You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Douglas_Knight comments on Open Thread, Apr. 27 - May 3, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: Gondolinian 27 April 2015 12:18AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (352)
Tags: open_thread

Comments (352)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: iarwain1 29 April 2015 11:31:16PM 4 points [-]

I'm looking for a book, or a combination of up to 5 books, that fulfills the following requirements:

  • At least a pretty good coverage of the all the major subjects in modern fundamental physics & cosmology (at least those that can be covered without going too deep into the math)
  • An emphasis on the philosophical implications and interpretations of the different leading theories. So it should cover all the major different interpretations of quantum mechanics, the meaning of space and time, the philosophical implications of multiple universes, etc.
  • Gives solid coverage to the major competing alternatives rather than just promoting a single controversial view. (Alternatively, I could try a combination of different books where each promotes a single view, but between them they cover all the major views.)
  • Very low math requirements: if there's anything more than high school math then that math needs to be extremely well explained and probably very dumbed-down.
  • Very clear and well-written.
  • As up to date as possible, although this is a bit less important than the other requirements.

Textbooks are fine, as long as they meet all those requirements.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 30 April 2015 12:37:13AM *  2 points [-]

Penrose

Comment author: iarwain1 30 April 2015 12:38:50AM 0 points [-]

I tried it, but I struggled with a lot of the math past chapter 5 or so.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 30 April 2015 12:43:51AM 1 point [-]

The math is self-contained, just difficult, right?

Comment author: Epictetus 30 April 2015 09:02:30PM 3 points [-]

There are two categories of "self-contained":

  1. Logically self-contained, which just means that the treatment doesn't assume outside knowledge. Difficulty level is not bounded from above.

  2. Beginner-friendly, which means the presentation is tailored to people without a strong background in the subject.

Penrose falls squarely in Category 1. An intelligent reader can probably push the definitions around enough to follow the presentation, but that's not the same as understanding what's actually going on.

Comment author: pragmatist 30 April 2015 07:04:30AM 2 points [-]

That's correct, but it is difficult enough to effectively not be self-contained, I think. Being able to apprehend the concepts at the pace and brevity at which Penrose introduces them would require significant prior training in thinking mathematically, or a quite unusually agile mind.

Comment author: iarwain1 30 April 2015 01:17:15AM 1 point [-]

I don't actually remember, it's been a while. I do remember that it's not completely explained - he does skip steps (and that's not just me, I read that in a review of the book). I also remember getting confused and frustrated. I bought the book with high hopes and put more than a little bit of effort into it, but eventually I gave it away to someone who knew more math.

I suppose I could go take it out of the library and try again.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit