First time on sale
$11.00 lower (
%85 savings) than the regular price of
$12.99
Available Retailers:Author | Michio Kaku |
Publisher | Anchor |
Publication date | April 6, 2021 |
Print length | 215 pages |
Customer Reviews | ★★★★★ / 3,351 ratings |
Great on Kindle | ✅ |
#1 NEW YORK TIMES BEST SELLER •The epic story of the greatest quest in all of science—the holy grail of physics that would explain the creation of the universe—from renowned theoretical physicist and author of The Future of the Mind and The Future of Humanity
When Newton discovered the law of gravity, he unified the rules governing the heavens and the Earth. Since then, physicists have been placing new forces into ever-grander theories.
But perhaps the ultimate challenge is achieving a monumental synthesis of the two remaining theories—relativity and the quantum theory. This would be the crowning achievement of science, a profound merging of all the forces of nature into one beautiful, magnificent equation to unlock the deepest mysteries in science: What happened before the Big Bang? What lies on the other side of a black hole? Are there other universes and dimensions? Is time travel possible? Why are we here?
Kaku also explains the intense controversy swirling around this theory, with Nobel laureates taking opposite sides on this vital question. It is a captivating, gripping story; what's at stake is nothing less than our conception of the universe.
Written with Kaku's trademark enthusiasm and clarity, this epic and engaging journey is the story of
The God Equation.
More eBooks Deals
https://smile.amazon.com/God-Equa...B08CTGL22R
12 Comments
Your comment cannot be blank.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Kaku is one of a number of string theorists who were not completely honest about how speculative string theory was. When experimental results in the last several years pretty much limited string theory to the realm of mathematics, Kaku pivoted and started peddling all kinds of speculative physics.
He is still deceptive about the difference between accepted and speculative physics. This stuff isn't fantasy. These are models that do not replace but extend accepted physics and are consistent with observations but haven't resulted in predictions that aren't explainable any other way. One or more of these ideas may be correct. It's just that nothing in this book is experimentally verified or widely accepted to be correct. Historically, speculative physics has shown to be wrong much, much, much, much, much more than it is right.
What Kaku is doing is harmful and erodes public trust. Ideas that are correct, such as relativity or evolution or anti-matter are mixed and confused with interesting ideas which will later be discovered to be incorrect. You see this in a comment below where someone dismisses anti-matter which every bit as real and true as anything else in physics. The commenter also mentions dark matter, which is better described as a description of gravitational anomalies observed many different ways at a cosmological scale. It may or may not be an undiscovered particle. If it turns out that there is no dark matter but the theory of gravity is incomplete and has to be completed to work at cosmological scales then people will lose even more trust in physics.
This is why it's important to be clear about speculative and accepted physics.
Kaku is one of a number of string theorists who were not completely honest about how speculative string theory was. When experimental results in the last several years pretty much limited string theory to the realm of mathematics, Kaku pivoted and started peddling all kinds of speculative physics.
He is still deceptive about the difference between accepted and speculative physics. This stuff isn't fantasy. These are models that do not replace but extend accepted physics and are consistent with observations but haven't resulted in predictions that aren't explainable any other way. One or more of these ideas may be correct. It's just that nothing in this book is experimentally verified or widely accepted to be correct. Historically, speculative physics has shown to be wrong much, much, much, much, much more than it is right.
What Kaku is doing is harmful and erodes public trust. Ideas that are correct, such as relativity or evolution or anti-matter are mixed and confused with interesting ideas which will later be discovered to be incorrect. You see this in a comment below where someone dismisses anti-matter which every bit as real and true as anything else in physics. The commenter also mentions dark matter, which is better described as a description of gravitational anomalies observed many different ways at a cosmological scale. It may or may not be an undiscovered particle. If it turns out that there is no dark matter but the theory of gravity is incomplete and has to be completed to work at cosmological scales then people will lose even more trust in physics.
This is why it's important to be clear about speculative and accepted physics.
Same! I almost bought it before I read that comment.
You still mad that god doesn't exist?🤣
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Obviously...
He is still deceptive about the difference between accepted and speculative physics. This stuff isn't fantasy. These are models that do not replace but extend accepted physics and are consistent with observations but haven't resulted in predictions that aren't explainable any other way. One or more of these ideas may be correct. It's just that nothing in this book is experimentally verified or widely accepted to be correct. Historically, speculative physics has shown to be wrong much, much, much, much, much more than it is right.
What Kaku is doing is harmful and erodes public trust.
Some of the predictions and models are later verified (e.g., Einstein's work) but, as you wrote, others are not. This is still valuable work. I'm not saying all theoretical physicists are pursuing equally fruitful areas but I appreciate efforts to try and drive knowledge forward, even if it ultimately is misguided. The mathematical models can often be applied to other areas.
Kaku's books had a major influence in getting me into science (I don't do physics but am a neuroscientist). They had an influence on two friends of mine becoming physicists (although neither are theoretical physicists). He's an excellent science writer and communicator. Some of what he covers is what can be called more esoteric. Some of what he covers gets close to the "fringe" but it's possible to appreciate and value his books for communicating complex ideas.
Maybe some of his most recent books have gone off the deep end, so to speak, I don't know. I haven't read his newest books but will get through this one and if needed, revise my opinion. I read the introduction to the book and in there he clearly writes about all the failed attempts to reach the unified field theory. He clearly points out that we have "no solid, testable evidence" of string theory and ultimately might never be able to verify it. "This book will hopefully give you a balanced, objective analysis of string theory's breakthroughs and limitations." That sounds like him being a good scientist to me.
I'd love to see specific examples you can provide of his books or work harming public trust (in what -- science?).