Enjoy fast, FREE delivery, exclusive deals and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery
Amazon Prime includes:
Fast, FREE Delivery is available to Prime members. To join, select "Try Amazon Prime and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery" below the Add to Cart button.
Amazon Prime members enjoy:- Cardmembers earn 5% Back at Amazon.com with a Prime Credit Card.
- Unlimited Free Two-Day Delivery
- Instant streaming of thousands of movies and TV episodes with Prime Video
- A Kindle book to borrow for free each month - with no due dates
- Listen to over 2 million songs and hundreds of playlists
- Unlimited photo storage with anywhere access
Important: Your credit card will NOT be charged when you start your free trial or if you cancel during the trial period. If you're happy with Amazon Prime, do nothing. At the end of the free trial, your membership will automatically upgrade to a monthly membership.
Buy new:
$17.99$17.99
FREE delivery: Saturday, May 27 on orders over $25.00 shipped by Amazon.
Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com
Buy used: $11.47
Other Sellers on Amazon
+ $3.99 shipping
91% positive over last 12 months
Usually ships within 4 to 5 days.
& FREE Shipping
83% positive over last 12 months
& FREE Shipping
71% positive over last 12 months
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
The Trouble With Physics: The Rise of String Theory, The Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next Paperback – Illustrated, September 4, 2007
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| Free with your Audible trial | |
Purchase options and add-ons
Ambitious ideas about extra dimensions, exotic particles, multiple universes, and strings have captured the public’s imagination — and the imagination of experts. But these ideas have not been tested experimentally, and some, like string theory, seem to offer no possibility of being tested. Yet these speculations dominate the field — attracting the best talent and much of the funding.
Modern science has created a climate in which emerging physicists are often penalized for pursuing less popular avenues. As Smolin points out, the situation threatens to impede the very progress of science.
With clarity, passion, and authority, Smolin charts the rise and fall of string theory and takes a fascinating look at what will replace it. Smolin not only tells us who and what to watch for in the coming years, he offers novel solutions for seeking out and nurturing the best new talent — giving us a chance, at long last, of finding the next Einstein.
- Print length416 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherMariner Books
- Publication dateSeptember 4, 2007
- Dimensions5.5 x 1.08 x 8.25 inches
- ISBN-10061891868X
- ISBN-13978-0618918683
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Frequently bought together

What do customers buy after viewing this item?
- Most purchasedin this set of products
Quantum Physics for Beginners: From Wave Theory to Quantum Computing. Understanding How Everything Works by a Simplified Explanation of Quantum Physics and Mechanics PrinciplesPaperback
Editorial Reviews
Review
"Lee Smolin provides a much needed, enlightening and engagingly written antidote to string-theory hype." --David Deutsch, Oxford University, author of The Fabric of Reality
"If you want to think in new ways about the interconnected universe around you, read Lee Smolin's provocative, inspiring book." --Margaret Geller, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Harvard University
"Bold, provocative, and, best of all, a joy to read." --Evelyn Fox Keller, Professor of the History and Philosophy of Science, MIT
"Smolin tells the somber tale of contemporary physics with virtuosity, passion, and courage." --Joy Christian, Oxford University
"An uncommonly clear and confident account of the great obstacles—and opportunities—facing physics today. . . .engrossing and illuminating." --Tim Ferris, author of Coming of Age in the Milky Way and The Big Shebang
"[Smolin] exudes a love of science and imagination, and a faith in the next generation of young physicists." --Jaron Lanier, computer scientist and columnist for Discover
"Lee Smolin is keeping his eyes open, asks sharp questions, and offers his delightful insights as a critical insider." --Gerard 't Hooft, Nobel Laureate, University of Utrecht
"[Smolin's] knowledge of [string theory] enables him to tell the story, and survey the road ahead, with clarity and grace." --Neal Stephenson, author of Snow Crash, Cryptonomicon, and Quicksilver
"Lee Smolin's understanding of theoretical physics is unusually broad and deep, and his critical judgments are exceptionally penetrating." --Roger Penrose, author of The Road to Reality and The Emperor's New Mind
"Lee Smolin has written an epic story with great energy and characteristic passion. . . .Thrilling." --Janna Levin, Barnard College of Columbia University, author of How the Universe Got Its Spots
"Clear, lively, and continuously interesting. . .Reading it is a very exciting experience and just what is needed at this time." --Kim Stanley Robinson, best-selling author of The Mars Trilogy
"Smolin offers a compelling argument. . . This is a well-written, critical profile of the theoretical physics community." Library Journal Starred —
About the Author
Product details
- Publisher : Mariner Books; Illustrated edition (September 4, 2007)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 416 pages
- ISBN-10 : 061891868X
- ISBN-13 : 978-0618918683
- Item Weight : 15.4 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.5 x 1.08 x 8.25 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #200,281 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #64 in Mathematical Physics (Books)
- #189 in Quantum Theory (Books)
- #570 in History & Philosophy of Science (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the authors

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more

Lee Smolin earned his Ph.D. in physics at Harvard, then went on to teach at Yale and Pennsylvania State before helping to found the innovative Perimeter Institute. He is the author of The Life of the Cosmos and Three Roads to Quantum Gravity.
