335 of 358 people found the following review helpful
Many Different Angles,
By A Customer
This review is from: A Brief History of Time (Paperback)
Most people know that Hawking is a brilliant physicist, but after reading this book, one develops a respect for his other talents as well. Most noticeable is Stephen Hawking's ability to make very complicated ideas seem quite clear through good explanations, clear comparisons to real life events, and a soft humor. The organization of chapers mostly follows a chronological order, which gives a sense of history from Aristotle to present day, yet also establishes concepts in an order that builds on itself. One also realizes that A Brief History of Time was written by a writer, not a scientist who happened to put ideas to paper. This makes a big difference in the enjoyment of a book, since good information in a dry, dull form can be difficult to read (remember trying to keep your eyes open while reading a dull textbook in a subject of interest?). On the other hand, interesting information presented in an interesting manner make A Brief History of Time as much of a 'page-turner' as physics can be.
In summary, a fountain of information from galaxies and black holes to quantum mechanics presented in such a way that is not only as easy to understand as it can be, but is an enjoyable experience to read.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jul 9, 2012 7:13:02 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 9, 2012 7:15:50 PM PDT
In reply to an earlier post on Jan 29, 2015 12:44:14 PM PST
A. J. Bright says:
Actually it's not clear that Hawkins is an atheist, rather that he does not believe that God interferes with science. His position is that the universe, its expansion and everything within it have scientific explanations. Belief in God does not need to be contradictory to this position. Actually in my view his description of how the universe works from a scientific basis strengthens my belief.
Much of the phenomena described by Hawkin in this book and his lectures are bizarre. That the universe operates in this way is equally bizarre. His positions on the coincidences that caused the universe to expand, to contain the perfect balance of attributes to create life and for life to self-create on our planet (and maybe others) are all based on scientific study, theory and fact. The descriptions of these events and phenomena such as black holes should bring a sense of wonder and awe. Just because we can describe how they are achieved does not lessen this, instead it strengthens that sense of wonder and awe. Surely if there was a God, it is these kinds of things that would be possible in His universe rather than the assumptions made by ancient man as to how the world and the universe that surrounds it works.
In reply to an earlier post on Jan 29, 2015 1:52:02 PM PST
Yes the only way for life to be achieved is by a perfect balance and attributes to follow would only mean order and design which can only come from God as that giver in perfect order and design. It is sad that brilliant men such as Hawkins refuse to accept this fact of science that proves this analyses and logic of a Creator
In reply to an earlier post on Mar 18, 2015 7:54:24 PM PDT
D. Braun says:
Science may one day "prove" there is a God, but can never prove there isn't: Only, that they don't know how, or where, to look.
In reply to an earlier post on Mar 19, 2015 4:54:33 AM PDT
DB science already has proved there is a God but the difference is in the presupposition of the scientist. If you are looking for God you will find Him in all fields of study not just one but if you are trying to get rid of Him you will need to make and believe theories of evolution and alien life
Why do they accept evolution theory over creation? Doctor George Wald, Nobel prize winner at age 71, Harvard professor said; "There is only two possibilities of where life begins spontaneous generation-evolution , or supernatural creative act of god, I do not accept that philosophy because I do not want to believe in god, I chose to believe what is scientifically impossible evolution." Thanks for clearing that up for us George!
‹ Previous 1 Next ›