 |
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
This page is the original source of this review, though you may also find it on Amazon or other sites. | ||
| Book Reviews Home | Free Audio Books | |
 |
Book Review of: Visions of the MultiverseDo parallel realities exist? Is our universe one of many? Price: $9.92 Availability: Usually ships
within 24 hours |
| Review
of
Visions of the Multiverse, by Dr. Steven Manly (Softcover, 2011) (You can print this review in landscape mode, if you want a hardcopy) Reviewer: Mark Lamendola, author of over 6,000 articles. I like Dr. Manly's style. It's obvious he enjoys writing. I enjoyed reading what he wrote. This book takes a non-academic approach to explaining various theories of some of the toughest of academic topics, such as particle physics and cosmology. Dr. Manly communicates the essence of these theories clearly, despite not using the math that normally forms the basis for discussion. The idea of multiple universes doesn't appeal to me, and I agree with the view Dr. Manly had before he wrote this book. However, that particular twist makes a compelling reason to read the book. The bulk of it covers the supporting topics, which we might consider mainstream physics and cosmology. I've read many books on these topics, partly because it took many books before I could have a reasonably full grasp of these topics. For someone who is new to these areas of science, this book would be an excellent introduction. It isn't particularly deep, but it does have enough depth to be educational. Its breadth is necessary, I think, to prepare the reader for the multiverse concepts Dr. Manly explores. It didn't surprise me when I read the About the Author part and learned he teaches introductory physics at the University of Rochester. This book is geared toward that demographic. Without being "dumbed down," the book is introductory in scope, content, and tone. He also has a direct writing style, as opposed to the passive voice commonly used in works targeted toward higher academics.
As a reader, I never felt insulted or condescended to. I could feel Dr. Manly's enthusiasm for the subject as I read, too. This is one of those works of nonfiction that you can read strictly for enjoyment, if you want to. This book consists of nine chapters and two appendices spanning 240 pages. It also has an index, extensive notes, and an extensive bibliography. Chapter one explains the story of Copernicus and his revolutionary effect on how the western world viewed the universe. Chapter two gives an overview of how our current view of space-time came to be. Chapter three delves into the sometimes confusing subject of particles and waves, a topic that seemed straightforward until de Broglie put his two cents in. Dr. Manly manages to discuss all of this without leaving the reader confused. The rest of the book goes a little deeper into particle physics but mostly builds on the multiverse theme as the title promises. Just in case you didn't catch all of the main points, Appendix A presents them in abbreviated form. For those who want a structured view of multiverse theories, Appendix B looks at Tegmark's taxonomy. It has four levels, so it's a quick read. Add this book to your reading list, if you don't have a copy yet. It could make for some interesting dinner conversations. | |
About these reviewsYou may be wondering why the reviews here are any different from the hundreds of "reviews" posted online. Notice the quotation marks? I've been reviewing books for sites like Amazon for many years now, and it dismays me that Amazon found it necessary to post a minimum word count for reviews. It further dismays me that it's only 20 words. If that's all you have to say about a book, why bother? And why waste everyone else's time with such drivel? As a reader of such reviews, I feel like I am being told that I do not matter. The flippancy of people who write these terse "reviews" is insulting to the authors also, I would suspect. This sound bite blathering taking the place of any actual communication is increasingly a problem in our mindless, blog-posting Webosphere. Sadly, Google rewards such pointlessness as "content" so we just get more if this inanity. My reviews, contrary to current (non) standards, actually tell you about the book. I always got an "A" on a book review I did as a kid (that's how I remember it anyhow, and it's my story so I'm sticking to it). A book review contains certain elements and has a logical structure. It informs the reader about the book. A book review may also tell the reader whether the reviewer liked it, but revealing a reviewer's personal taste is not necessary for an informative book review. About your reviewer
About reading styleNo, I do not "speed read" through these. That said, I do read at a fast rate. But, in contrast to speed reading, I read everything when I read a book for review. Speed reading is a specialized type of reading that requires skipping text as you go. Using this technique, I've been able to consistently "max out" a speed reading machine at 2080 words per minute with 80% comprehension. This method is great if you are out to show how fast you can read. But I didn't use it in graduate school and I don't use it now. I think it takes the joy out of reading, and that pleasure is a big part of why I read. |
| |||||