Photo by Lumidek at English Wikipedia (Own work by the original uploader) [CC BY 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons.
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
In an introductory chapter, Lee Smolin states that between 1780s and the 1970s, there have been every year breakthroughs in theoretical physics that have been tested experimentally, or in experimental physics where the theory was then later on derived for. But since the 1970s, these breakthroughs have been lacking. Trying to figure out what is going wrong, he lists the five fundamental questions the current physical theories leave open. As such, what happens in a Black Hole with the singularity, is one of them. Moreover, Lee Smolin does not like the observer-based framework of quantum mechanics. It cannot be the world differs, depending on whether we look or not. Then, he looks at how in physics, progress is made by unifying theories. From unifying theories, new predictions will come out that can be tested. Some of the new predicts will be surprising and new to new approaches. His primary example is the unification of electricity and magnetism by James Clerk Maxwell. The electric and the magnetic forces were explained by forces and it was recognized that one can lead to the other, that effectively, they have to two faces of the same phenomenon. Moreover, when Maxwell determined the speed of the electromagnetic field, he arrived at the speed of light, thus hinting at the unification with light. However, Lee Smolin says, not all unifications are valid. Therefore, experimental confirmation is important. As at that time, materialism was prevailing it was thought that light as well has to be a wave in matter. It was thus postulated that light is a wave in the aether. When afterwards electrons and atoms were discovered, it was theorized that atoms are knots in magnetic field lines and different knots were different atoms. This led to the mathematical knot theory.
Once the aether had to be abolished, and the idea that fields, like everything else, was matter, the idea came up that matter might be made up from fields. Einstein unified motion with rest, and then later, when he was thinking about gravity, he unified gravity with acceleration. About the same time, Gunner Nordström, unified electromagnetism with gravity. He only added one additional dimension into the electromagnetism equations and gravity was covered. Lee Smolin also says that as we don’t see this extra dimension, it might be circular and, as we cannot see it, very small. Only one of these unifications could be correct, in Einstein’s theory, gravity would bend space, in Nordström’s not. Happily, this could be tested experimentally, and at a solar eclipse 1919, Einstein’s theory of general relativity could be proven.
Thereafter, when it was tried to unify general relativity with electromagnetism, and the way to go seemed to be again an additional dimension. Theodor Kaluza, like Nordström before, applied a fifth dimension to Einstein’s general theory of gravity, and found electromagnetism. However, the fifth dimension again has to be small circles too small to see, and whereas general relativity describes spacetime the whole time changing, the radius of these circles has to be frozen in time and space. But if the radius was allowed to change, the electrical charge would also change. Thus, for this unification to be a true unification, have to be treated the same and the fifth must also be allowed to change. To safe the theory, it was tried to hide this this limitation, but play around a little bit with the radius and either the circle collapse in a singularity, or become visible. The discovery of the strong and weak nuclear forces led ten to the further demise of this theory.
It was still tried to incorporate those two forces by adding more dimensions, but these dimensions again had to be very small. The more dimensions included, the higher the price paid to freeze their geometry. Again, only few solutions were stable, there were an infinite number of ways the higher dimensions could be curled up and, again, no new predictions followed out of these theories. Moreover, they ignored quantum theory. Einstein had hoped that if he would once have his unified field theory formulated, the quantum phenomena would be included therein. So, in the end, unification attempts invoking higher dimensions was abandoned.
Electromagnetism has been unified with the weak and the strong nuclear force by breaking the symmetry. As such, the force is transmitted by similar particles, just the electromagnetic over an unlimited distance, where the other two are only exerting influence over short distances. The particles were derived by breaking the symmetry: Just like with a pencil that stands on its tip, it’s symmetrical but unstable. When the symmetry was broken, the particles got the features and became stable. The standard model of elementary particles has been derived like this and has been confirmed many times in the last thirty years. In order to achieve the next unification, supersymmetry was proposed. Here, all the elementary particles have a symmetry with the force particle. The problem with supersymmetry is that supersymmetry has 125 parameters that have to be fine-tuned, and that the unknown particles again have to be hidden; they are thus suggested to be so heavily that they have not been observed yet. Lee Smolin says that the LHC might show supersymmetry. I know that the Higgs particle has been found by the LHC, but supersymmetry hasn’t.
And next the discussion is on quantum gravity. Here, approaches are normally not in a background-independent context, simply, because when they were first developed, no one knew how to apply quantum theory to general relativity. Field theories first had to be developed. Electromagnetism was soon unified with quantum theory in QED, in a background dependent way. But doing the same with gravity proofed much more elusive. In the 1970s, supergravity was calculated as an idea, but successes were limited again.
In the late 1960s, the idea came up to think about what would happen if particles were not the usually imagined points, but actually as vibrating rubber bands, or, with more dignity, strings. Firstly, applied only to the strong nuclear force, it was soon seen to be applicable to all particles, by using supersymmetry. Supersymmetry was thus discovered by route of string theory and string theory is only stable with supersymmetry, as otherwise there would be faster than light tachyons. But before 1984, string theory was ignored, until a paper was published that year that showed that the theory was finite and consistent. From then on, everybody wanted to work in string theories and conferences were established everywhere. In string theory, there are 10 dimensions. Once in time and three in space are observable, thus there have to be six hidden ones. However, it was realized that string theory had not only one solution, but many solutions. No new predictions about the world could be made. Some physicists started to doubt that string theory really explained the world. As string theory is background dependent, it was realized that string theory might not be a fundamental theory, so that all solutions are valid solutions depending on the background, and a deeper fundamental theory that is background independent would be needed. It was even appreciated that the background and therewith the constants and the universe might have evolved. In the 1990s, some people thus left the field disheartened, and the split between believers and skeptics deepened.
In the mid-1990s, it was realized that the five consistent string theories that had been established should be unified. In order to do this, dualities between two each were analyzed. In the end, the idea came up to unify them all by describing strings not in a 9-dimensional space as one dimensional, but as two-dimensional surfaces, like membranes, in a 10-dimensional space. As these surfaces can then spread in all the other hidden dimension, they are actually not two-dimensional, but more. Therefore, they are not membranes and are therefore called D-branes. Black holes can be interpreted as extremal brane systems in which the branes holding the maximum amount of electrical and magnetic charge are wrapped around an extra dimension. However, as with supersymmetry there remains the question if this similarity to black holes is purely coincidental or not.
