I'm looking forward to hearing your views, because as said, my knowledge on quantum mechanics is somewhat spotty, on the level of pop science, and apart from what I've read regarding string theory mathematics, probably not very current.
As for the Hawking books, at least A Brief History is getting to the point where it has more value as a document of scientific history, rather than as an accurate portrayal of how today's cosmological theories understand the structure of the universe. Well, re WMAP data and ever-expanding vs. expanding-contracting universe models, at least. I haven't read any of the new printings of the book, though.
Being a mathematician (well, applied math), I'm far more interested in Gödel's incompleteness theorem than in his yammerings about the structure of the universe. And I do subscribe to the many-worlds theory as being the most viable way of enabling time travel, but who knows -- maybe magic works in Gödelian ways. It seems to be fine disregarding the First Law of Thermodynamics, too. ;)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2005-03-23 01:39 am (UTC)As for the Hawking books, at least A Brief History is getting to the point where it has more value as a document of scientific history, rather than as an accurate portrayal of how today's cosmological theories understand the structure of the universe. Well, re WMAP data and ever-expanding vs. expanding-contracting universe models, at least. I haven't read any of the new printings of the book, though.
Being a mathematician (well, applied math), I'm far more interested in Gödel's incompleteness theorem than in his yammerings about the structure of the universe. And I do subscribe to the many-worlds theory as being the most viable way of enabling time travel, but who knows -- maybe magic works in Gödelian ways. It seems to be fine disregarding the First Law of Thermodynamics, too. ;)