Skip to main content

Einstein's Unfinished Revolution - Lee Smolin ****

You wait years for a book on the interpretations of quantum theory and then they appear in droves. In reality though, it's a good thing - each of them has brought its own slant and approach, and never more so than in Einstein's Unfinished Revolution from theoretical physicist Lee Smolin.

 Although Smolin takes us on a tour of the best-known interpretations, he sets out his intention from the beginning - he is a realist and wants an interpretation that incorporates realism. That might not seem much of an ask - surely everyone in science wants realism? - until you realise that the long-prevailing approach, the Copenhagen interpretation is anti-realist. This is because we're dealing with a particularly theoretical physics view of the world. It's not that those who have held the Copenhagen interpretation don't think the world as a whole is real. Rather that the requirement that, say, a quantum particle has no location, just probabilities, until it interacts with something means that quantum theory is not a description of something 'real' in the usual sense.

The lack of realism was one of the reasons that Einstein became so uncomfortable with the way quantum theory was developing, making his famous remarks about playing dice, and Smolin plays this up as a defender of Einstein's position, particularly in the preface to the book. I found the way this was done a trifle disingenuous, as Einstein was also unhappy with non-locality, the idea that, say one quantum particle can influence another instantly at any distance - and it's impossible to have realism in quantum theory without non-locality. But this is only a passing irritation.

Smolin comes down firmly on the side of realism, more it seems for intuitive reasons than anything else, and accordingly looks at the possible approaches that embrace this. He gives an excellent overview of the deBroglie-Bohm pilot wave interpretation, which he clearly likes - in it, particles are real, always having a specific location - but is honest about issues with it, notably his dislike of the way that particles are steered by the pilot waves, but the particles can't influence the waves. He then takes us through the Many Worlds approach, which he impressively shreds (rather beautifully referring to it as 'magical realism'), before introducing one or two more esoteric possibilities.

Up to this point, Smolin has done what others have done, and does it very well, managing all this without any mathematics and with clear, approachable language. But then he faces the problem square on. No approach is totally satisfactory. And, for that matter, no one has managed to bring general relativity and quantum theory together despite decades of trying. He suggests, then, that we need to take a step back and start from scratch, giving us an overview of some, at the moment very toy, approaches to doing this.

This section is much harder to follow than the rest. When Smolin outlines his current ideas involving networks* of 'nads', what strikes me is both fascination and sadness. Fascination to see how such an edifice is constructed, but sadness because, for me, what he constructs seems far further from any idea of a comprehensible worldview than even the Copenhagen anti-realism. This is the only place where I got the feeling of a theoretical physicist detached from the rest of us, except when Smolin makes the assertion that the anti-science efforts of climate change deniers and some religious extremes reflects a lack of trust in science because of anti-realist quantum interpretations. This seems a very parochial worldview that, dare I say it, suggests theoretical physics has more influence in the world than it really has.

That isn't the end, though. Although very inward looking, it's well worth persevering with Smolin's short epilogue in which he explains the difficulties of making the leap away from the standard approaches at a fundamental level and starting over within the confines of the academic system, and ponders whether to make the leap - I found this genuinely moving.

Overall, while more effort was needed to make the nads comprehensible (and particularly seeming anything like reality), the book is an excellent contribution to thriving debate on what to do about the elderly enfant terrible of physics, quantum theory.

* Purists: I know they're not strictly networks, but it's alliterative. 
Hardback:  

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more