But then, dark energy was discovered and string theory was in crisis. Even though many theories had been established that were all thought to govern a different region of a multiple universe, they all had Einstein’s cosmological constant, the energy density, at zero, or if not, then negative. Einstein himself has introduced the cosmological constant when it was recognized that the universe might be expanding; he wanted to save therewith the static universe. When Edwin Hubble could show that the universe was indeed expanding, Einstein quickly and embarrassed withdrew the constant. Soon, however, it was recognized that quantum theory said something about the cosmological constant as the vacuum energy of the universe, that, according to quantum theory because of the uncertainty principle, had to be huge. However, with such huge cosmological constant, no universe would ever have formed. Most theorists tended thus to ignore it, as the observed cosmological constant was zero. When in 1998 it had been established that the universe was expanding, it was clear that the cosmological constant has to be positive. First, the sentiment was that a positive cosmological constant could not be a solution for string theory. Then, a solution was discovered that could not only accommodate a positive cosmological constant, but that also solved the problem why the extra dimensions were stable and would not end in a singularity or become visible. The solution involved wrapping branes around the geometry in which the moduli are stable. Antibranes were then used wrapped around to get the cosmological constant small and positive. But the problem now was there were 10500 solutions. And in contrast to before, where it was taken that eventually, one unique and correct would be found, now, all the 10500 solutions were taken to represent genuine solutions. This led to split in the string theory society; whereas some were happy that string theory had been saved, other believed that it had been reduced ad absurdum.
Moreover, Lee Smolin says that some theorists are absolutely happy with this number of solutions. They say, eternal inflation gave rise to an infinite population of universes, with bubbles appearing where the expansion is slower. Our universe happens to be such a bubble where live happens to exists. All the solutions thus exist somewhere in the multiverse, predictions become difficult to obtain, as all the laws will happen somewhere and we just happen to live in a universe where live is possible, applying therewith an anthropic solution. Lee Smolin thinks it would be better to look for the features that are required by string theories; extra dimensions, supersymmetry, and the forces becoming unified. Finding them would not proof string theory, but if one of them would be confirmed to not exist, that would do the same with string theory. In an additional chapter, Lee Smolin analyses in how much string theory actually solves the five basic questions that he had listed in the beginning. Even though it neatly unifies particle and forces, it was set up for that purpose, it can only unify gravity and quantum theory in approximation, when certain conditions are met. As such, black holes are only understood under very special conditions, that do not occur in reality. The three remaining problems are neither solved by string theories. As such, Lee Smolin considers it better not to put all eggs in one basket and diversify research. He also points to experimental findings which actually seem to contradict our current physical understanding and where new theories made be derived from. As such, the cosmological constant defines the scale R over which it curves the universe. R is about 10 billion light years. The cosmic microwave radiation seems to show anomalies at this scale. Moreover, it turns out that at the acceleration c^2/R, the behavior of stars in galaxies changes. In the center of galaxies, the behavior of stars can be well calculated using Newtonian laws. Outside a certain radius, it can’t, and here dark matter seems to play a role. Now the border between these two regions is not defined by a specific radius. Rather, as a star reach the acceleration c^2/R, dark matter starts to have an effect. Moreover, as the two Pioneer spacecrafts have left the solar system, their trajectories are off from predicted values by about c^2/R. Thu, Lee Smolin says, even though these discrepancies are far from being understood, they might even turn out to be statistical flukes, they might nevertheless hint at things that we do not understand yet.
Moreover, there recently have been hints that at extreme energies at the velocity close to the speed of light, Einstein’s special relativity might be breaking down. By breaking down, Lee Smolin states that either the theory might turn out to be wrong, or we might not completely understand it yet and further research will deepen our understanding. As such, Lee Smolin was involved in work establishing a theory where not only the speed of light, but also the Planck length is constant. Therefore, not the speed of photons would be constant, but their energy, or depending on version, their momentum limited to a maximum. For low-energy photons, this would then mean effectively that their speeds are constant but this would only be a specialty below a certain energy threshold. In this theory inflation would be unnecessary, as shortly after the big bang, there was a lot of energy in the universe and light might thus have travelled faster in the early universe. The theory is called deformed or doubly special relativity, short DSR. Again, if DSR should be confirmed, all string theories that were build based on special relativity would face troubles. However, it would be possible again to construct string theories that are based on DSR.
Looking at physics beyond string theory, Lee Smolin looks at the developments of quantum gravity. Taking only discrete building blocks and causality as given, these theories have the idea that classical spacetime will emerge out of them. Spacetime is thus not a precondition, but will emerge. Moreover, many background-independent quantum theories of gravity have elementary particles in them as emergent states, so that string theories has nothing more to bring to the table than they do.
