Science ebook recommendations

[Angst]

Originally Posted by kennyc

New one from Alan Wiseman (The World Without Us) - Countdown - will the Earth support 11 billion?

http://www.amazon.com/Countdown-Last.../dp/0316097756

Kenny, you might be interested in Hans Rosling's TED Talks presentation on global population. Hans is one my favorite presenters.

Summary taken from the TED site:

The world's population will grow to 9 billion over the next 50 years -- and only by raising the living standards of the poorest can we check population growth. This is the paradoxical answer that Hans Rosling unveils at TED@Cannes using colorful new data display technology (you'll see).

http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_roslin...on_growth.html

[MickeyC]

Highly recommend The Future of the Mind by Michio Kaku.

In Book One, he covers the history of the brain and new instruments for studying the brain.

In Book Two, he explores this new technology which has made recording memories, mind reading, videotaping dreams and telekinesis possible.

In Book Three, he covers alternate forms of consciousness, from dreams, drugs and mental illness to robots and aliens. Particularly interesting, he discusses the potential for controlling and manipulating the brain to manage diseases such as depression, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and more.

And, typically for Kaku, he keeps the details very understandable. Also, he interviewed a lot of scientists which makes the book that much more credible.

[Soldim]

Originally Posted by MickeyC

Highly recommend The Future of the Mind by Michio Kaku..

I bought it last weekend ... it's somewhere on the TBR pile. I'll try to get to it soon

[Lin2412]

Originally Posted by MickeyC

Highly recommend The Future of the Mind by Michio Kaku.

In Book One, he covers the history of the brain and new instruments for studying the brain.

In Book Two, he explores this new technology which has made recording memories, mind reading, videotaping dreams and telekinesis possible.

In Book Three, he covers alternate forms of consciousness, from dreams, drugs and mental illness to robots and aliens. Particularly interesting, he discusses the potential for controlling and manipulating the brain to manage diseases such as depression, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and more.

And, typically for Kaku, he keeps the details very understandable. Also, he interviewed a lot of scientists which makes the book that much more credible.

I should like to read that book, especially the book three as there is a history of Parkinson's in our family. Managing it would be helpful and would make me less of a worry-wart for the future.

Do we need to read it chronologically, or would we miss important points and could get side-tracked if we proceed to the latter books?

[MickeyC]

Originally Posted by Lin2412

I should like to read that book, especially the book three as there is a history of Parkinson's in our family. Managing it would be helpful and would make me less of a worry-wart for the future.

Do we need to read it chronologically, or would we miss important points and could get side-tracked if we proceed to the latter books?

Actually all the "Books" are actually sections in The Future of the Mind. Why he used the term 'Books' vice Sections is not clear. Anyway, buy The Future of the Mind and you get all three 'books'

[Rizla]

Biocentrism examines the role conciousness in physics.

http://www.amazon.ca/Biocentrism-Con.../dp/1935251740

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by Rizla

Biocentrism examines the role conciousness in physics.

http://www.amazon.ca/Biocentrism-Con.../dp/1935251740

I think the title of this thread is "science ebook recommendations", and not "pseudoscience ebook recommendations". Looks to be standard Deepak Chopra-style malarky that is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of quantum physics - that an "observer" has to be conscious, or even alive. Or maybe it's based on the all too astute observation about what people will buy when you affix the word "quantum" to it.

I love that the book description on Amazon has this gem: "Robert Lanza is one of the most respected scientists in the world". Strangely, it omits the fact that Lanza is a medical doctor, and not a physicist or evolutionary biologist.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

I think the title of this thread is "science ebook recommendations", and not "pseudoscience ebook recommendations". Looks to be standard Deepak Chopra-style malarky that is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of quantum physics - that an "observer" has to be conscious, or even alive. Or maybe it's based on the all too astute observation about what people will buy when you affix the word "quantum" to it.

I love that the book description on Amazon has this gem: "Robert Lanza is one of the most respected scientists in the world". Strangely, it omits the fact that Lanza is a medical doctor, and not a physicist or evolutionary biologist.

Yes. Lanza is a total woo-pusher along the lines of Chopra, Penrose - with regard to his idiotic quantum consciousness, and others.

Ancient debunked philosophy masquerading as science.

http://nirmukta.com/2009/12/14/bioce...ious-universe/

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...bert_lanza_do/

....

[FlorenceArt]

Thanks. The book's description made me suspicious and the reviews too, but I looked up Lanza and saw that he was indeed a scientist if not in the field he is tackling here, and I was wondering if the book might be worth reading anyway. But that Wired article settles it. Here's a quote from the book:

Modern science cannot explain why the laws of physics are exactly balanced for animal life to exist.

Of course modern science doesn't explain that. Modern science has proved that animal life evolved to adapt to their environment. That includes the laws of physics. If the laws of physics were different, life would be different, but how can we say that our laws of physics are the only ones that would allow life? We can't, so the argument is worthless.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by FlorenceArt

Of course modern science doesn't explain that. Modern science has proved that animal life evolved to adapt to their environment. That includes the laws of physics. If the laws of physics were different, life would be different, but how can we say that our laws of physics are the only ones that would allow life? We can't, so the argument is worthless.

Precisely - it's simply a statement of the "anthropic principle", which basically says that if the universe were significantly different to the way it is, we wouldn't be here to observe it.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Yes. Lanza is a total woo-pusher along the lines of Chopra, Penrose - with regard to his idiotic quantum consciousness, and others....

I would hardly put Penrose in that company. Chopra, of course, but not someone who once shared the Wolf Prize for physics with Stephen Hawking.

[WT Sharpe]

A book I read, enjoyed for the most part (except for the math), and thoroughly disagreed with the central idea was Our Mathematical Universe by Max Tegmark. But as strange as is that idea that "all structures that exist mathematically exist also physically" and that any structures complex enough to contain self-aware substructures will subjectively perceive themselves as existing in a physically real world, I would hardly call him a peddler of "woo". I'd say he's simply another scientist who has a fascinating Theory Of Everything into which I have not been sold. Besides, the rest of his book is very mainstream, even if his main thesis is a throwback, in my opinion, to Pythagoras.

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...ostcount=19068

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

I would hardly put Penrose in that company. Chopra, of course, but not someone who once shared the Wolf Prize for physics with Stephen Hawking.

Sir Roger Penrose, Emeritus Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University, is most assuredly not in that category. He's one of the foremost living mathematical physicists.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

I would hardly put Penrose in that company. Chopra, of course, but not someone who once shared the Wolf Prize for physics with Stephen Hawking.

He truly is with respect to cognitive science. He stepped way out of line with his "The Emperor's New Mind" and has deviated much further since then. He's a fine mathematician and even something of a physicist but he's a total woo-pusher with his quantum mind speculation.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

A book I read, enjoyed for the most part (except for the math), and thoroughly disagreed with the central idea was Our Mathematical Universe by Max Tegmark. But as strange as is that idea that "all structures that exist mathematically exist also physically" and that any structures complex enough to contain self-aware substructures will subjectively perceive themselves as existing in a physically real world, I would hardly call him a peddler of "woo". I'd say he's simply another scientist who has a fascinating Theory Of Everything into which I have not been sold. Besides, the rest of his book is very mainstream, even if his main thesis is a throwback, in my opinion, to Pythagoras.

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...ostcount=19068

But the problem with things like his is that it is NOT a THEORY, it's pure unsupportable speculation and is not SCIENCE. But I argue the same thing for some of the bleeding physics speculations as well.

I have nothing against speculation as long as it is presented as such, but with the lack of scientific understanding of the general public they often confuse these things with science and/or reality and that is the real problem. The tainting of science.