Stephen Hawking: A Brief History Of Time

[beer good]

I have to say this bit cracked me up.

There are other models to explain Cygnus X-1 that do not include a black hole, but they are all rather farfetched. A black hole seems to be the only really natural explanation of the observations. Despite this, I have a bet with Kip Thorne of the California Institute of Technology that in fact Cygnus X-1 does not contain a black hole! This is a form of insurance policy for me. I have done alot of work on black holes, and it would all be wasted if it turned out that black holes do not exist. But in that case, I would have the consolation of winning my bet, which would bring me four years of the magazine 'Private Eye'. If black holes do exist, Kip will get one year of 'Penthouse'.

(Apparently, Hawking has since conceded that black holes do exist, and Kip Thorne has enjoyed his subscription to Penthouse; his wife, less so.)

 

[Peder]

Serious physicists seem to be a playful bunch. :whistling:

 

[beer good]

Which is what I liked about that passage. I'd hate for "serious physicists" to be so serious about their job that they lost their sense of humour. :flowers:

The book is excellent so far, btw - though I'd lie if I said I understood everything, and I'm a bit miffed that I picked up an older edition, but for someone with an IQ that's probably twice that of anyone here, Hawking is a very good teacher. And there's something to be said for reading a book by someone who can rightfully say things like (paraphrased) "Until I proved Einstein wrong..."

 

[-Carlos-]

Richard Dawkins has my ear.

 

[beer good]

Another example of physicists' humour, this time talking about the Big Bang:

This picture of a hot early stage of the universe was first put forward by the scientist George Gamow in a famous paper written in 1948 with a student of his, Ralph Alpher. Gamow had quite a sense of humor – he persuaded the nuclear scientist Hans Bethe to add his name to the paper to make the list of authors “Alpher, Bethe, Gamow,” like the first three letters of the Greek alphabet, alpha, beta, gamma: particularly appropriate for a paper on the beginning of the universe!

(p.124)

 

[Cosimah2o]

beer good, have you got the illustrated version of this book?

For those with no physics background this version has the virtue of 240 pictures which make following Hawking's text a bit easier to follow. Instead of equations, one finds very simple diagrams explaining some of the physical phenomena: space-time, relativity, black holes, the Big Bang.

 

[Cosimah2o]

Serious physicists seem to be a playful bunch. :whistling:

Right Peter, even when they change a light bulb :lol:

Q: How many general relativitists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Two. One to hold the bulb and one to rotate the universe.

Q: How many astronomers does it take to change a light bulb?
A: None, astronomers prefer the dark.

Q: How many quantum physicists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: None, once they have observed it is out it has already changed.

Q: How many particle physicists are necessary to change a light bulb?
A: Two hundred: 136 to smash it up + 64 to analyse the tiny pieces.

Q: How many theoretical physicists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: They can't change light bulbs but they can run expensive simulations which predict the lifetime of the bulb with order of magnitude accuracy.

 

[beer good]

beer good, have you got the illustrated version of this book?

For those with no physics background this version has the virtue of 240 pictures which make following Hawking's text a bit easier to follow. Instead of equations, one finds very simple diagrams explaining some of the physical phenomena: space-time, relativity, black holes, the Big Bang.

Mine's the 1988 paperback edition, so there are illustrations in it, but they're rather small and black and white. Very helpful, but I'm sure more could have been done...

I finished this on Friday; really liked it, and though I'd be lying if I said I understood everything, Hawking is a good teacher and he almost makes me feel not stupid. Almost. It's a very good introduction to physics, both the hows and the whys, from the beginning of the universe to us being here trying to figure it out before we're sucked into a black hole, with lots of interesting examples and anecdotes. Of course, the trick to writing a layman's guide to advanced (very advanced) physics is to try and explain how we know what we know, and why we want to know it, and he's very good at that; I think I finally understood how redshift works, for instance. Hawking writes really well, managing to both lecture and converse with the reader, but somehow the book feels far too short - you're just beginning to understand one concept (and want to know more about it) when he moves on to the next. , I guess.

 

[Cosimah2o]

Richard Feynman had a great sense of humour. If you allow me, I would like to recommend 2 books:

Surely you are joking Mr. Feynman! & The Pleasure of Finding Things Out. ​

 

[beer good]

Richard Feynman had a great sense of humour. If you allow me, I would like to recommend 2 books:

Surely you are joking Mr. Feynman! & The Pleasure of Finding Things Out. ​

I've had those two on my "Buy them if you stumble across them at a reasonable price" list for some time. Will move them up. Thanks!

 

[sparkchaser]

I think Hawking has done the best job to date of explaining that stuff on the level of the layman. That being said, there were a few bits that I had a hard time understanding too. I guess we can't all be physicists.