Wide Range of Topics/Wide range of explanations
I really enjoyed reading this book. I am not very proficient in some of the areas covered. I thought the book did a great job of explaining the topics and then giving me some of the explanations that are possible and then finally coming to a conclusion. The book will definitely make you think and understand how little human beings really know about the universe they reside in. I feel after reading this book I know what questions should be asked and I now I have a better grasp of some of the world's greatest mysteries.
Error prone, biased and uninteresting
This book was a very disappointing gift.
I found Vacca's explanations of science's current puzzles to be tedious and frustrating. Most of the topics are explained in tedious detail, yet not enough detail to permit real understanding. As an example, it is perhaps impossible to explain the first few milliseconds after the Big Bang without heavy use of mathematics - yet Vacca tries, using extensive, vague and (to me) uninteresting prose. He repeats this performance, attempting to deal with issues ranging from quantum gravity to protein folding to free will.
The frustration is made worse by the inclusion of many grammatical and technical errors. There were more of these errors than I've seen in any comparable volume. He also makes excessive use of boldly-highlighted mid-page "Notes" boxes - which really should be relegated to footnotes.
Finally, Vacca's self-conferred mantle of scientific objectivity is destroyed in the chapter on "Free Energy." He seems to believe it's possible to suck all the energy the earth needs from the cosmic ether. So much for the laws of thermodynamics! His "Notes" in this chapter consist of jabs at the "naysayers and skeptics" with little clue that these "naysayers" comprise over 99% of the world's scientists.
If a layman wants a technical, yet non-mathematical explanation of cosmology and quantum physics, Hawking is much, much better. If a layman wants a well written and wide-ranging overview of science, Bill Bryson's _A Short History of Nearly Everything_ is much more engaging.
Fascinating despite some repetition and some fuzziness
The problems range from dark matter and dark energy through attempts to reconcile gravity and quantum mechanics to problems associated with DNA and proteins, to neuroscientific concerns about free will and consciousness to what to do about nuclear fusion and its waste.
There are other books on cutting edge problems in science that I have read, e.g., John Malone's Unsolved Mysteries of Science: A Mind-Expanding Journey through a Universe of Big Bangs, Particle Waves, and Other Perplexing Concepts (2001) or The Next Fifty Years: Science in the First Half of the Twenty-First Century (2002) edited by John Brockman; but there is only one other that is anywhere near as ambitious as this work. That book would be Magic Universe: The Oxford Guide to Modern Science (2003) by Nigel Calder.
To compare these two books for the reader I would say that Calder's book is not only longer but covers more ground, is better edited and relies on a greater range of scientific authority. But Vacca's book has the virtue of narrowing in on just where the scientific action is while he does a good job of presenting the various opinions. That is, insofar as I, personally, can tell. To be honest, much of the material in all these books is above my level of expertise. Consequently I take most of what I read at face value. Clearly I cannot choose between cosmological models of inflation and quintessence. Nor do I have any firsthand experience with the complications of protein folding, etc. But neither will most readers. However we needn't be critical readers. It is enough to read appreciably about the wonders of science and how such wonders inform our beliefs and enrich our lives.
As for the repetition in the book and the typos and the other errors pointed out by other readers, it is good to understand that Vacca wrote this book by himself (although he interviewed and relied on the work of many scientists) and probably did so in a first draft/correct it mode (judging again from the repetition and some of the unpolished prose). Let's face it, life is short and a book like this needs to be written fast or it will become outdated before it hits the book stores. Furthermore, although he had editors to check for technical errors, editors to check his spelling and such, and had the benefit of the professionals at Prentice Hall, it is in the nature of a book like this that no single person with the exception of the author can really be close enough to the content to adequately edit it.
Now I want to look at a couple of the problems that Vacca discusses.
