31 of 31 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Helped me catch up to the last 30 years of particle physics!, December 22, 2005
This book is good for the interested layperson, and even better for a college student who has just had their first year physics or chemistry course and wants to see more about all the hot ideas they've been reading in the newspapers.
I enjoyed this book very much. Here are several things it does better than any other popular book I've read.
It gives you a glimmer of an idea of what "spontaneous symmetry breaking" means, and what it means that all the forces become unified at very high energies. It does it BETTER than other popular works I've seen.
It allows you to understand what the "weak" force is, why it's called that, and what "good" it is. The four fundamental forces are gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force and the weak force. Physics fans generally learn about the first three, but what the weak force is good for ("Who ordered that?" to paraphrase a certain famous physicist) has long been a puzzlement to me. In book after book, I find a single lame sentence that the weak force is involved in certain types of radioactive decay. How useless!! Oerter actually explains what the weak force is.
Many popular accounts of Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) dumb it down to the point where you hear "it is the most accurate theory known to mankind". They never tell you what it is accurate about! Oerter points out that QED allows one to calculate the electron gyromagnetic ratio to 10 decimal places. Gee -- sounds like a good theory!
Finally, Oerter actually at one point writes down the "Grand Unified Equation" (The Lagrangian that includes all 3 fundamental forces -- but not gravity). You may not know what it means, but it sure is nice to see the equation that describes the entire universe. It's got to at least be good for a T-shirt!
Despite the fact that he says he won't talk about superstrings, he does, and he does that well too. (A real feat -- I read Smolin's book on strings -- it blew my mind but didn't really illuminate me.)
I'll admit that I'm a physics professor, so I'm looking for more "beef" in popular books on physics. All physicists tend to know what we teach undergraduates, but in grad school we all go to our separate sub-fields. Since I'm not a particle physicist, I'm almost as ignorant as a layperson about spontaneous symettry breaking, the Higgs field and mass creation, and what EXACTLY the standard model really is. Now I am less so!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
56 of 63 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An introduction to the greatest intellectual achievement of the human race, July 20, 2008
This review is a little bit long, however, it is more than an assessment of the book, it will also help you prepare for reading the book and explain confusing parts of the book.
Imagine if we had found a two billion year old alien underground civilization under the desert in Arizona several years ago, and you still knew nothing about it, because journalists thought this information was pretty boring stuff and therefore didn't bother telling anyone about it. Well that is most likely not true, but what is true is that the general public has entirely missed the greatest scientific revolution in the history of the human race partially because mainstream media has largely ignored this information, even though the Nobel Prize committee has been raining Nobel Prizes over it.
In the 70's a theory that explained, at the deepest level, nearly all of the phenomena that rule our daily lives came into existence. The theory called "The Standard Model of Elementary Particles" is a set of "Relativistic Quantum Field Theories" that explains how elementary particles behave, which elementary particles there are, and why they have the properties they have, for example, isospin, spin, charge, color charge, flavor, even mass, or mass relations in many cases. The theory explains how all of the fundamental forces in nature work except gravity. The theory describes how the elementary particles interact; decay, how long they are expected to exist, and how they combine into other sub atomic particles. The theory uses only 18 adjustable parameters to accomplish of this.
In the extension the theory thus explains how nucleons and atoms are formed and what properties the atoms will have, and how molecules will form and what properties molecules will have, their chemical reactions, and what elasticity, electric conductivity, heat conductivity, color, hardness, texture, etc. any material will possess. In the extension it explains why mass and matter exist, how the sun and the stars work, and the theory is therefore the ultimate basis of all other science. It also provides a formula, or an equation of almost everything. Best of all it has been thoroughly verified experimentally, in fact the predictions the theory has made has been confirmed with such stunning accuracy and precision that it could be considered the most successful scientific theory ever. A theory that successfully unites all of physics and basically all of human knowledge of the Universe into one single theory has never before existed.
However, "The Standard Model" does not incorporate gravity and the general theory of relativity, and cannot explain dark energy, dark matter and why neutrinos have mass. Therefore as soon as the theory came into existence physicists started looking for the next theory that would finish what the "The Standard Model" did not finish. Example of such theories are GUT theories, SO(5), SO(10), string theories (abandoned), super string theories, and M-theories. Even though those new theories are extremely interesting they have not been verified or able to predict anything. In comparison with the "Standard Model"; super string theories, grand unified theories, chaos theories, you name it, are essentially nothing, but are still better known.
This book explains to the layman what the "Standard Model" is and how it came into existence. The book is by no means a perfect book. I think there are several problems with the book. However, I decided not to take off any star because there are very few books written for science interested non-physicists that explains the "Standard Model of Elementary Particles". Dr. Oerter deserves five stars just for his fairly decent attempt at doing so.
