The Life of the Cosmos has ratings and 42 reviews. David said: Lee Smolin presents an interesting hypothesis that attempts to explain why the fundame. CHAPTER ONE. The Life of the Cosmos. By LEE SMOLIN Oxford University Press. Read the Review. LIGHT and LIFE. Science is, above everything else. The life of the cosmos / by Lee Smolin. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN X. ISBN (Pbk.) 1. Cosmology.
|Country:||Central African Republic|
|Published (Last):||10 March 2008|
|PDF File Size:||3.16 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.23 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
These ideas may seem astonishing to the reader, but theorists have often contemplated them.
However, there is a problem with this, because when the electrons move in circles they radiate light waves, which carry energy away from the atom. This should also be this book was mesmerizing. It gives a good overview of big picture and current fundamental problems in physics and cosmology with some emphasis on the philosophical aspects of the smolib. Lee Smolin offers a new theory of the universe that is at once elegant, comprehensive, and radically different from anything proposed before.
His argument is that, under Radical Atomism, particles have fundamental properties, independent from their environment. Gravitation propels our Earth around the Sun thd causes the Universe to expand. It only means that to find such effects, we probably have no alternative but to look at scales much larger than stars and galaxies. In this process, we see that individual and collective intelligence memes, knowledge, self-awareness increasingly influences and constrains the original and persistent “random” replicators genes, DNA.
Not that it’s founded on no science or bad science, but that he pushes “what if” into some areas that might blow our minds my words. All of the living things on earth are made out of carbon compounds that are built with copious amounts of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen, as well as traces of many other atoms.
Another problem with the philosophy of radical atomism is that it gives us little ground to understand why the universe is as organized as it seems to be. The Life of the Cosmos Hardcover edition. This is also thicker with physics, making it a slower go.
But, if we are to understand our place in the universe, we must come to lre it.
Jupiter Scientific participates in Amazon. Smolin posits that a process of self organization like that of biological evolution shapes the universe, as it develops and eventually reproduces through black holes, each of which may result in a new big bang and cos,os new universe. What he has in mind is the problem that modern fosmos theory, including string theory which was the last word when this was written seventeen years ghehave many free parameters such as the values of the forces and masses of the particles which are not constrained by the theories, or could be different and still give rise to consistent interpretations, and which in fact have improbable values.
My body stays at about the same temperature, no matter what the temperature of my environment might be, at least as long as I am healthy. Yes, because it is testable.
Looked at in a new way, smloin familiar world can all of a sudden reveal new meanings. This book is more philosophy of science than science, which is what differentiates it from other popular books on cosmology.
Just give me my science, leave the whining imbeciles out of it. The triumph of atomism is by now so complete that any challenge to it seems at first to point outside of the boundaries of science. Now, Newtonian physics is a beautiful subject, as are the plays of Shakespeare. If the world suddenly became Newtonian smolun would take only a fraction of a second for most of the electrons to fall into the nuclei.
The worse thing about the book is the small font size that Oxford University Press has used. Aug 27, Kev rated it it was amazing Shelves: In this theory, the apparently fine-tuned parameters in physics are a result of a sort of natural selection. These parameters are numbers, such as the masses of particles and the strengths of forces, that can in principle be varied.
The question of the origin of the structure in the universe is then not unlike the question of the origin of life. That takes real skill and Smolin has it.
Also, two distinct and equally true theories: In my opinion, the best argument to date, against a “designed universe” wherein, if any of the physical constants were even a billionth part different, the ramifications would affect the viability of chemistry, star formation and hence, life as we know it.
Most people have an intuitive idea of the meaning of the law of increasing entropy.
I’m looking forward to reading his other books! Humans have an innate desire to seek out reasons for everything. This is, as my literary friends have been telling me for some time, a rather problematic relationship. The best aspect of his hypothesis is that it is “falsifiable”. From a fundamental point of view, a universe filled with a gas of atoms in thermal equilibrium is as plausible as a world full of a variety of structures.
Cosnos is at least one good reason not to believe the physics that is taught in most courses for nonscientists.
Once I got the hang of the idea, I was ready to be done with In this book, Lee Smolin proposes that universes can be naturally selected for based on their production of black holes. If the universe is nothing but atoms moving in a void, then it is hard to understand why it isn’t far simpler than it is.
We shall see that, in spite lre all that we have learned, given the basic principles and laws of nature as we understand them now, it is extraordinarily improbable that the universe be full of stars. The hierarchies of structures that we see in the sky are not random, they are created and maintained by processes that go on in stars and galaxies.
Apr 14, David rated it liked it Shelves: Quotes from The Life of the C Tbe if one changes a coupling constant or a particle mass, the number of black holes should decrease. Views Read View source View history. However, for every “Copernicus,” there are a hundred scientists who have made bold proposals that have turned out to be wrong.