Very good. A large collection of works that cover astronomy, mathematics and physics. From "There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom" to the one about the Coastline of Britain, there is plenty of material to keep you busy.

Huge book; a wealth of information.

Great compendium of selected works.

How it would be possible to rate this collection of essays less than 5 stars I'm not sure. Ferris has assembled one of the best selection of science writing on the subjects of 20th century physics, astronomy and maths that I have ever come across. The ordering is logical and comprehensive, and the essays are by the best authorities and communicators in each field assembled. The broad themes are explorations of Relativity, Quantum mechanics, Astrophysics, Game theory, Chaos, science biography, poetry and philosophy. There are poems by James Clerk Maxwell and Emily Dickenson, biographys of Rutherford and Turing, and several essays by Azimov, Einstein, and Feynman. On Quantum there are essay's by Bohr, Heisenberg, Russell, Dirac and Von Neuman, On Astronomy by Hubble, Sagan, Eddington and Weinberg. Mathmathics is explored by Mandelbrot, Von Neumnan and there is Alan Turing's original paper on a test for Artificial intelligence. Biographys on Chandrasekkera Rutherford, Robert Wilson and others compete for one another for attention as to the lives of these facinating men. One or two essays were poor selections (Schwinger on Tomonaga seems to have been interted to show an interest in Japanese physics at the time of the war, but is so baddly written that few would argue it belongs here I think). Another gaping hole is the almost complete absence of women contributors, addressed almost as apology by Vivian Gornick. Notably there is an essay by Pierre Curie but not by Mdme. It may have been she died before writing a public communique, but I think it is the major flaw of the collection. Overall this was absolutly a materful collection. I will be re-reading many of these essays again I am sure.gh

Not too shabby, though some of the selections messed with the pace. E.g. too detail oriented without any real reason to keep you reading. Good though.

dibeliin saat masih smp kelas 1...membuat kepala mo pecah saat baca pertama kali...sampe sekarang belum bisa ngerti semua isinya. jika ada yg berminat saya bersedia berikan / swap buku.

these topics interest me much because it contains the information of the constellations and their mathematical calculations

This is my favorite collection of essays.

One of my favourite Scientific Books. Explore cosmic evolution, the big bang and many more subjects delivered in text by the great pioneers and scientists themselves.

read or not to read? .... READ ! you will come out richer ...

This collection is actually the second of the “World Treasury” series that I’ve encountered; I’ve also got the science fiction collection which I will review when I get it back from the friend to whom I loaned it (not his fault; there’s a lot there to read). The goal behind creating a world treasury, states the series editor, is to introduce (presumably mainly American) readers to worthy and enduring works in the chosen subject from all over the world, not only those from the more classical canon (though the latter is certainly, as it should be, well-represented). This is a noble goal, so long as the pieces are chosen for their content first and their point of origin second. In the sci-fi treasury this is mostly the case, as there are more than a few outstanding stories which were originally written in languages other than English, though there a few which were obviously chosen for the diversity they would add rather than any independent merit of their own. In this collection devoted to “Physics, Astronomy, and Mathematics,” a similar approach has been used, although it feels much more natural. Though the seminal discoveries of modern science were originated in Europe, their study and application has spread around the globe and thus it is quite possible, even necessary, to include luminaries from Russia, India, and Japan alongside their colleagues from Europe and America.

Under that overarching principle, then, each collection focuses on its specific theme, and here we are primarily concerned with modern physics, both atomic and astronomic. Again, the editor’s stated goal is not to compile a textbook or technical journal, but to include pieces which can be apprehended by the layman. I was a bit skeptical upon reading this, anticipating a bunch of journalism majors trying to distill complex scientific concepts clearly beyond their comprehension into sound bites suitable for a TV-drugged public with even less cognitive power, but a glance at the table of contents shows I needn’t have worried. The author list is a veritable who’s who of Nobel laureates, including those giants who stand at the head of the class: Heisenberg, Bohr, Planck, Dirac, and Einstein. Collectively they offer clear, engaging explanations of the staggeringly brilliant insights they have crafted. These are men who possess not only the technical prowess to grapple with these concepts which have forever altered the way in which we view the physical world, but also the philosophical conviction that lets them internalize the new paradigm and its implications and in turn communicate them to those of us of lesser ability.

Given the theme of the collection, it is not surprising that science writing, mainly written by scientists, occupies the bulk of the material. The first section covers Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and the atomic realm, the second handles general relativity, astrophysics, and cosmology, while the third discusses mathematics and information technology. As previously mentioned, most of the material presents foundational concepts directly from their discoverers; the editor has chosen to stay close to the core of the science rather than branch into many of the admittedly fascinating but not-as-well developed (at the time, anyway) offshoots like string theory. This decision to adhere mostly to orthodoxy was well-made, as the few forays off the beaten path don’t do the collection any favors – a discussion of the now unpopular Nemesis star theory and an existentialist and decidedly unscientific description of a solar eclipse by Annie Dillard spring to mind (“There was no world. We were the world’s dead people rotating and orbiting around and around, embedded in the planet’s crust, while the earth rolled down.” Seriously?). I’ve had occasion to study atomic physics and chemistry before, so much in that section was familiar to me and as fascinating as when I was first introduced to it. Astrophysics, on the other hand, was not a subject I had considered very thoroughly, and the excellent writings in this collection have inspired me to read more in that direction, starting with A Brief History of Time. The section on mathematics is rather short comparatively, and could probably have been omitted with no loss to the whole.