In the last part, Lee Smolin then comes to talk about his reason why he wrote the book. He says that string theorists believe too much in their theories without proofs, almost akin to religion. He says that whereas normally skepticism is normal in science, the field of string theory is dominated by sociologist ideas, where people want to adhere to the mainstream idea so they rather refer to a famous person in the field than to think independently for themselves. For example, the finiteness of string theory has always been assumed to be true from the 80s to the time the book was written, even if has actually never been proven.
Moreover, generally analyzing science, Lee Smolin thinks that the current way of doing physics is not useful anymore, in that big, aggressive research programs are supported, whereas smaller, more introspective ones are not. Looking at how normal science is done he says that there are the craftsmen and the seer. The craftsmen are good in calculating with the current theories, they contribute therewith to incremental progress. The seers on the other hand think deeply about a problem. They might not have an out for ten or twenty years but until then come up with revolutionary ideas. The seers always had had it difficult; Einstein himself did not get a job in academia but worked in a patent office. But nowadays, how the academic institution has developed, there is absolutely no room anymore for seers. There are some that support themselves, as Lee Smolin introduces them. He states, we should make more room for the seers, they might one day explain how the universe works. Presenting how science really works, he discloses that peer-review is not really done by peers, but by people older and more powerful. This has the implication that to get papers published, a first grant and then tenure, it is always easier and much less risky to do mainstream science. Seers always elicit mixed reviews, being either praised or criticized, so that they quite often fail in the peer-reviewed system. In a concluding section, Lee Smolin looks again at his five questions from the beginning and remarks that the developments in academia have organized it in such a way that revolutionaries are rare. He states that we should fights the symptoms of groupthink and open the doors to a wide range of independent thinkers. He thinks that projects others than string theory should be given priority so that new original research programs can gain some ground. All in all, this is a good critique in which Lee Smolin explains why he thinks it unlikely that string theory explains the universe. And for me, it has now been ten years since I regularly review (or summarize) the books I’ve read.
Section A provides a broad historical overview of physics and lists what he refers to as the “five great problems in theoretical physics” below. Trying to solving these so-called problems seems to be the prime motivation for developing string theory as well as other theories such as loop quantum gravity.
1) Combine general relativity and quantum theory.
2) Resolve the problems in the foundations of quantum mechanics, either by making sense of the theory as it stands or by inventing a new theory that does make sense.
3) Determine whether or not the various particles and forces can be unified in a theory that explains them all as manifestations of a single, fundamental entity.
4) Explain how the values of the free constants in the standard model of particle physics are chosen in nature.
5) Explain dark matter and dark energy. Or, if they don’t exist, determine how and why gravity is modified on large scales.
Here are my comments on these problems:
Problem 1 is based on the premise that general relativity and quantum theory are incompatible, which is a mantra repeated over and over in the scientific community. I’m not convinced this is true at all. Recent papers have shown that quantum weirdness, i.e. indeterminacy, is indispensable in order for large-scale classical physics to make sense.
Problem 2 is based on the premise that quantum mechanics doesn’t make sense because it conflicts with realism, which is kind of the whole point of quantum mechanics. Smolin says, “I should admit I side with Einstein and the others who believe that quantum mechanics is an incomplete description of reality.” Oh, really? Einstein and two of the others (Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen) published a paper in 1935 that tried to prove quantum mechanics based on the Copenhagen interpretation is incomplete. John S. Bell was another of the realists who doubted the completeness of quantum mechanics. In 1964 he published a landmark theorem that showed that a certain class of experiments could prove whether or not quantum mechanics is deterministic. These experiments were carried out, beginning in the 1980s and into the 21st century, and these proved without a shadow of doubt that quantum effects are indeterminate. In other words, Einstein and others, including Bell and Smolin, were wrong.
Problem 3 has been mostly taken care of by quantum field theory for the weak, electromagnetic, and strong forces. The “force” of gravity isn’t a force at all, which was Einstein’s motivation to formulate the general theory of relativity. An object feels a “gravitational force” when an external influence makes an object deviate from its geodesic path through curved spacetime. The force comes from the external influence, not from gravity, and it is equivalent to acceleration.
