The God Equation

Welcome to the virtual Book Club!
User avatar
CrazyCraftLady
Rear Admiral
None of your business
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2020 10:45 pm
Location: Baltimore-Washington Corridor
House: Ravenclaw

Fandoms

Arts & Crafts

Lifestyle

Vaccines

The God Equation

Post by CrazyCraftLady »

Image

If I knew then what I know now, I probably would have tried to break into science writing. I have strong feelings for what makes good (and bad) science popularizations.

Michio Kaku is a brilliant scientist, and an awesome popularizer. I really enjoyed the last part of the book, where he explains the current state of the Unified Field Theory (his candidate being M Theory, which is not surprising, since that's what he's spent his career researching).

I did NOT enjoy the parts of the book where he talks about the history of science (apparently it starts with the Greeks, stalled out in the Dark Ages, and started up again in the Renaissance). True, that's what they told us back in the day when I (and he) were in public school. The thing is, it didn't make any sense to me then, and I know enough now to recognize the Eurocentricism, and to know a little of what's left OUT of that narrative. It's not his field, and it's not the point of the narrative, but it's so uselessly offensive that I found it off putting. He got better once he got to Newton, and was pretty much OK through the 20th century (although he made it sound like Watson and Crick had the idea for X-Ray diffraction, though he manages to squeak Franklin in there - his point was that the technology which gave us the structure of DNA is based on quantum physics, but his total ignorance of the people involved was offputting...)

Likewise, I'm pretty sure his take on philosophy will offend anyone who knows anything about philosophy.

I'm sure he added all this in to broaden the appeal, and to spark the interest of people who aren't already excited about the fact that string theory automatically combines quantum and gravity. But I just wish he wouldn't...

Other than that, readable, and it makes the science approachable for the non scientifically inclined. Nowhere as good as Brian Greene's stuff, but I'm glad I read it.

(it also included a factoid which Steve will, alas, never make an Atomic question out of, because I told it to him, but definitely should, because it's just so DAMN cool...)
‘Meow’ says the knitter. :twisted: