Customer Reviews

The Physics of Star Trek

5 star:		(35)
4 star:		(27)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Did you know that many of the world's best physicists like to watch Star Trek, and then discuss what's right and wrong about the science displayed? Well, apparently they do.

Drawing on contacts within the scientific community and on-line bulletin boards, Professor Krauss has written a sprightly review of what physicists think about when they see these shows. He translates these observations into simple concepts that the average reader should be able to follow, assuming an interest in Star Trek or science.

As a non-scientist, I had always assumed that 70 percent of the "science" on a Star Trek show was just so much imagination. The reason I thought that was because I could see so many obvious errors (seeing phaser light in space, hearing sounds in space, effects occurring too soon on the space ship, holograms acting like they were made of matter, and permanent worm holes) based on what little I knew. Was I ever surprised to find out that these obvious errors were the bulk of all the errors in the shows!

Apparently the writers have been working closely with scientifically knowledgeable people to keep what is covered reasonably possible . . . along with some poetic license.

The physics of cosmology are fascinating, but I can quickly get lost in matching quantum mechanics to general relativity and so forth. I was also pleasantly surprised to see that I could follow the arguments much better when they used a familiar Star Trek episode as a reference. Like the child who learns math when it involves counting his or her own money, I can learn physics more easily when it relates to Star Trek. Very nice!

The book takes a look at the common Star Trek features like warp drive, transporters, replicators, phasers, sensors, subspace communications, and tractor beams. You also get special looks at less common features like multiple universes and special forms of radiation.

You can read this book from several perspectives as a result: (1) to appreciate what's happening in an episode; (2) to learn some science; (3) to think about where Star Trek could become real and where it is less likely to become so; and (4) what problems have to be solved in order for Star Trek technology to develop. I found the last perspective to be the most interesting. Professor Krauss's speculations about how rapidly technology might develop and what could be done with it were most fascinating.

Where the book fell down a little was in being quite strong in stating that certain "laws" of physics would never be changed. If we go back in 100 year increments, we find that a lot of earlier "laws" are later somewhat amended if not totally changed. That may happen in the future as well, as we learn more. Professor Krauss is a little too confident in many places that there is nothing else to learn. Most modern technology would look like Star Trek science fiction to someone living in 1700, despite being based on sound scientific principles not understood then.

After you finish enjoying this interesting book, think about what questions no one is trying to solve. Why not? What benefits would occur if they were solved? How could curiosity be stimulated about these questions?

Ask and answer important questions in interesting ways to make faster progress!

As both a Star Trek (old series) fan and popular science reader, I was greatly intrigued to see Lawrence Krauss' The Physics of Star Trek at my local bookstore. Often disappointed by past efforts to connect to the bandwagon of popular culture, I was delighted at how learned, clear, yet sprightly Krauss' short book was. In the first part, Krauss attempts nothing less than an explanation of Newtonian physics, general and special relativity, and other physics concepts to explain warp drives, tractor beams, wormholes, and other Star Trek staples that -- under the laws of physics as we now understand them -- are probably impossible. Subsequent chapters address and deconstruct the transporter beam, warp drive, etc. The clarity and humor of Krauss' writing is just wonderful. Perhaps the most amusing chapter is the last, in which Krauss lists his "top ten" Star Trek scientific bloopers -- events, plot devices, and the like that just could not occur. Because he is a trekker, Krauss does not treat these foibles with contempt or ridicule; as a scientist and writer, he ably outlines those errors.

As I looked through my local bookstore for an interesting read, I could not help but notice this interesting title in the Physics science section. Being a sporatic viewer of Star Trek myself, I picked it up for a closer look. As I read the first section of the book, I realized that it was more than blatant critique on scientific errors. Rather, it was an interesting view of future possibilities and also impossibilities in the field of science. In this book, Krauss explores the existence of things such as wormholes, black holes, and existence of other intelligent life in space. Krauss is also relentless in his discussion of Einstein and other renowned Physicists. He often writes about highly esoteric subject matter, but on the whole this book is well rounded and a relatively interesting read. However, keep in mind that one must have an interest in science, specifically fields such as quantum mechanics and relativity.

Lawrence Krauss examines the technology of the Star Trek universe and discusses whether such technology is possible or not according to physics as we know it today. As it turns out, most of the technology is either impossible or improbable when considering the laws of physics. For example, to use warp drive or impulse drive, it would take more energy than the entire planet uses at present. Another example, which would probably be impossible, is the transporter. Krauss raises the issue of whether the transporter transmits the matter or just the information of a person. If it transmits the matter, there is the problem of scanning, storing, and transmitting the data of the location of each molecule,--a feat that would take an astronomical amount of calculating power. If it only transmits the data, then the transporter is effectively a human replicator. If that is the case, what do they do with the original body? Also it raises a lot of ethical issues as well.

I really recommend this for those fans of Star Trek who are interested in finding out if the science in the Star Trek world is feasible or not. It's very easy to read and very entertaining too. Check it out.

