dehumanizing consequences. Through a series of steps, he demonstrates that “pure measurement in itself is not objective, which means that science is not objective … though it puts on a good show of objectivity.”
Jones moves from those anti-realist musings to taking up the issue of human consciousness, which “is not a welcome guest in modern physics.” This attitude is one that cannot be ignored, on Jones’ estimation, and he seems to side with Roger Penrose in observing that, if anything, “deeper laws than those of quantum theory are needed for the functioning of the mind.” In any event, he does not quibble in stating that the practical consequences of quantum theory are nothing short of astonishing, and then devotes a subsequent chapter to surveying some of its associated technological achievements, such as superconductors and lasers. Of course, any treatment of the positive results of quantum theory would be remiss without covering its darker applications, such as the development of nuclear weapons for the purpose of mass-human destruction. To that end, Jones describes the amazing properties and structure of the atomic nucleus, which is also the instrument of untold good, such as nuclear medicine and, debatably, power production. Of course, the issue of “Physics and Conscience” (the subject of chapter 17) is hardly more relevant than the discussion of developing nuclear weapons. Jones engages this subject against the fascinating historical backdrop which led to the World War II bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Interestingly, he recounts how Einstein momentarily dispensed with his own pacifism to convince President Roosevelt to develop nuclear weapons ahead of the Nazis, though even Einstein’s clout was powerless to prevent the eventual use of those bombs in what would end up being the final days of the War.
After tackling the daunting task of describing and illustrating the two incommensurable pillars of modern physics—general relativity and quantum mechanics—Jones fittingly introduces the topic of unification. This opens the door to discussing the “gutsy option” of a grand unified theory (GUT), and superstring theory, the latter of which posits the existence of six additional dimensions on top of the four which currently describe space-time reality. Jones uses the uncertainty and mystery of such theories to highlight their speculative nature, which is nearly on par with science fiction. To that end, he underscores the subjective features of physics, such as “its own system of beliefs, conventions, tacit knowledge, biases, assumptions, misconceptions, lore, and myth.” And while many scientists would reject this analysis, he points out that it is not far-fetched; after all, the big bang entails inescapable “articles of faith,” such as an unsubstantiated belief in the constancy of physical laws and properties, not to mention the mystery surrounding its initiation.
Transitioning to a less-controversial topic, art, Jones explores the impact of modern physics on painting, music, theatre, and even literature. He observes that such influences are present in “the atomizing effects of pointillism, in the variable fractured space of cubism, in the fluid space of surrealism, in the temporal imagery of futurism, in the random non-deterministic harmonies of atonal and serial music … and in the loss of meaning in the theatre of the absurd.” He then broadens his scope to address the increasingly disjunctive relationship between science and the humanities, where the former has garnered far more prestige and awards than such disciplines as history, culture, and ethics. Jones argues that “there is nothing natural or essential about separating the sciences from the humanities,” and for all of its merits, “science has not brought us one jot closer to fathoming the human condition and the mystery of existence.” Finally, Physics concludes with an appeal to humanize the discipline through overhauled education in secondary schools. Jones points to the fact that popular treatments of the subject have appeared increasingly on bestseller lists, while the enrollment in high school physics classes has decreased, suggesting that the publishers know something that school administrators need to learn. The subject of education is as opportune time as any to underscore his main point: physics is not for an elite few, but for everyone.
Since Physics never achieved bestseller status and was published nearly 25 years ago, it is difficult to pin down the nature of its reception; however, it presently has 4.5 stars out of 15 reviews on Amazon. The general consensus among these readers is that high praise is due to Jones for his accessible and entertaining treatment of a complex subject. For example, one reviewer comments that while a physics textbook would be unhelpful for him, given the “overwhelming amount of mathematics and statistics involved,” Jones was “very good at making a difficult subject entertaining to read.” This same reviewer, whose title describes Physics as “unputdownable,” does note that, for him, the philosophical dimensions of the book were not as “entertaining” as its technical/conceptual aspects. Perhaps, in this regard, Jones might have made a more explicit attempt to outline the importance of philosophical reflection. While his rationale for such musings is certainly implied, it may have carried greater weight with readers had the ‘so-what’ factor been addressed more overtly.