Problem 4 is resolved by thinking of physical “laws” as simply describing the behaviors of physical systems under specific conditions instead of causing or governing them. The free parameters of the standard model were not chosen. They emerge from the behaviors of elementary particles themselves.
Problem 5 exists due to the assumption that the universe is scale invariant, which has not been proven. Dutch physicist Erik Verlinde is working on a new theory of gravity based on entropy that seems to account for the gravitational anomalies that appear at large scales without appealing to exotic dark matter particles. Dark energy – if the phenomena it purportedly describes actually exist – appears to be equivalent to the cosmological constant that emerges naturally from Einstein’s field equations instead of some new, exotic, and unexplained form of energy.
Section B of the book introduces string theory. It appears that developing the initial version of string theory was motivated by an effort to force determinism into quantum mechanics, which is fundamentally indeterminate. In 1968 Gabriele Veneziano noticed a pattern in the probabilities scattering angles of interacting particles that could be derived from a formula based on Euler’s beta function. In the early 1970s, three physicists including Leonard Susskind (The Father of String Theory) tried to explain Veneziano’s result based on a physical mechanism, which turned out to be representing the particles as stretchable, vibrating strings instead of points. Thus, string theory was born. Bear in mind that the experiments based on Bell’s theorem weren’t performed until the 1980s, so the jury was still out at that time regarding quantum indeterminacy. Through the 1970s into the 1980s, an effort was underway to develop a theory that represents a broad array of elementary particles instead of just a special class studied by Veneziano. It was hoped that string theory could explain why the parameters of the standard model had their observed values, which could ultimately lead to a grand unification theory (GUT). Some versions of string theory even appeared to include the hypothetical graviton particle, which purportedly mediates the gravitational “force.”
But as Smolin correctly notes, “When they [the string theorists] tried to understand the strings qua strings, trouble emerged. The problems stemmed from two reasonable requirements they imposed on their theory: First, string theory should be consistent with Einstein’s special theory of relativity – that is, it should respect the relativity of motion and the constancy of the speed of light. Second, it should be consistent with quantum theory.” The first problem could probably be solved in a manner similar to the way Paul Dirac made Schrodinger’s equation consistent with special relativity. The second problem is much more serious. A theory based on strings qua strings must be inherently deterministic because strings are treated as physical objects with physical properties; they occupy physical regions of space (either in standard 3-dimensional space or in 9-dimensional space as required to make the theory consistent), and have vibrational modes that conform to physical shapes. This goes against the grain of quantum indeterminacy, which insists elementary particles don’t have ANY physical properties a priori. A particle is just an array of probabilities that become actual properties only after those properties have been measured.
The fact that quantum mechanics is truly indeterminate should have been made apparent by the results of Bell’s experiments as they began coming in in the 1980s, but it seems that at least some string theorists didn't get the memo or weren’t paying attention. Other string theorists claim that string theory has been made consistent with quantum mechanics, but it isn’t at all clear how this could be true if it is still based on strings qua strings. By consulting several online physics forums, opinions are split roughly 50/50 as to whether or not string theory is deterministic; but if it is, then it definitely does not conform to quantum mechanics. This doesn’t appear to bother Smolin, who considers himself a realist in the same camp as Einstein, Rosen and Podolsky. Not surprisingly, he only mentions Bell briefly in passing.
Section B proceeds with the history of the first superstring revolution, which modified the original model by introducing the feature of super symmetry. This was done in order to eliminate some of the anomalies inherent in the original model, such as tachyon particles that travel through space faster than light, and the absence of fermions with mass. Unfortunately, supersymmetry introduced a number of new elementary particles that have never been observed, and likely never will be. It also produced five consistent but very different theories in 10-dimensional spacetime. The second superstring revolution came about when Edward Witten proposed that those five theories could be unified through an overarching theory he named M-Theory; however, to this day, nobody knows what M-Theory really is (or even what M stands for). The whole superstring enterprise appears similar to “vaporware” – a computer program that a software vendor says is under development and promises will be fabulous when it is finished, but unfortunately it never will be.
