Reading it made me

[Guest gcursor]

I'm not the dumbest person on the planet nor am I a rocket scientist either. So I decided to sit down and read A BRIEFER HISTORY OF TIME by Stephen Hawking. This book is the ABBREVIATED version of A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME and everybody touts the books as being something that ANYBODY can read and understand no matter how much you know about time/space/etc. I have been reading very patiently about curved space and relativity and the other topics contained therin. I try to read in small pieces so that I can try to digest and understand what is presented.

After reading the material I have thus far, I feel as if I'm a dog that has discovered its tail and started chasing it faster and faster and faster! OH WHAT JOY! Finally, I get tired and rest then I notice the tail again and chase the tail faster and faster and faster ONCE MORE! Then I rest again all out of breath and then I throw up.

Apparently I am the BIGGEST moron on the planet because every #$@#$ review I read talks about how easy this book is to understand. Now that I've started reading the stupid book, I have to FINISH it one way or another which either means I'll probably end up in a coma from trying to understand string theory OR I'll end up BURNING the book just so I won't have to see it on my bookshelf ever again.

Has anybody else ever had this happen to them with a book they read before or this book in particular?

[Guest EXPAT]

YES. But I usually find it's because I'm unable to focus for whatever reason. Sometimes if I put it away and come back to it later it comes easier. Sometimes it doesn't. Then I find it's because my interest lies elsewhere. So it may be one of those reasons and not your intellect.

[Guest hitoallusa]

String theory is just a far fetched theory without any scientific evidence to support it. Some scientists are skeptical about it. It's more like a philosophical topic at this point. So no worries.

[Guest gcursor]

*stares at Hitoallusa with mouth wide open* you understand string theory? you never fail to amaze me as a person with your knowledge and compassion.

gcursor

String theory is just a far fetched theory without any scientific evidence to support it. Some scientists are skeptical about it. It's more like a philosophical topic at this point. So no worries.

[caeron]

I've met Dr. Hawking a couple of times, including having dinner with him. He said that if he didn't talk over people's heads at least some, they wouldn't think it was worth their time :-). Having heard his lectures, I think anybody who says its easy to understand is full of shit, or trying to pretend they're smarter than they are. I find it quite hard to grasp.

I disagree about Hitoallusa on string theory though, having also had dinner with Brian Greene (my job has its occasional perks.). There is a difference in saying we can't prove the theory, and saying there is no scientific basis for it. It may or may not be correct, but it does fit the existing scientific evidence, and so the reason it has its supporters. There are also skeptics, but the jury is out.

The challenge is that we're testing the limits of our technology to devise scientific tests that can prove or disprove some of these theories.

[MsGuy]

Caeron, I agree that folks that aren't fluent in math are fooling themselves if they think they can understand this stuff. At best we English speakers can latch onto some verbal analogies that the math guys assure us (with a wink and a nod among themselves) convey the general concepts.

I'm told that, aside from resolving a number of knotty problems in the standard model of physics, string theory is favored by math types for its elegance. Apparently pretty is as important in mathematics as it is in escorting.

I'm also told that the main criticism of string theory lies in its failure after 40 years of work to provide any testable predictions that would allow it to be falsified. As I understand it, damn near any result from a test would be allowed by jiggling the parameters of the theories.

Me, I think it's all scorcery. When you get down to it, the reason we believe any of this crazy shit is true is that the high priests of physics are demonstrably better at working miracles than their competition. With their nukes and their cell phones, they overawe us all into thinking they must have the inside track to truth.

[Guest gcursor]

could anyone tell me what string theory is in a really dumb easy fashion that I could understand?

gcursor

[AdamSmith]

Caeron, I agree that folks that aren't fluent in math are fooling themselves if they think they can understand this stuff. At best we English speakers can latch onto some verbal analogies that the math guys assure us (with a wink and a nod among themselves) convey the general concepts.

Ain't it the truth? I ate up the book for lay readers on whatsisname's solution to Fermat's Last Theorem, thinking every few pages, "Ah, I begin to see." But on finishing it, realizing of course that I had not the foggiest.

(And I used to be capable of working a few proofs in algebraic topology, back in the Mesozoic. But stumbled across that textbook a couple of years ago and could not understand even the introduction, which was equation-free. And these days a mathematician friend possessed of infinite patience cannot impart the least glimmer of whatever a Hilbert space is. I can only conclude my current self must be a pod-person who at some point co-opted and replaced the original me.)

(Know the feeling?)

[caeron]

The simple answer is no. I've had it explained to me on more than one occasion and my brain can't or won't wrap itself around it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory

The best I can offer is that the very fundamental objects of creation are small 'strings' that are composed together to make all matter. It is a unified theory that explains all of physics.

The problem alluded to by hitoallusa is that these strings are so ridiculously beyond anything we can measure that there isn't really anyway to test the theory. It does explain all existing facts, but...

[Guest hitoallusa]

Unlike Careon I have not personally met any of these scientists but read some of their lectures and books and watched some TV programs.. I don't understand it at all so no stares please... I researched Brian Greene because he was such a hottie.. I could listen to him all day.. .

*stares at Hitoallusa with mouth wide open* you understand string theory? you never fail to amaze me as a person with your knowledge and compassion.

gcursor

[Guest gcursor]

Okay, so as I gather it, string theory is the way of saying that the universe is created and held together by SILLY STRING. is that about it?

[Guest hitoallusa]

I am not sure whether you know about general relativity and quantum mechanics.. It's all about finding a theory of everything... that can explain all the forces in the universe... It's a bit like The Lord of the Rings.. "One ring to rule them all" The string theory is one candidate for a theory of everything.

Okay, so as I gather it, string theory is the way of saying that the universe is created and held together by SILLY STRING. is that about it?

[Guest hitoallusa]

If I don't understand a book I read another book on the same topic and go back to the original book... It always works for me.

Ain't it the truth? I ate up the book for lay readers on whatsisname's solution to Fermat's Last Theorem, thinking every few pages, "Ah, I begin to see." But on finishing it, realizing of course that I had not the foggiest.

(And I used to be capable of working a few proofs in algebraic topology, back in the Mesozoic. But stumbled across that textbook a couple of years ago and could not understand even the introduction, which was equation-free. And these days a mathematician friend possessed of infinite patience cannot impart the least glimmer of whatever a Hilbert space is. I can only conclude my current self must be a pod-person who at some point co-opted and replaced the original me.)

(Know the feeling?)

[lookin]

For me, the thing that makes this so difficult to understand is the need to embrace the idea of all these dimensions. I'm pretty comfortable getting around in three dimensions and, when I stumble across an especially good batch of sensimilla, I can sometimes manage four.

But string theory would have me imagine a universe with ten dimensions. It's so far from anything related to my day-to-day world, getting my head around it would be like a dog learning to drive a car.

And then there's M-theory which kicks the number of dimensions up to eleven.

I guess if it somehow became necessary for survival to navigate in such a world, our brains could eventually rise to the task, as Steven Hawking's already has. We do, after all, continue to learn new tricks.

While I may be trailing the pack today, who knows what the future holds?

[Guest hitoallusa]

Lol Lookin you sound like the late Andy Rooney in 60 Minutes...

[JKane]

I had the exact same experience trying to get through the original. Went from thinking I was fairly intelligent to wondering where my dunce cap was.

But then I see what passes for entertainment these days on The Soup or hear a politician speak and I realize that while there are some *way* above me, there are so very many sadly below...