Over the last few weeks I have been reading small chunks of A Brief History of Time and initially felt that I had a grasp of the subject matter - no pun intended.
Having now tried to understand quarks, antiquarks and flip particles I am really struggling and about to go back a chapter to try again.
So, my question to the assembled intellect of STW is what page / topic did you get to when you realised you had lost the plot ?
I was enthralled by the credits..
I read it all the way through. I need to go back and give it another read.
I read it all the way through. I need to go back and give it another read.
I've read it all, in stages. But when I pick it up to re-read it, it all seems fresh!
Very little of it seems to have stuck in up there... Clearly, I'm a little bit thick.
I'm with the resurrection, read it a number of years ago on my elective (studying abroad - mostly on a carribean beach) had to go back a few pages several times but all seemed to make sense at the time, can now remember practically non of it. May have to take it on holiday and re-read it - thanks for the reminder!
Just thinking that I may re read aswell.
Singletrack book club looming? It would be a great one to start on. 
All the way. But in my defence, I do have a Physics degree and found most of it hard going.
Better, in my opinion, is Brian Greene's "The Fabric of the Cosmos".
I bought it but didn't get much further than that -really can't remember how far I got but it wasn't very far and I barely understood a f***** word. Compared with Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" I found it a hard read and I am not thick 
I got as far as my kitchen with it - I have a wonky table....
Unlike the brainy buggers above, I go about a third of the way through, realised I'd re-read so much that I'd have read the book twice, and gave it up as a bad job
It was a while ago but I don't think I made it all the way: one page forward, two pages back...equivalent of reading a book three times as long. Must have another go at it.
my head fell off at about page 4
Bit out of date these days thing have moved on inthe world of theroretical physics.
having failed my a-level physics thanks in part to opting to do the quantum physics module, i decided that i should try reading this in the hope that i may actually understand some of the concepts.
22 years later, i've still not finished it and i'm not sure i want to!
what i do want to do is get them to re-mark my physics exam though since hawking has subsequently said that he's probably got it all wrong, meaning there's a good chance i should really have passed...
All of of it twice
But again I have that physics degree head start
Apparently a massive percentage of people who buy that book never even get 1/4 of the way through it, it's known as being one that sits on peoples bookshelves and very few people ever manage to read all of it never mind understand it!
I find the same with a lot of Richard Dawkin's books. Very intelligent guy, great presenter but his writing style leaves a fair bit to be desired (IMHO).
Another one here for read the whole way through but also want to re-read it as a lot didn't sink in/was understood!
I remember reading a review that said more or less. If you think you've grasped the concept, you probably haven't understood it properly...
Read it ages ago, some of it was heavy/dull/unfathomable [psychology degree, no hard sciences]and some of it was really funny. Sure I had to go back a page here and there, or skip a page even ! but it was good.
More recently listened to it on iPod on long long road trip with geeky friend; listen to a chapter and discuss. That was good.
Wont be long till my kids are listening to it too.
Should it be classed as fiction?
I got to last page and it was missing... so I dont know who it did?
If you want a book that will properly open your eyes to how the world works, read Capital by Marx. If you want a helping hand watch these as you go along:
All the way through, it's an enjoyable popular science book that glosses over the harder stuff to make it a nice read, but then I do have a PhD 
got it from the library. read first paragraph. said **** this. took it back to the library. 
Is reading that like some sort of birth control?
I didn't find it hugely difficult to be honest. I must be right clever me (although I supposed it's more likely I missed the point entirely). Some of the stuff is fairly abstract I guess. And I suppose reading a number of other popular physics books has made some of the terms familiar.
If you want a popular physics book that'll screw with your head, get the superstrings theory one.
It's hard to have faith in science, because science doesn't have faith in itself, or rather, is constantly questioning it's own conclusions. That is why I will never follow the advice of a doctor or scientist, not because I don't respect them and their "knowledge", but because in 5 years time they'll have changed their minds about it all. Which is good,quest for truth and all that, and it's all the opposite to religion where everything is a given and can't be questioned, which I can't stand and means I'll never be religious.
I only made it halfway through, and now you tell me he's wrong, hey ho. SNAFU.
It's time to hand the world over to engineers. X=Y+Z. (Full stop) Oh, but we had better use a safety factor of 10 in case we're talking bollocks.
Well I think you're getting theoretical science and actual science confused there. You just typed a load of stuff and I read it because we're often pretty good at putting theoretical science into practise. It's only a matter of time before we gain the technology to prove/disprove what the wheelchair bound one is saying.
Is this the Bill Bryson book??
I read the paper back on holiday in Turkey & kept regaling the other half with 'interesting anecdotes' by the pool. She found this very entertaining, I think.....
She then bought me the hardback (with pics) copy & I think I have read that twice.
I do agree that it seems to slip from the mind quite quickly, but it's good to read at the time.
I really enjoyed it when I read it a couple of times a few years ago, but haven't looked at it (or the subject area) since, and suspect that things have moved on since then.
The act of studying A Brief History of Time alters a Brief History of Time. It is therefore better not to study it. I think...
I have a Physics degree so it was fine, whereas Ulysses and Finnegan's wake were completely impenetrable and lasted about 10 pages
(Mr MC posting) again another physics grad who finished and thought it was quite entertaining. Also read loads of popular theoretical physics books when I was at GCSE level (dont profess that I understood them all) so I'd come across the concepts and explanations a few times.
Thread should be retitled "hands up who's a geek?"....
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
