Skip to main content

On the Origin of Time - Thomas Hertog ****

Perhaps the most remarkable thing about Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time is that it says hardly anything about the nature of time. (The second most remarkable thing is how few of the people who bought it actually read it.) This book from Thomas Hertog, one of Hawking's former students, subtitled 'Stephen Hawking's final theory' very much follows the same line. Again it's far more about cosmology and black holes than it is about the nature of things temporal. And although I would say it's probably better written than the earlier book (and certainly far better than The Grand Design), this is a book that probably needs the reader to have a greater ability to take in technical details than A Brief History.

What I really like about this book is that it gives fascinating insights into the way that theoretical physics evolves. Hertog gives us an inside view of how Hawking and his colleagues worked - he is clearly in awe of Hawking to the point of hero-worship, but it remains enlightening. Things progress sometimes with major shifts of approach, sometimes by patching up flaws where an apparently beautiful theory doesn’t match reality. This was the case with the original big bang, and Hawking’s no boundary approach described here (where the universe begins without a beginning), which as originally formulated would have resulted in a universe bearing no resemblance to our own. Interestingly, Herzog doesn’t really explain why when Fred Hoyle did something similar for his steady state theory it was ignored - fashion makes a significant contribution to the success or otherwise of these kinds of highly speculative theories. 

In an attempt to get away from the idea of taking a 'god's eye' external view of the universe we are part of, we are told that Hawking et al developed a 'top down cosmology'. Here things start to feel very hand-waving - far more a matter of philosophy than physics. Herzog describes how they see the present influencing the past - but this feels very circular, along the lines of 'things are like they are now so we can ignore outcomes that don't lead to that, even if they seem very unlikely from the theory'… but it feels harder to justify the theory in the first place if this is the case. There are echoes too of Heinrich Päs' recent The One.

Broadly, there are two ways to write a popular science book about a complex theory. You can attempt to explain it as well as you can without the underlying mathematics, or you can not explain it at all, but just state what the theory does without looking under the hood. Each approach has its problems. The explanations of those trying to put forward a maths-based theory without equations inevitably fall short of what the theory is really about. And the 'never explain' approach, which is used by Hertog, can easily present as fact what is in reality highly speculative and quite likely impossible to prove through experiment or observation. Reading this book, for example, you would not suspect that string theory or the existence of dark matter particles were in any way contentious. 

Depending on your approach to such things, this is either fascinating, leading edge theoretical physics or something more akin to theology - ascientific rather than science in the traditional sense. You pays your money and you takes your choice. Personally, the 'science' leaves me cold, but the insider view of the way highly speculative theoretical physics was developed by Hawking and colleagues made this an unmissable 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

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

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