Nearly everyone on the planet has seen at least one episode of Star Trek. At the same time, nearly everyone has wondered about certain aspects of the show. For example, if their civilization is so advanced, how come no one has invented a cure for baldness? On the more technical side, certain questions pop up again and again. For example, what really happens during the process of "beaming up"? Why is warp 10 not attainable? How does a tractor beam work?...

Like Mr. Wizard, Lawrence Krauss, who holds a Ph.D. in physics, answers all your questions - or most of them. All the major topics are covered, including a few minor ones. The text is non-technical, clear and concise, but also complete. Although it is impossible to discuss certain ideas without the use of graphs and equations, Krauss keeps them to a minimum.

For each particular advanced technology of the future, the theory behind each application is dissected, explained, and examined. Also, given present day knowledge, the author examines the theoretical or practical obstacles that would have to be overcome in order to achieve this technology. In transporter technology, for example, what exactly would be involved? Would the actual atoms and molecules have to be sent, or would just the information (code) be sufficient?

Would both (atoms and information) be necessary and how would such a task be accomplished, if at all?

This book is highly recommended. Even if you are not a Star Trek fan, you will be interested. This book is easy to read, faithful to the physics, full of Star Trek trivia and always entertaining. Voyager and Deep Space Nine episodes are also mentioned, when relevant to the particular topic under discussion.

I never took biology or chemistry let alone physics in school, so I am easily intimidated by big words with Latin prefixes and Greek suffixes that explain the mysteries of the real world let alone the Star Trek universe. Lawrence M. Krauss, Ambrose Swasey Professor of Physics and Professor of Astronomy and Chairman of the Department of Physics at Case Western Reserve University might be making stuff up the same was as Gene Roddenberry and his heirs, but he sure makes a compelling case that is easily understood even by scientific illiterates such as myself. He certainly has the credentials, even if he spells his first name funny.

This book takes nitpicking about Star Trek to a whole new level, and I mean that in the best sense of the world. "The Physics of Star Trek" is divided into three sections. The first, "A Cosmic Poker Game," explores the physics of inertial dampers and tractor beams as they apply to warp speed, deflector shields, wormholes and time travel (The short answer is "No, but...," which is where it gets fascinating). The second, "Matter Matter Everywhere," covers transporter beams, warp drives, dilithium crystals, matter-antimatter engines, and the holodeck (see above short answer). The third, "The Invisible Universe, or Things That Go Bump in the Night," looks at the great unknown of the future where we may (or may not) encounter alien beings, multiple dimensions and other fun thinks from the Star Trek universe. There are nice diagrams to help the explanations along, filing in for Krauss' classroom chalkboard. Krauss also proves he is not alone in his major league nitpicking as he includes a Top Ten Physics Bloopers and Blunders from Star Trek that were selected by Noble Prize-winning physicists and other Trekkers.

In his foreword Stephen Hawking points out what we have known since Jules Verne: "Today's science fiction is often tomorrow's science fact." I believe it was Jim Kirk who said things were only impossible until you did them. If I had read this book when I first watched the original Star Trek in syndication it might have kindled my interest in science to a level at least appropriate for polite social conversation. I can easily imagine what reading this book might do for somewhere who loves science; opening the minds of students to the possibilities behind the television show they enjoy watching.

I'm sure some 'true blue' Star Trek fans will be disappointed that this book doesn't agree with all the 'science' used in Star Trek. Actually 'Star Trek' is only used as a jumping off point to talk about physics and possible advances of physics in the future. It also presents the other side, and will give the scientific reasons that some form of Star Trek technology (such as transporters) will probably never be possible. I thought the explanation of various scientific principles (usually related to something in Star Trek) were done well without being either condenscending or obtuse. I was actually surprised that the author (apparently a Start Trek fan) found that, for the most part, the scientific concepts used in Start Trek were generally more accurate than the usual SF TV show or movie. Usually the science in these shows is pretty bad. It appears that the Star Trek technical advisors have been doing their homework. I recommend this book to those interested in science and physics and are also familiar with Star Trek. The connection between the two makes the science more palatable and enjoyable.

...for anyone who likes both "Trek" and science. Laurence Krauss shows that it is possible to enjoy "Trek" while using it as a tool to teach some physics fundamentals (usually to the effect that "Trek" physics/technology is impossible or wildly improbable). The foreword is by Stephen Hawking, also a fan, who endorses the imagination-expanding possibilities of science fiction. Remember how many engineers were inspired by the example of the late "Scotty" (he was even given an honorary engineering doctorate for it). Read, and enjoy - and learn more about the awesome universe in which we live.

I loved this book. It explained things in two hundred pages that twelve years worth of science teachers have failed at, and I'm no Trekkie. I assume it is physics in relatively simple terms, given that I could understand most of it, but I feel like a scientist now (did you know that quarks come in three colors?). Its the same idea as A Brief History of Time but easier to understand. Recommended for any curious resident of our universe.

This books really surprised me.. I reread some parts several times to really grasp what he was saying because he delves into some pretty deep thinking and math based ideas. I highly recommend this to anyone who ever wondered how a transporter or warp drive could work and wanted a really good answer