I may carry a healthy disdain for existentialism and other such nonsense, but that doesn’t mean that we as scientists can afford to neglect the human element present in the study of our natural world, or indeed in any other human endeavor. Accordingly, neither does this anthology; the final three sections are entitled “Scientists’ Lives and Works,” “The Poetry of Science,” and “Philosophy and Science”. The first of these is a series of biographical sketches of scientific figures, some luminaries and some more obscure, again mainly written by fellow scientists who had worked with or studied under their subjects. Not all of these are equally gifted at character sketches as they are science writings, so this section occasionally bogs down, but any fan of biography and science history will find it enjoyable. The poetry section is exactly what it purports to be – poems about science. Some of the poets embrace the wonder and joy of scientific discovery, some rail against the cold, unfeeling, foolhardy aims of the discipline, some seek to straddle the paradox inherent in the former views. Some of the poems from each camp are simply empty repetitions of mawkish sentiments or grand-sounding ideas (Emily Dickenson is just not a good poet), while some are genuinely thought-provoking. Whatever else this section is, it’s also, wisely, short.

More germane to the overall aims of the collection, and much more gratifying to the reader, is the last section, which pertains to the intersection of scientific thought and theory with the realms of philosophy and religion. As one who believes in a God whose character is reflected in both the rational laws which govern the physical universe He created and in the fragile, emotional, often quite irrational creatures He fashioned in His own image, to me these questions are not just intriguing but fundamentally important. So it was with great interest that I read these grandmasters sharing both their overarching epistemologies and their quiet musings, always seeking to unravel the mystery that is man’s quest for knowledge. For it is here that the human element in the pure sciences is most clearly revealed, here in the minds of men who seek to understand the universe in all its facets, here in the actions of human agents who reveal as much by the very action of plumbing these depths as they do in the results that they obtain, here much more than in the existential angst and poetical polemics of the artists.

Take, for instance, Einstein’s famous statement that, “God does not play at dice,” over against the Copenhagen school’s insistence that yes, in fact, He does. What Einstein feared, and what some of its proponents have joyfully proclaimed, was that the uncertainty relations implied by quantum physics would sound the death knell for any sort of determinism, especially that which might be attributed to the actions of an omniscient God. Heinz Pagels, one of the more vocal of the aforementioned proponents, puts it thusly:

Physicists realized that the concept of the perfect, all-knowing mind of God has no support in nature. Quantum theory – the new theory that replaced classical physics – makes only statistical predictions. But is there a possibility that beyond quantum theory there exists a new deterministic physics, described by some kind of subquantum theory, and the all-knowing mind uses this to determine the world? According to the quantum theory this is not possible. Even an all-knowing mind must support its knowledge with experience, and once it tries to experimentally determine one physical quantity the rest of the deck of nature gets randomly shuffled again. The very act of attempting to establish determinism produces indeterminism. There is no randomness like quantum randomness. Like us, God plays dice – He, too, knows only the odds.

This statement is true as far as it goes; any act of observation on the quantum level will irrevocably change the quantities complementary to the one being observed, preventing complete knowledge of the system at any one time for any one experimental arrangement. What Einstein and Pagels have apparently overlooked (not surprisingly, considering that the Christian church has all but abandoned this doctrine, though it screams from every page of Holy Scripture) is that God’s omniscience is not the result of observation and experience, no matter how wide-ranging or subtle, but rather the immediate result of His sovereign, directing action. God knows all not because He sees all, but because He orders, directs, and commands all, from the largest supernova to the intricate dance of each and every subatomic particle, from mankind’s greatest triumphs to his deepest tragedies (c.f. Is 45:7). Once again it is shown that God’s revelation of Himself in nature syncs perfectly with his written Word, and the futile thinking of those who in their unrighteousness would suppress the truth is again thwarted. Even though it might not be necessary to answer or even consider all the implications contained in such scientific breakthroughs before pressing on to the practical considerations their development affords, we are still obligated to consider the philosophical, human elements contained therein, for it is this very humanity which will determine the uses to which such practical considerations are put.

So, to which readers would I recommend this anthology? Well, I’ll tell you who shouldn’t read it, and I know this reader because he owned my copy of the book before me. My anonymous reader obviously started into this collection with the best of intentions, to delve into the fascinating realm of science and maybe to arm himself for such philosophically battles as we have previously been considering (or maybe just to pick up a few fancy words and concepts so he could sound impressive at dinner parties). The forward, preface, and introduction to the first section have been accordingly scrutinized; copious underlinings in various colors of pen highlight important concepts (indeed, more of these pages are underlined than not), key phrases are carefully inscribed in the margins for future reference. This treatment continues through the first selection, an account taken from a Richard Feynman lecture on the behavior of atoms in various circumstances. Beyond this point, however, the studious marks disappear; my friend apparently not up to the task of wading through 835 pages of such daunting material. Perhaps you think it uncharitable of me to ascribe such lack of intellect to one clearly doing his best to learn, but let me share one minor detail. At one point, Feynman is discussing a solution of salt in water, focusing on the interactions of the dipolar water molecules with the negative chlorine ions and the positive sodium ions. Our erstwhile acolyte has dutifully rendered these protean players in the margins as Cl-... and So+. If, as it did me, this anecdote evoked from you a reaction of bemused disappointment, you’re more than qualified to read, understand, and enjoy this well-crafted treasury. If, however, you’re still trying to work out what all the fuss is about, well, perhaps you should go see what reality shows are on.

This is a very good collection of essays. The science and math sections are accessible and interesting. The play with the different ideas that are challenging scientists. My personal favorite was the essay speculating a second sun in a distant for our solar system and explaining how it effects gravitation pulls. This is just one of several essays that are really quite good.