Skip to main content

The One - Heinrich Päs ****

At first glance this book has all the hallmarks of an attempt to tie quantum woo into ancient philosophical and religious beliefs, where some vague resemblance between an ancient observation about, say, 'the oneness of everything' and some aspect of quantum physics is given as evidence of the great wisdom of the ancients. In practice, if you make vague enough statements they can be said to prefigure anything - and have no connection to modern science. Thankfully, though, that's not what much of Heinrich Päs's book is about.

What Päs sets out to show is that the reason that quantum physics can seem strange, if not downright weird, is that we are looking at things from the wrong direction. Quantum physics is hugely successful at practical stuff - predicting what will happen to enable successful design of, for example, electronics, but doesn't have a big picture: there is no satisfactory explanation of what's going on 'under the hood'. Päs suggests this is because we're looking at it the wrong way - it is impossible, he suggests, to truly understand what's really happening from the reductive viewpoint of particles and their interaction, we need start from a holistic view of the universe because everything interacts with everything else.

There's some excellent material in here, including a really good historical summary of the way that quantum physics has managed to be hugely successful while at the same time physicists have papered over the cracks of what is really happening - what's sometimes referred to as 'shut up and calculate'. There's no doubt that most of the science here is, while speculative, based on solid physics. (This is as opposed to the theology, for example, where Päs conjures up a totally fictional and rather hilarious battle between his ‘monism’ view of quantum mechanics and monotheistic religions, inevitably deploying Giordano Bruno.)

What's less sure, though, is whether or not this speculation is anything more than vaguely interesting. Päs suggests that the way to get to what's really happening is to start from the universe as a whole. This can be both technically true and practically useless. For example, you might argue the only way to fundamentally understand why you decided to have croissants for breakfast was to gather data on every single one of the 1027 atoms in your body. This may in principle be true, but in practice is totally useless as we both can't collect the data and can't do anything with it in a useful way. Similarly, we might get a better understanding of what is really happening when two quantum particles interact by studying the universe as a whole - but practically speaking it won't tell us anything.

It's also true that the book doesn't entirely avoid falling into the ancient wisdom trap. For example, we read 'as startling as it is, as long as fifty centuries ago the ancient Egyptians knew something very similar to entanglement'. That's on a par with Erich von Daniken in Chariots of the Gods saying that the book of Ezekiel in the Bible describes a spaceship. No - it's retrofitting a vague imagining from the past to a unlinked modern scientific idea and has no value.

As long as you can resist groaning at these references to ancient parallels, there's indubitably interesting content here, which is why I've given it four stars. However, despite the tag line calling this the 'future of physics', the monism concept at its heart is ascientific - it's highly unlikely it will ever be experimentally provable or have any meaningful impact on physical theory.  I am far more interested in popular science that describes theory that links to experiment and has practical value, but as an exploration of one of the less painful aspects of such speculation, this still makes for an interesting read.

Hardback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
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