stephen hawking leonard mlodinow the grand design

P15-28 A rather lame historical essay about the development of physical law. P10 Ends with profoundly philosophical questions 'Why is there something rather than nothing?, Why do we exist?, Why this particular set of laws and not some other?' but has trivialized philosophy and rambled in a post-modern way, even after declaring that philosophy is dead. P8 Points to M-theory as the model for an ultimate 'theory of everything'. 'If two such physical theories or models accurately predict the same events, one cannot be said to be more real than the other rather, we are free to use whichever model is most convenient.' This appears to be saying there is no ultimate truth or reality. Also introduces a kind of post-modern view of truth. P7 basically argues against common sense, in that it is tied to common experience. P6 gives Feynmann a ride, and points to idea that universe has no single history.

Chesterton's statement 'Philosophy is thought that is well thought-out' None of this seems well thought-out. Philosophy has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly physics.' I think these are really stupid statements, so my immediate impression was that I hope Hawking gets a great burst of sales from pre-publicity, because if this kind of statement characterizes the approach, the public is going to get wind of it. P 5 Raises philosophical questions like 'Where did this all come from? Did the universe need a creator?' Then responds with 'Traditionally these are questions for philosophy, but philosophy is dead. A sloppy, intellectually lazy presentation of physics.The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow The Grand Design Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow That makes it a poor theory, because it isn't falsifiable. Scientists have been abandoning it, because no one has been able to propose experiments that reveal whether it's correct.

(There aren't.) I was bothered that string theory is given credence. In quantum physics, there is no 'cause and effect', and there is no discussion of the argument about whether there are hidden causes that haven't been discovered. You //can// predict where the roulette ball will fall, but not when an electron will drop from a higher quantum level. We are left believing that the statistical behavior of quantum effects is somehow equivalent to the statistical behavior of macro objects. Much is omitted - time dilation, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, and most importantly, Einstein's major goof - 'God doesn't play dice'. I just watched episode 2, a grab-bag of ideas that never coalesce into a coherent view. He's no Richard Feynman or Carlo Rovelli. Anyone who's read 'A Brief History of Time' knows what a poor job Steven Hawking does explaining things.

Stephen hawking leonard mlodinow the grand design