He talks about traveling back into the past and asserts that the usual paradoxes relating to killing your grandfather before your parents were born, etc. can be overcome by having you go back to a past in a parallel universe. Relying on the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics (which he seems to favor), Vacca finds this reasonable. The problem, however, is that Vacca has already in a previous chapter made it clear that there is no interaction between postulated parallel universes, so he ends up justifying travel to the past by making it doubly difficult: not only do you have to violate causality but you have to go to a parallel universe to do so! I imagine he would say in response that by going to another universe you actually avoid the violation of causality since you do not in any way affect the universe you are in. However to go back in time in the other universe you have to be in that universe.
Vacca suggests that the dark matter that cosmologists are now utterly convinced exists because of its gravitation presence is perhaps an example of a parallel universe. Actually he takes the opposite perspective and asks if a parallel universe exists (parallel to the dark matter) and answers that it does. It is us. (p.115)
Since gravity that makes us aware of the existence of that dark universe (and remember there is no evidence of any information about the dark matter via the electromagnetic force or the weak or strong nuclear forces) could it not make them aware of us? (Assuming there is somebody there to be aware.) Perhaps some day we will communicate with other universes through some type of gravitational mechanism. (Huh?--Well, maybe.)
On free will Vacca uses basically three authorities, Timothy O'Connor, Miroslav Backonja, and Paul J. Bertics, and from them constructs what he sees as the current understanding by neuroscience. I wasn't even aware that neuroscientists had a position on free will. I thought it was a purely philosophic or religious question. The opposing camps of naturalism (no such thing as free will) and libertarians (humans have free will) are reconciled in the neuroscientific community through the idea of "compatibilism," a word I encountered here for the first time. What it means is that the lack of free will (which most neuroscientists, Buddhists and myself, among others see as obvious) is made compatible with the societal and human psychological need to believe in free will (for punishment and criminal deterrence) by realizing that in an Orwellian way we can say that free will does not exist, but in order for society to run smoothly we must pretend that it does. Vacca discusses the ramifications from this doublethink and concludes that whether free will is an illusion or not depends on your point of view. Your free will is obvious, but that of others has to be taken on their say so.
Here's an example of Vacca's sometimes strikingly expressive prose: "As much as free will exposes humans to the threat of unlimited retaliation for wrong-doing, it nevertheless compensates them by making them the lords of their little domains, the micro-gods of their minds." (p. 394)
The worst science book that I have read recently
The book coveres big topics, e.g., free energy (Chapter 19) and nuclear fusion (Chapter 20). The author, however, did not even get simple facts correct. W (watt) is incorrectly identified as "Tungsten" on p.623 and 625. JET is said to be "Joint European Toms" (p.626). It should be "Torus" instead of "Toms". I wonder how many Toms are there in Europe under this scheme. It is a waste of tree to print this book.
The World's 20 Greatest Unsolved Problems
This textbook is a comprehensive treaty on the 20 unsolved problems of this century. The unsolved problems are well laid out in a logical sequence. The style and the presentation of the text makes it easy reading for non-technical readers.
The 20 unsloved problems are thought provoking, and reminds us that we are far from understanding this world we live in.
Astronomy: The mystery of dark matter - is there any other state of matter!!! The creation of this universe - a puzzle?
Physics: A very concise and an excellent discussion on the nature of fundamental elementary particles and can there be a consistent theory of Quantum Gravity? If so, then we would know the mind of GOD.
Biology: DNA and multi-celluar life. Is there a computer program hidden in the DNA!
Paleontology: How present day microbiological information can be used to construct the ancient tree of life.
Neuroscience: Are we responsible for out actions? Lawyers would have a field day on this topic. Now for the ultimate mystery of all the mysteries - Consciouness.
Geology: This should make an interesting reading for those of us who live in California.
Chemistry: It is the essnece of formation of chemical bonds, without which there would be no DNA, hence no life as we understand.
Free Energy: Is there a such a thing as Free Lunch, I put it?
John has done an excellent work in presenting the most fascinating problems of this century. This should make an interesting reading for any inquiring mind.
Highly recommend.
(29 reviews)