This point is all the more pressing, given that so much of Physics is philosophical in nature, as one reviewer writes, “a good half of the chapters have nothing to do with science, let alone physics … The sudden change in gears is almost jarring in that you suddenly can go from hard facts to his views on the interpretation and place of science in the world.” Unfortunately, this analysis betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of Jones’ point, that the very assumption of “hard facts” is question-begging; i.e., it assumes that such things as facts exist independently of one’s perception, or at least one’s interpretation. Thomas Kuhn, of whom the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy writes, is “one of the most influential philosophers of science of the twentieth century,” is famous for his arguments against the very scientific realism that the reader tacitly assumes. According to James Ladyman, a Senior Lecturer of Philosophy at the University of Bristol, UK, Kuhn pointed out that the sense of such terms as ‘atom’, ‘electron’, ‘species’, and ‘mass’ have changed considerably throughout the history of science, and thus this raises the question of whether they actually do have positive ontological status at all. Of course, this is not to make a value judgement of Kuhn’s analysis one way or the other, but rather to observe that Jones’ point—that people accept so-called ‘facts of science’ as unquestionable givens—is actually underscored by the reviewer’s sentiment.
In close connection with that issue is another point made by this same reader: “The views presented in many of the more philosophical chapters have nearly nothing to do with science so it certainly helps to be able to distinguish the two sides of the author.” Here, the reviewer (probably unwittingly) assents to another common fallacy, that ‘science’ is clearly distinguished from ‘non-science’. This issue is formally referred to as the demarcation problem, where distinguishing science from non-science/pseudo-science eludes any specific set of criteria. One may think, for example, that the fabled ‘scientific method’ would serve as the boundary between science and non-science, but again, there is nothing like a monolithic scientific methodology which is distinct to science. As J.P. Moreland observes, at best, science research appeals to a cluster of context-dependent practices which may loosely be referred to as scientific methodologies, but which are not exclusive to science, per se, and neither delineate ‘science’ from other disciplines, nor distinguish it as a uniquely privileged enterprise. For example, the Copernican revolution was spurred, in part, by citing assumed philosophical inadequacies of Ptolemy’s geocentric model; similarly, Darwin appealed to a perceived theological disparity between divine benevolence and the appearance of so-called bad design in nature. Regardless of whether the particulars in these cases were determinative, such examples demonstrate that science methodology relies on interdisciplinary support with respect to prompting observations and promoting justifications.
The fallacious nature of science’s claim to a privileged status by virtue of an allegedly-unique methodology is essential to Jones’ argument for humanizing physics by placing it back in the liberal arts departments of the university. In his treatment of “Physics and Conscience” (chapter 17), he powerfully emphasizes the need to dispense with an unwarranted elitism that is implied by such notions as ‘the scientific method’ and its corresponding demarcation of science from other disciplines: "In the last analysis, our personal attitudes and unconscious beliefs about science amount to moral choices and acts. If we blindly accept the pronouncements of scientists and surrender our right to participate in political decisions involving science, if we worship and idolize science and treat it as a state religion, and if we accept the 'scientific method' as the final arbiter of truth and human experience, then we truly abandon our moral and ethical responsibilities as human beings."
He makes a similar point in his chapter on “Science vs. Religion” in the context of scientific idolatry: “All scientific concepts and theories, together with the whole system and rationale of the so-called scientific method, clearly originated in the human mind … science is the product of human imagination … it is neither external, nor independent, nor final, nor even provable.” Clearly, Jones’ analysis will not resonate with today’s popularizers of science, who promote a form of scientism which, itself, depends on the truth of naturalistic assumptions that preclude (or at least cannot account for) immaterial things like concepts and meanings.
These key insights were not lost on some Amazon reviewers. One reader considered “the profound and articulate criticism of the role of science in contemporary society” to be “the most important topic in the book.” He accurately synthesizes Jones’ broader point, which is not merely to teach concepts of modern physics, but to bring awareness to the notion that “science has become the unofficial religion of our society, a new form of ‘idolatry’. It pervades our institutions, our government, industries and educational policies...and it has done so at the expense of other vital human activities, especially those (e.g., religion and the humanities) that have traditionally vested human life with a sense of purpose and meaning.” This is undoubtedly the point that Jones wanted to resonate amidst tutorials on relativity and quantum theory, and this is undoubtedly one of Physics’ great strengths.
