Customer Reviews

Supersymmetry : Unveiling the Ultimate Laws of Nature

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

If I had not previously read Gordon Kane's "Particle Garden" and had only read the Amazon editorial reviews and single customer review that is currently on the site, I would not have bought and read this book. Then my understanding of the significance of symmetry, supersymmetry, and string theory and the relationships among them all would have remained fuzzy and incoherent. I have to admit that some of this stuff is still fuzzy and incoherent in my mind, but this exciting and important book cleared up so much for me that I have to regard it as one of the most enlightening books of popular science I have ever read, ranking with Guth's "Inflationary Universe" and Brian Green's "The Elegant Universe", to mention two outstanding books on related topics that have recently been published.

I have to admit that a lot of the stuff in this book is so strange and unfamiliar that I really need to go back and read the book again to pick up more of it. But this book is far superior to every other book I've read that has tried to explain Supersymmetry to me, including various Scientific American articles. Maybe I had finally collected enough background understanding for this stuff to suddenly start sinking in, but this is the first book on Supersymmetry that I've read that seems to take the subject head-on, and not back away from the daunting challenge of explaining the actual mechanics of the theory in terms a layperson can understand. And why not? Professionally, Gordon Kane is right in the middle of this, and he has a profound understanding of both the theory and the practice of particle physics. He took me deep enough into the intricacies of the theory that suddenly all kinds of things started falling into place, not just the facts of Supersymmetry Theory themselves, but the concepts and terminology that I had encountered so many times before that I had found completely befuddling.

Several things really stand out in my mind about this book, not necessarily the most important points, but items that just seemed to click in me. First, Supersymmetry presents a solid theory behind what the Dark Matter of the universe might consist of, and why Dark Matter doesn't seem to interact with ordinary matter except gravitationally. It just seems so logical the way Kane presents it, that Supersymmetry provides the source for Dark Matter, and I finally have some kind of understanding of what all these strangely named supersymmetry particles are and how they relate to ordinary matter, and how they aren't so strangely named after all. Of course the theory might be completely wrong, but Kane brilliant manages to convey to an ordinary reader like myself the compelling nature that its theoreticians feel about this theory. After reading this book, I would be astonished, as its current theoreticians also would be, to later learn that experimental evidence had been discovered that disproved it. It just explains too much for it not to be true. Yet, as Kane clearly points out, we don't yet have the experimental evidence to say one way or the other. All we currently have are the elegance and completeness of its explanations.

This brings up another wonderful concept that I learned from Kane: the idea of an "effective theory." This is a theory that has a domain only within certain limits and is effective (in effect) only within those limits. Supersymmetry is an effective theory. It doesn't go "all the way down." Only String Theory does that. String Theory is at the bottom, explaining the basis of everything at the indivisible Planck scales of space and time. String Theory is sometimes in fact called the "Theory of Everything", but (and this is another highly appreciated insight from Kane) Kane much more accurately calls it the Primary Theory, the first theory, the theory that explains the "why" of everything. String Theory is not an effective theory. Effective theories must have inputs, "givens". The mass of an electron is a given in Quantum Theory, but it is *predicted* by String Theory. So String Theory doesn't have any inputs. Each of its basic principles *must* be true if the universe is constructed the way particle physics has discovered it to be. This is why it is a "Primary Theory". It consists of the first principles by which our universe is physically governed.

Supersymmetry sits right above String Theory, between String Theory and Quantum Theory. It bridges the gap between the Planck scale of things and the scale of quarks, electrons, and photons. Appreciating these relationships is one of the most valuable insights I got out of this book. On hindsight, I'm amazed that I never had this understanding before. But in reading another popular science book just recently published, I found the distinction between Supersymmetry and String Theory completely muddled, so I'm not the only one, and I'm not a professional science writer, either. After read the Kane, it was immediately obvious to me that this other science writer should have done a little more brushing up on the topics before commenting on them and treating the theories as if they were virtually interchangeable.

Quantum Theory is one of the most securely established scientific theories ever discovered. But when we go below that, we have yet to discover whether the best theories we have are actually true, namely Supersymmetry and String Theory. Both of these theories are what Kane calls "RIP" sciences, "research in progress." What this means is that this book is about the hottest topics going on in physics today, topics that have not yet become "textbook" science.

The exciting thing is that Supersymmetry Theory is on the verge of achieving this status, either that or of being refuted by actual experimental results. As Kane so lovingly portrays, these results will come from the most advanced existing particle accelerators in the world today, as well as a few even more powerful machines that will be built in the next five years. We will soon know for sure whether Supersymmetry is true. That is, we will know that, assuming that these future particle accelerators are actually funded and built. This also assumes that there will exist a critical mass of scientists capable of building them. Kane expresses concern that there will not be enough public interest to generate the funding to complete this experimental research, and therefore, there will not be the draw into the field required to maintain this critical mass of talent capable of doing the work. This is actually a critical moment in the history of human thought and understanding. Humanity has the opportunity to unlock the ultimate laws of the universe. But it has to take that opportunity now, or it may simply lose the expertise to do it, for the tragic reason that there isn't enough blasted funding for it! What an opportunity that is at our front door! I wish this book could be read by the widest audience possible, so that the urgency and importance of Kane's plea could be understood by the critical mass of lay people necessary to make sure scientists like Kane are able to take these next few steps that will reveal to humanity why the universe is construct the way it is. We do it now, or it may never happen.

In his review of Gordon Kane's book Supersymetry, R.J. Fokkink bad raps Witten. The book doesn't claim to be co-authored by Witten and states only that the Forward was written by Witten--which he did.

The correct level for a book on a complicated subject such as supersymmetry is, of course, the author's first challenge and I believe that Kane shot too low. The "layman" will probably find the whole subject pretty dull and the "informed layman" familiar with the basics of the standard model won't find much that he or she didn't already know. I wish Kane and the physicists at Fermilab luck in finding a super particle in the next few years, but will be on the lookout for a more informative book on supersymmetry.

I was looking forward to this book. Supersymmetry is such a fascinating subject, it is even more fascinating if nature turns out to be indeed supersymmetric. However this book, is written in such a style that it assumes that the readers IQ is below 50. The author throughout the book tells the reader that some of the details are too complicated for the reader to comprehend. He avoids using any equations, or in that case any significant mathematical examples that are above the level of a 5th grader. However he does explain the Higgs Boson pretty well. I was disappointed that the book is not more technical, I don't mean at the undergraduate senior level, but something that you would get a great read with basic calculus skill level.

It's come to be a relief to read a book on popular physics without the obligatory chapter on Einstein. The author, Gordon Kane, spends that freed up space discussing how effective theories change the scope of physics at different scales of various parameters (size and speed being the usual ones). This is something that the general public would benefit from knowing, as a great many people think that each new scientific discovery invalidates previous knowledge instead of expanding on previous knowledge.

While Kane necessarily avoids burdensome mathematics, he does offer some "proofs" and "requirements" of supersymmetry that can be explained qualitatively. This plus the Feynman diagrams are about the best you can expect without grabbing an advanced graduate-level textbook.

One caveat: the author seems almost religiously convinced that the evidence for supersysmmetry is "just around the corner" and always speaks as if the experimental proof is a fait accompli. Based on limits to the theory, we really ought to be seeing the lightest superpartner already and the reader feels that the book takes on an unrealistically-optimistic tone.

For forty thousand years humans have tried to know how the universe
works, and now physicists are approaching the ultimate understanding
of the laws that govern the natural world. Gordon Kane, a renowned
particle physicist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor,
describes the theories at the forefront of this majestic human
endeavor in a readily understandable manner. The author calls the
theories that work at different distance scales "effective
theories," and an ultimate theory of nature "the primary
theory." The central theme of this book is the supersymmetry
theory. This theory is expected to extend the Standard Model, the
validated effective theory on a scale of about a hundred million
billionth meter, down to the wondrous scale of nearly a hundred
million billion billion billionth meter (Planck scale), but it is not
yet the primary theory. Thus the author explains also the possible
relations of the supersymmetry and the next possible effective theory
called string theory, and their way up to the primary theory. Kane
writes not only about the features of the theories but also how these
would be tested experimentally. To confirm the supersymmetry really
to be the next stage toward the primary theory, particles called a
Higgs boson and a "superpartner" have to be found in the
giant accelerators. Topics of research in progress are often referred
to in this book, so that the author uses an acronym of RIP for such
research. It is wonderful that many problems in RIP are treated in
simple words. This is quite an inspiring book, and I strongly
recommend it to all the readers of an inquisitive mind.