So then why are physicists still pursuing string theory? Some of the reasons are societal: Competition in the theoretical physics world is intense, and string theory is currently the only game in town. Also string theorists are hopeful that by starting from a set of fundamental principles based on string theory, a consistent theory of everything (TOE) will somehow emerge from an enormous landscape of possibilities. This requires nine spatial dimensions for consistency, three of those dimensions are the standard spatial dimensions of our universe and the remaining six are compacted into shapes called Calabi–Yau manifolds. Depending on which Calabi–Yau manifold is chosen, a different theory will emerge, resulting in an unimaginably large total number of possible theories (around 10^500 by some estimates). This makes it virtually impossible to arrive at a viable theory by picking and choosing among them. Worse yet, even if a viable theory does emerge from the landscape, there are serious doubts whether it can make meaningful predictions that can be tested experimentally.
In Section C, Smolin discusses alternative ideas to string theory he seems to think show promise in solving the Five Problems he listed in Section A. But are these really problems or are they a physicist’s version of monsters hiding under the bed? Does a theory of everything that can plot the orbit of the Moon in addition to explaining radioactive decay actually exist? And would physics really be any worse off if it doesn’t? Is there a grand unification theory that combines gravity with the three other forces given that gravity isn’t even a force (as revealed through general relativity)?
In the subsection under Section D entitled How Do You Fight Sociology, Smolin gets kind of personal. He compares string theory to religion and the string theory community to a cult. Watching online presentations by leading theoretical physicists sometimes is like watching a cartoon version of a church service. Almost every one of them starts out with a compulsory genuflection to the string god, even when the topic at hand has nothing to do with string theory. Smolin asks, “Why, despite so much effort by thousands of the most talented and well-trained scientists, has fundamental physics made so little definitive progress in the last twenty-five years?” The answer seems to be the same as the reason religion has made so little definitive progress over the last several millennia: You can’t make progress when all your beliefs are tied up with dogma and wishful thinking without a shred of factual evidence to back any of it up.
Overall, I found “The Problem with Physics” to be somewhat disorganized and the writing style rambling and out-of-focus. Smolin has a tendency to veer off-subject and delve into historical minutiae for no apparent reason, which detracts from his arguments instead of augmenting them. I found this distracting, making reading this book quite tiring. I’ve noted similar criticisms in reviews of Smolin’s other books. Smolin does make a number of very valid points, particularly regarding the current sad state of the theoretical physics culture. But I wouldn’t call this book great or ground-breaking by any means. I think it deserves three stars, but no more.
Top reviews from other countries
The book is easily readable, and doesn't require any serious understanding of physics or mathematics to follow what Smolin is putting forward. It does however require both an understanding of what is (or should that be "used to be"?) recognised as the scientific method and the ability to see why abandoning that (and thus abandoning the whole idea that a non-testable theory of physics is just so much fluff) is probably a bad thing - so not recommended for string theorists who are not prepared to consider the possibility that their untestable and inadequately defined theory might not actually be the be-all and end-all of physics.
That said, the trouble with physics, according to Smolin, is that in the 200 years up to 1975 major advances were made about every 25 years, but since 1975 there have been none. This period coincides with Smolin's professional career as a physicist.
Smolin indentifies five major problems that faced physicists in 1975, none of which have been solved. The first was the need to reconcile relativity with quantum mechanics. Various theories were put forward, but the dominant one was string theory, which Smolin explains as well as is possible, I guess, without maths.
Smolin complains that string theory is not really a theory at all, in that it makes no predictions and, therfore, cannot be tested by experiment. Nevertheless, it has become the dominant theory in university physics departments, to the extent that no young physicist can expect to get a post, at least in American universities, who does not subscribe to it.
Thus, the book is largely a critique of string theory, and the way universities fail to encourage theorists with original ideas. Physicists, he says, are of two kinds. There are the craftsmen and the dreamers. At the moment the craftsmen are in the ascendant, but Smolin thinks that something important is being missed, and what physics needs is a dreamer or seer to identify what this is.
Whilst I agree with much of what is written in the last section of the book about how university departments operate particularly with regards to funding, I found it a little tedious and repetitive (even more so because much of what is here is stated elsewhere in the text) which is why I gave four stars instead of five.