From a technical standpoint, it is difficult to critique the details of Jones’ presentation without being a physicist in the first place, and since the book’s title would scarcely seem to interest such a person, there is nothing in the way of a substantive technical evaluation available on Amazon. As an aside, the above reviewer does aptly note that in light of its broader considerations, perhaps Physics should’ve been targeted toward the professional scientific community, as well as “the rest of us,” since its implications ultimately concern everyone. In any event, the virtuous aspects of the book overwhelm anything that might otherwise be considered a glaring weakness, although some reviewers cited the need for more discussion on superstring theory, which is admittedly limited, and others thought that additional drawings should be included (there is only one).
A philosophical critique could be leveled at Jones’ anti-realism, which is not as clearly expounded as it probably should be, though admittedly, his intent was not to convince people of that view as much as it was to shake them from their slumber of scientific fideism. Nevertheless, certain claims seem to be assumed or asserted rather than argued, and this will leave those familiar with the debate hungering for much more information. Additionally, his discourse on science and religion paints with too broad a brush when describing the “war” between the church and science, of which Galileo and Bruno were causalities. Jones writes, “The church long ago recognized the threat to it posed by science,” yet he makes no mention of the amazing contributions to the advancement of physics from likes of Copernicus and Newton, who were motivated by their religious convictions. Similarly, the conflict view between science and religion is assumed to be the case on the contemporary scene: “It is science and not religion that gives the world its rationale, morality, sustenance, and story of creation, such as it is.” And it is clear that Jones’ point is to the exclusion of anything like Gould’s non-overlapping magisteria, when he observes, “Despite protestations that science has nothing to do with religious and spiritual questions, it is science that dictates to the church, and not vice versa.” To his credit, these observations are not endorsements of the presently-perceived state of affairs, but rather lamentations that such a state has happened “unconsciously and without deliberation or consent.” Moreover, he observes that “if we fail to recognize and take account of the deeply religious role that science plays in our lives, we run the risk of destroying not only our material benefits, but our souls as well.”
These relatively minor criticisms notwithstanding, Jones does achieve his objective of providing “a conceptual approach to modern physics with an explanation of its deeper meaning and philosophical significance.” In light of the fact that this objective is clearly stated on page 2, it is surprising that some reviewers were dismayed to find so much philosophical reflection in Physics, though perhaps the nature of the reflection itself is what proved most bothersome, such as Jones’ unapologetic dethroning of science as the tacitly held state religion, or his unusual openness to religious thought and its possible contribution to scientific ideation. One can imagine a proliferation of scathing reviews from today’s science popularizers in response to such tolerance of religious influence and the relegation of scientific authority. The likes of Krauss, Tyson, and Dawkins would undoubtedly subject Jones’ heresy to a modern-day inquisition—an unfortunate reflection of the extent to which the reasonable and respectful treatment of diverging ideas has waned in the past 25 years.
In spite of the fact that Physics is not ‘hot off the presses’, it remains relevant in many important ways. It offers descriptions and illustrations of the major pillars of modern physics which are the same today as they were a quarter-century ago; and, given the hostility-infused scientism marketed largely by today’s “new atheists” and their sympathizers, Jones’ philosophical reflection is as apropos as ever. Thus, Physics is highly recommended for anyone interested in developing a deeper understanding of the remarkable physical world in which they live, and for those who take seriously the responsibility of being informed citizens with respect to the implications of technological advances in physics, as well as science in general. As one insightful reviewer observed, “There is much food for thought in this book...and Jones' lessons on the concepts of physics are just the first course.”
39 of 40 people found the following review helpful.
More than physics
By Gary E. Albers
From reading the earlier customer reviews (none more recent than Jan., 2001), one might assume that this book had reached its intended audience: "...The Rest of Us," i.e., those of us who are not trained physicists. Even the title of the book seems clearly to imply that audience. But the title and the comments of the earlier reviewers are misleading. I would argue that the author was hoping for (and deserves) a wider audience. In particular, his message should resonate strongly with the professional scientific community itself.
