4 ms·

Try Roger Penrose's "The Road to Reality." He takes the approach of assuming that his readers can range from absolute beginners to mathematicians, and that if

by jansho 9y ago

Try Roger Penrose's "The Road to Reality." He takes the approach of assuming that his readers can range from absolute beginners to mathematicians, and that if you prefer, you can skip the equations and the exercises. But if you attempt to understand them, then your picture of the Universe will become richer that no other pop science book can promise. It's an enticing thought, and that and his gentle prose are just about his only tricks to push his readers through his enormous tome. I haven't finished it yet but it does feel rewarding that much of the maths that I've come across (Alevels and engineering degree) are there, laid out in a new framework of meaning, the Universe. P.S. There's also an eBook version, and an online resource that gives solutions to the exercises.

77pt77 9y ago
It's a very good book for people of a technical background to get a taste of theoretical physics (probable the only one) but let's not exaggerate, it's not a math book.
pbhjpbhj 9y ago
Penrose says the same in "Emperor's New Mind" - that you can skip the equations. Perhaps you can but IMO you'd miss an awful lot, I found it too difficult to just jump over the equations until I'd studied enough to have met the Schrodinger equation and from then one can pretty much grasp all the physics/maths. Perhaps he does better at keeping the flow going in "Road to Reality" for those trying to read without deeper knowledge?
anatoly 9y ago
My advice is to not try Penrose's book. The vast majority of its contents will be utterly incomprehensible to someone without a PhD level background in physics. Technically it is self-contained and nothing beyond high school knowledge is needed to understand it; but while technically true, in reality it's a cruel deceit. If you try to learn it without advanced training in physics and math, you'll run into limitations related to mathematical maturity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_maturity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_maturity) very quickly, within the space of the first few chapters. The idea of this book seems noble and uplifting, but it cannot be done in this fashion. It doesn't matter that every theorem and assumption are clearly stated and follow each other in an orderly sequence. There's a huge number of new ideas, mathematical and physical, which require proper acquaintance to settle in your mind, not the 1-2 pages Penrose is able to give each of them. If someone is serious about learning physics to that level "properly" and is willing to invest the time and effort, they're much, much better off working through conventional college-level (and later grad-level) textbooks in particular subjects, taking care of math prerequisites before and during such study. That's very very hard to do, but is in fact possible, whereas studying solely from Penrose's book, I think, is not. It functions, sadly, as a sort of trap for impressionable bright people very eager for advanced knowledge - they will try to struggle through it, inevitably give up rather early on, and blame themselves.
- jansho 9y ago
  > It functions, sadly, as a sort of trap for impressionable bright people very eager for advanced knowledge Or perhaps people who assume that it's a good all-in-one solution to get a glimpse of understanding the Universe. For me personally, I have no wish to be mathematically fluent now. I admit that I can't imagine committing wholly to the studies of maths and physics for more than two years - this book seemed like a Magic Bullet. My plan is to read it very slowly, perhaps over a decade. My mind is on other projects for now, but if I have this quietly stewing at the back of my mind, maybe one day I can be braver to make the jump and study maths and physics seriously. At least, that's the plan. A retirement amongst books - I thought that's appropriate. Sigh, I do believe you though. Have you read this book to dispute Penrose's claim that the less mathematically fluent can gain some useful insights?

by jansho 9y ago

77pt77 9y ago

It's a very good book for people of a technical background to get a taste of theoretical physics (probable the only one) but let's not exaggerate, it's not a math book.

pbhjpbhj 9y ago

Penrose says the same in "Emperor's New Mind" - that you can skip the equations. Perhaps you can but IMO you'd miss an awful lot, I found it too difficult to just jump over the equations until I'd studied enough to have met the Schrodinger equation and from then one can pretty much grasp all the physics/maths. Perhaps he does better at keeping the flow going in "Road to Reality" for those trying to read without deeper knowledge?

anatoly 9y ago

My advice is to not try Penrose's book. The vast majority of its contents will be utterly incomprehensible to someone without a PhD level background in physics. Technically it is self-contained and nothing beyond high school knowledge is needed to understand it; but while technically true, in reality it's a cruel deceit. If you try to learn it without advanced training in physics and math, you'll run into limitations related to mathematical maturity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_maturity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_maturity) very quickly, within the space of the first few chapters. The idea of this book seems noble and uplifting, but it cannot be done in this fashion. It doesn't matter that every theorem and assumption are clearly stated and follow each other in an orderly sequence. There's a huge number of new ideas, mathematical and physical, which require proper acquaintance to settle in your mind, not the 1-2 pages Penrose is able to give each of them. If someone is serious about learning physics to that level "properly" and is willing to invest the time and effort, they're much, much better off working through conventional college-level (and later grad-level) textbooks in particular subjects, taking care of math prerequisites before and during such study. That's very very hard to do, but is in fact possible, whereas studying solely from Penrose's book, I think, is not. It functions, sadly, as a sort of trap for impressionable bright people very eager for advanced knowledge - they will try to struggle through it, inevitably give up rather early on, and blame themselves.

jansho 9y ago
> It functions, sadly, as a sort of trap for impressionable bright people very eager for advanced knowledge Or perhaps people who assume that it's a good all-in-one solution to get a glimpse of understanding the Universe. For me personally, I have no wish to be mathematically fluent now. I admit that I can't imagine committing wholly to the studies of maths and physics for more than two years - this book seemed like a Magic Bullet. My plan is to read it very slowly, perhaps over a decade. My mind is on other projects for now, but if I have this quietly stewing at the back of my mind, maybe one day I can be braver to make the jump and study maths and physics seriously. At least, that's the plan. A retirement amongst books - I thought that's appropriate. Sigh, I do believe you though. Have you read this book to dispute Penrose's claim that the less mathematically fluent can gain some useful insights?