Even though the book is a Physics book, it is also a book on Philosophy. In fact Physics is often the best and the deepest Philosophy, the kind of Philosophy that can be falsified, verified and proven wrong or correct. To understand what I mean consider Noether's theorem. Noether's theorem states that whenever a theory is invariant under a continuous symmetry, there will be a conserved quantity. As an example of what a continuous symmetry is the following; any physical experiment that is performed at a certain time will have the same result if it is performed exactly the same way a certain time later. That seemingly self evident observation means that Energy is conserved. Another example is, any physical experiment that is performed at a certain place will have the same result if it is performed exactly the same way somewhere else. That seemingly self evident observation means that momentum is conserved.
Let me add that "exactly the same way" really means that! Gravity, other forces, differences in light, or anything else cannot be different in the second experiment. The only thing allowed to be different is the position "x" (if that is our symmetry variable). That is what a continuous symmetry means, changing just one thing, and everything stays the same.
Noether's theorem has been the guiding principle behind the standard model and it is used to find conservation laws where symmetries are found, and it is used to find symmetries where conservation laws are found. It is a spontaneous symmetry brake that allows the Higgs Boson to give all other particles their mass (excepting mass less particles). This is why matter and everything in our Universe exist. The Higgs Boson is also called the God particle (guess why). So Noether's theorem is both very useful in a practical sense and deeply philosophical at the same time.
The God particle has not yet been found, but scientists will be looking for it using the new Large Hadron Collider (LHC) that will come on line this fall (fall of 2008). LHC will start operating in August and the first collisions are planned for October. It is the largest machine ever built and it has a circumference of 17 miles. However, a law suit has been filed in attempt to stop the LHC from operating. Some people believe that the LHC will create small black holes that could suck up all of earth. In essence, they believe that our attempt to find the God particle will be the end of the world.
In addition to Noether's theorem the standard model is built upon the special theory of relativity and a modern formulation of quantum mechanics (Quantum field theory), QED, QCD, as well as some discoveries regarding elementary particles. I can add that Noether's theorem was formulated by a Jewish woman, Emmily Noether, who could not get a job in academia because she was a woman. This theorem is one of those very important but mostly unknown discoveries, like the invention of paper by the Chinese Tsai Lun.
Oerter does not attempt to explain the special theory of relativity; however, he tries to give the reader an idea of what it is. The problem with his approach is that he gives the reader just enough information to enable the observant reader to come up with the apparent paradoxes within the special theory of relativity, but not enough information to help the reader to easily resolve them.
He also confuses the reader by not distinguishing between rest mass and relativistic mass. The observant reader will think that he is contradicting himself. The term relativistic mass is the total mass and the total quantity of energy in a body. The rest mass is the mass of a body when it is not moving. The formula E = mc² is always true, when it refers to relativistic mass, which is why we talk about an energy/mass equivalence. The other more complex formula Oerter presents refers to rest mass. There is no such thing as an energy/rest mass equivalence (except at speed 0) but that is what the reader who is not already familiar with the subject will end up believing.
Another mistake Oerter does is in regards to the fact that the speed of clocks will be measured differently in different reference frames. On page 35 last paragraph Oerter writes "Here, we have an apparent paradox: If each reference frame sees the other as slowed down, whose clock will be ahead when the passengers leave the train?" Then he implies that the paradox has to be solved by incorporating the General theory of relativity. Even though that may be how it was first solved, you can solve this form of the so called "Twin Paradox" and other similar paradoxes from within the framework of the special theory of relativity itself.
Oerter explains Quantum Physics in a very typical manner but he mostly avoids making it look much weirder than it actually is which he should be commended for. However, there is one thing that all Physicists seem to do when they explain Quantum Physics to the layman which annoys me greatly. The matter waves (or quantum fields) in Quantum Physics are quite strange entities. The reason they are so strange is because they do not exist in a real sense, they are more correctly stated mathematical abstractions. Oerter states this clearly, which is good. However, he then goes on to mention De Witts idea about multiple Universes without acknowledging that these "bizarre solutions" to Quantum Wave conundrums are completely unnecessary and worthless. There is no more reason to believe in multiple Universes based on matter waves then there is to believe in multiple Universes because we all have different reference frames.
In fact when I took my first class in Quantum Physics (as an engineering physics student) I successfully proved, using a combination of the Schrödinger equation and plain Galileo transformations, that the matter waves are not only "not real" they don't even represent information in an objective sense, in fact every reference frame had its own matter wave for the same particle. Our own single Universe is thus already all the Universes you need all at once. My associate professor was...
Read more ›
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192250339_.gif){kind=small}