Though introduced as co-authored by Kane and Witten, the book is clearly not written in Witten's style. The book gives a clear account of how supersymmetry may be the logical penultimate step on the road to what Kane calls the "Primary Theory"; the theory that should lead to an explanation of, amongst others, why the cosmological constants have the values they have.
The whole book breathes the atmosphere of the author being convinced that supersymmetry is real and here to stay, whereas the reader is constantly reminded of the fact that the theory is still RIP (research in progress). The latter to such an extent that it may become adverse to the readability of the essence of the message itself. When one steps over this shortcoming, very useful and contextual information is provided, albeit without going into detail, on the behavior of particles, their interactions and the very promising consequence of the stable lightest superpartner to the conundrum of the Dark Matter.
What receives little attention in building the case for Supersymmetry as a part of the real description of the working of the Universe, is the fact that the most promising candidate for the Primary Theory (Superstring Theory and the extension to M theory) can only take mathematical substance if Supersymmetry is taken as an established fact.
In summary, the book is a good and thought provoking general introduction to the field of supersymmetry but written somewhat defensively. Upon reading one stays behind with the feeling of needing to read more as deepness is lacking, which is perfectly OK for an introduction.

The book contains no technical passages inaccessible to the ordinary reader and there are few equations. A number of more arcane concepts relegated to short appendices will be of benefit to the physicist. The ascent is gradual, with many pauses for breath to enjoy the view, and in the final chapters the reader can be assured of acclimatization to the rarefied atmosphere of superstring theory, M-theory and what Kane terms "primary" theory.

Daniel Treille/CERN

A complete review is available in CERN Courier, June 2000

An unabashed propaganda for the cause of supersymmetry. Gordon Kane has written this with mostly the future funding for this field of science in mind, which is obviously very near and dear to him. A bait in the form of a foreword by Witten completes the picture.

It is a good read and sums up the current issues and frontier nicely and maybe too simplistically. He has made little effort to include other perspectives or other related activities and places developments in historical context rather poorly. The habit of referencing to future sections and then continuously referencing to the previous chapters gets a little annoying. It is not a very dense or thick book.

Only chance Kane gets to make it a little interesting was the description of those engineering marvels, colliders and detectors and he cuts it very short.

One can not help but marvel at the confidence Gordon Kane and his colleagues have in the supersymmetry physics. Other than mathematical consistency and a sense of "balance and elegance", little else is there to support it. Sure, the arguments are very logical and smart but personal beliefs should not pass as science and Kane comes real close to it.

Still, it is good stuff. Certainly not a waste of time for anyone who was remote to the topic.

Physics can only properly be described with math, and can only be described deeply with math that only a tiny fraction of people can understand. So every writer of a book on physics for a popular audience faces the question of how to describe physics in everyday language that will nonetheless convey much of the essential meaning. On the other hand, the core demographic for a popular book on theoretical physics shouldn't be confused with the average individual. Gordon Kane, while a formidable theorist, unfortunately misjudged where to aim his sights with "Supersymmetry", a book attempting to describe the theory of extending the Standard Model a little closer to the ultimate theory of everything by devising a symmetry between bosons and fermions. There's a limit to how much you can talk about a theory without actually describing the theory.

For example, consider this exercise in friendly vaguary: "One can estimate the maximum possible value of the cosmological constant from the observed expansion rate of the universe. We can also estimate naively what size the cosmological constant should be if we made the simplest guess. The problem is that the maximum size the cosmological constant could have, and still be consistent with what we observe, is many powers of 10 smaller than the naive estimate." I can barely even decipher this ambiguous hand-waving as an indication of the cosmological constant problem; I find it hard to believe that anyone not already familiar with this problem would gain any understanding from this sort of description. They'd do much better to read, for example, Joao Magueijo's beautiful exposition.

Kane does clear up enough to carry across some of his keen insights, including on the daunting task of finding experimental evidence of supersymmetry and on what the shape of fundamental theory implies for different versions of the anthropic principle. He also provides some of the reasons why supersymmetry actually makes predictions that fail in ways the Standard Model already succeeds at least somewhat, casting doubt on the inevitability that supersymmetry will prove to be a successful description of physical law. Actually the book could gain from further splashes of cold water; many times Kane ends up implying that supersymmetry's first impressions are clearly inconsistent with known theory and new versions of the theory were devised that always make predictions just out of reach of our collider technology. Somehow though, Kane repeatedly concludes with assured confidence that this out-of-reach version of the theory will be vindicated. As with strings, the exuberance of the theorist leaves a vague disquiet, if you can sense it, at the prolonged enthusiasm for intricate mathematical elegance in the absence of experimental verification of theoretical predictions - made before the fact, not as postdictions. In the meantime, the wealth of newly observed physical phenomena, such as dark energy, that were wholly unanticipated in decades of arcane theoretical work, beg for that disquiet to receive a greater acknowledgement than can be found here.

Sets up the framework for supersymmetry nicely, but lacks details most readers would expect. Could have been written by a lobbyist for the Fermi Lab or CERN. Does a good job to bring attention to this field of study at a very accessible level.