The author does provide some of the most intelligible explanations of the major concepts of modern physics that I have ever read--and I've read quite a few. Although my own background includes much technical training--chemistry, mathematics, electronics engineering, and philosophy--I must admit to having stumbled badly over general relativity and quantum mechanics. The pictures the author paints of these theories are probably as close as the human mind can come to visualizing what (we must realize) can not be visualized.
There are also excellent accounts of the Big Bang, quarks and bosons, the expanding universe, dark matter, the four fundamental forces of the physical world and the intense search for a theory that will demonstrate how they are all really different aspects of a single force: a grand unified theory that will explain everything.
If this was all the book was about, the title would be accurate and the author could return to his job as a college professor, secure in the knowledge that he had produced an excellent book on physics for the lay public.
Imagine my surprise when I discovered that interwoven in this excellent work on the concepts of modern physics was a profound and articulate criticism of the role of science in contemporary society. As I read further, it occurred to me that this critique of science was, in fact, the most important topic in the book.
In the author's view, science has become the unofficial religion of our society, a new form of "idolatry." It pervades our institutions, our government, industries and educational policies...and it has done so at the expense of other vital human activities, especially those (e.g., religion and the humanities) that have traditionally vested human life with a sense of purpose and meaning. This is strange stuff coming from a scientist!
Happily, Jones is not a religious fanatic or scientific Luddite who is arguing for a return to the days of old, with science replaced by alchemy, astrology and the Inquisition. His plea is for a balance between science and the humanities. Although science has proven its efficacy at manipulating the physical world, it can not generate those initial ideas or sparks of genius that lead to new, fertile theories; those come from the human mind. Nor can science tell us anything about what we should or shouldn't do with our discoveries--should we use our knowledge of radioactivity to make bigger bombs, or should we save lives with nuclear medicine? Those decisions are ethical ones and must also be human, perhaps originating in something we used to call the "soul."
The author argues forcefully for the usefulness of science. At the same time, he deplores the demise of the humanities, the arts and religion. Most importantly, he warns us that, without increasing the average citizen's knowledge of science and technology, we have little hope of reversing a dangerous trend. The first step is to provide a knowledge of "physics for the rest of us." Then we will be able to take the second step: to regain control of the role that science will play in our lives. There is much food for thought in this book...and Jones' lessons on the concepts of physics are just the first course.
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful.
Unputdownable, Physics for a lay person
By Monson Marukatat
The book's objective: "To combine a conceptual approach to modern physics with an exploration of its deeper meaning and philosophical significance."
What the book tells you: As a Trekkie, I have been intrigued by the way physics plays a crucial role in shaping up modern and future technology. Reading a physics textbook is not an option for me to know more about the subject. The overwhelmed amount of mathematics and statistics involved is too intimidating. This book makes my dream come true. The author is very good in making difficult subjects entertaining to read. Once I started with the first chapter, I read through the rest of the book in a very short time. It reminded me of the time when I read the Da Vinci Code and the Angels & Demons. The subject covered ranges from Newtonian physics to Einstein's relativity to quantum theory. Each topic is divided into 1-2 pages sub-topics so the readers will not get lost as they try to understand it. Bear in mind that is book is about conceptual and not applied physics. I found the philosophical chapters not as entertaining to read as the former part.
What the book does not tell you: The "applied" aspects of physics such as the topics you will find in Hawkin's Universe (singularity, black hole, galaxies) or the Star Trek's stuff (wormhole, anti-matter). String theory was mentioned but very briefly. Isn't this the theory that tries to unify both the relativity and the quantum? If so, it deserves more space as one of the ideas of "Twentieth-Century Physics That Everyone Should Know."
Physics For the Rest of Us, by Roger S. Jones PDF
Physics For the Rest of Us, by Roger S. Jones EPub
Physics For the Rest of Us, by Roger S. Jones Doc
Physics For the Rest of Us, by Roger S. Jones iBooks
Physics For the Rest of Us, by Roger S. Jones rtf
Physics For the Rest of Us, by Roger S. Jones Mobipocket
Physics For the Rest of Us, by Roger S. Jones Kindle
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar