Briefer History Of Time

by:

Hawking, Stephen and Leonard Mlodinow

Publisher:

Bantam Dell, Random House Inc, New York

Location:

2005

Cover:

Book Laboratory Inc & Moonrunner Design

Type:

Softcover

reviewed by:

Lynard Barnes

2/25/2009

Comment:

An "accessible formulation" of the key concepts from Hawking's book, "A History of Time".

The color illustrations in this book are excellent as is the lucid explanation of some of the more thorny issues of physics. It is intended to be a makeup version of Hawking's 1988 best seller, A History Of Time published by the Bantam Dell Publishing Group. Though a best seller, the general opinion is that few people read the book. A BRIEFER HISTORY OF TIME is definitely readable. Since this reviewer did not purchase the first book, comments will be restricted to the second.

Paul Davies' 1995 book, ABOUT TIME: EINSTEIN'S UNFINISHED REVOLUTION is a book specifically about time (reviewed in the TGBJ in September 2005) and offers a more direct treatment of questions related to the physics underlying our perception of time. Hawking's A BRIEFER HISTORY OF TIME tackles the explanation of time by examining the surrounding postulates of science. Indeed, you get the feeling that this is a tutorial for the 19th century scientifically challenged. (If you are one of those, you should be aware that we are now in the 21st century). While the discussion is excellent, the illustrations are excellent, there is nothing new here, real or imagined. The book is a tutorial. A light tutorial.

The most provocative (interesting, insightful, argumentative) thread running through A BRIEFER HISTORY OF TIME Hawking sums in chapter 12, the conclusion:

". . . But if the universe is complete self-contained, with no singularities or boundaries, and completely described by a unified theory, that has profound implications for the role of God as creator."

Some theoretical mathematicians and physicists doing battle with the lay public ignorance of their endeavors seem caught up in this battle of God versus science. Paul Davies touches on the subject in his book, ABOUT TIME: EINSTEIN'S UNFINISHED REVOLUTION, and is less confrontational than Hawking. Of course, Davies immersed himself in the subject with his book 1983 GOD AND THE NEW PHYSICS [see the TGBRJ opinion piece for January 2, 2009, If God Were A Pina Cola

Trices Group Book Review Journal

HTMLBookReview

. Basically, their argument is that if their theories are correct, then a god could not have created everything--the universe. Earlier in the book, Hawking poses what he sees as a paradox: can God create a stone so heavy that he can not lift it?

It is understandable why scientists would want to bring God into a discussion of their respective scientific disciplines. Religion preaches against the evils of sin (which can be translated to mean "physical life"). Science preaches against the banality of Religion. If your adversary is powerful, by inference, so too must you be powerful. Like children in a playground who have exhausted all the really fun-things to do, you engage in an ongoing argument about whose parents has the most important job. In essence, this is the God versus science debate.

How would a Religious person respond to Hawking's paradox about the stone? A Religious person would say that (1) since God is unknowable, you, you lowly scientist, would never know whether God ever created such a stone and (2) since God creates everything, even the heaviest of stones, God is capable of moving everything, including the heaviest stone. To the scientist, this would not be an acceptable answer. It can not be tested. To the Religious person, it is a perfectly acceptable answer since it encapsulates the very foundation of religion, which is faith. However, for those mulling around the playground who are neither Religious nor scientists, the answer is incorrect and rather self-serving, explaining nothing. The correct answer is that God is the stone. End of paradox.

Trices Group Book Review Journal

HTMLBookReview