Skip to main content

QED - Richard Feynman ****

When a book is a classic of the field it can be easy to forget to review it. Richard Feynman's 1985 QED is one of the best-thumbed books on my shelves, and still in print - so it seemed sensible to cover it. Because Feynman has a number of books with his name on the cover from his remarkable anecdotes in Surely You are Joking Mister Feynman? to the anything-but-popular-science Red Book (The Feynman Lectures on Physics), it can be a surprise to realise that he never wrote a book per se. What we get in print is either transcripts of lectures, shorter pieces collected or interviews.

In the case of QED it was a lecture series given at UCLA to cover quantum electrodynamics - as the subtitle tells us, the strange theory of light and matter (and particularly light and electrons where much of the interaction takes place). Feynman tells us that the book 'purports to be a record of the lectures', but has been significantly edited by Ralph Leighton. Along the way, the reader gains an insight into Feynman diagrams, but most of all into the way that the interactions between light and matter are not like the classical ideas of a wave or a particle, say, bouncing off a mirror, but instead involve a more complex and far more fascinating interplay where phase and probability amplitudes have to be considered.

One thing you can certainly say about this book is it's a source of some Feynman's most famous quotes, notably '[Y]ou think I’m going to explain it to you so you can understand it? No, you’re not going to be able to understand it. Why, then, am I going to bother you with all this? Why are you going to sit here all this time, when you won’t be able to understand what I am going to say? It is my task to persuade you not to turn away because you don’t understand it. You see, my physics students don’t understand it either. This is because I don’t understand it. Nobody does.'

In a sense this is borderline as popular science. It's certainly aimed at the public, and doesn't contain much in the way of mathematics, but you do have to work a little to follow some of the more obscure sections.  Feynman says 'Many "popular" expositions of science achieve apparent simplicity only by describing something different, something considerably distorted from what they claim to be describing. Respect for our subject did not permit us to do this.' And this does sometimes mean more detail and fiddly diagrams than can make for ideal readability.

It remains an important book, both in terms of getting a look at quantum electrodynamics from the horse's mouth and as a historical document in its own right. I've got a lot from this book and I hope you will too.

Bizarrely, although you can buy this book on Kindle in German it doesn't appear to be available this way in English.

Paperback:   

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee or taking out a membership:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...

How to Keep a Plane in the Sky - Alex Davies ****

If there's one big gap in the science writing sphere, it's popular engineering (you can quibble over whether engineering is science, but where else would you put popular engineering?). Alex Davies does the field a real service with this insightful introduction to the world of test engineering. The concept is simple. If we build something and sell it, we need to test it to make sure that it won't fail in a way that's dangerous to the consumer. The most obvious example is airliners, which feature at some length, but this applies to everything from cuddly toys to hair straighteners: someone needs to predict what could go wrong and to put the product through its paces to see if it will survive under any reasonable circumstances. When Davies is telling a story of test engineering in action, the book is a delight. He opens with the way that real bears are used to test if bears can get into coolers and trash cans - and the impressive ways these animals can  circumvent human in...

On the Equality of All Things - Carlo Rovelli ****

There is a wide gulf between the worldviews of physicists and philosophers. Many physicists present a rather sweetly naive, child-like view of the world, where philosophers bring a distinctly more adult, cynical tone. This being the case, it can be a little worrying when a physicist dips a toe into the philosophical mire. Infamously, in The Grand Design , Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow told us that philosophy was now dead because science could deal with anything it had previously been needed for. Thankfully, Carlo Rovelli is not trying to do away with philosophy, though it has to be said that when he veers into the topic that physicist's naivety can make it feel like the philosophising of an earnest eighteen-year-old. Take the opening paragraph, which tells us 'electrons and minds, stones and laws, judgements and galaxies do not essentially differ in nature from one another. They are notions that illuminate each other'. I almost expected a Pink Floyd soundtr...