Susskind’s new book, The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the .. From Leonard Susskind, in his email exchange with Lee Smolin. Leonard Susskind, a founder of the theory and one of its leading practitioners, But most of “The Cosmic Landscape” is structured not around. Leonard Susskind in his book The Cosmic Landscape takes the reader along to share his perceptions of the ultimate boundary; the one about.
|Published (Last):||11 June 2005|
|PDF File Size:||2.1 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||3.77 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Despite the fact that it’s sloppily argued and poorly written, I’m embarrassed to say that I found it unputdownable. Please review your cart. The Ends of the World. Comparison of their known sizewith their apparent size allows measurement of a triangle and establishes that space is flat on scales of billion light years, – It appears that the universe inflated exponentially for a period in its earliest phases, and this has resulted in the surprisingly homogeneous nature of space.
The Cosmic Landscape – Wikipedia
Okay, it would be unfair of me to give this any sort of ranking due to the simple fact that I understood about five percent of it. Travels in the New Third World.
There is much of interest in this post and many of the ensuing comments. Regarding the significance of the special features of 4-dimensional manifolds, see the excerpt from a paper by Hendryk Pfeiffer quoted in this comment on an earlier post on this blog. But no matter how large it starts out, it can also drop rapidly by quantum tunneling into a lower energy level of the landscape, almost like water running downhill.
Book Review: The Cosmic Landscape – Universe Today
In order to describe a possible answer to those questions, Susskind first addresses, in the same concise, understandable way, other topics: But better and better measurements show that the cosmological constant only appears to be zero Susskind claims that after Guth first came up with this init was attacked as unfalsifiable.
It combines theory, common sense with a touch of the historical developments in physics and cosmology.
No-one is going to take you seriously in this forum until you have been savaged by Lubos Motl. Another important constant is the “fine structure constant”. But is String Theory beautiful?
Nice, but depressing review. He remarks with surprise that no one has drawn the obvious conclusion that these arguments just imply that string theory is wrong: It requires an investment of your time. He must be right because the great Leonard Susskind says so.
The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design
He goes on to argue that the laws of physics implied by string theory have turned out to be highly non-unique: The most interesting parts, for me, cosmi related to the Anthropic Principle and the discussion of the Landscape and Multiverse theories. It’s fair to ask what has happened with the cosmic landscape idea in the last 10 years.
He is one of the founders of string theory and the phrase is in the title, so no prizes for guessing that it will be an essential ingredient.
A whole new ballgame sine the 50’s. Jun 07, -uht! However, the Anthropic arguments we gave concerning the special properties of three-dimensional space and four-dimensional space-time show that there would be a Weak Anthropic explanation for this observation also; but, for all we know, it may also be a consequence of the unique topological properties that four-dimensional manifolds have recently been found to possess.
Book Review: The Cosmic Landscape
However, hardly any are associated with existing pocket universes. There was very little new in this book that I hadn’t read before. The remaining mass is almost certainly not made up of landscxpe matter. I imagine he wants you to buy his book on waging “war” with Hawking. My quibble is how heavily the author susxkind on a flavor of the Anthropic Principle which seems to put the cart before the horse.
Look on it as a rite of passage.
Want to Read saving…. If string theory had made some predictions like this, few people would be criticizing it. This book is endlessly fascinating, frequently frustrating and is, hands down, one of the most difficult books I’ve ever read. Superbly written, sussiind I am suxskind deeply appreciative of scientists who can not only think clearly, but also communicate their thoughts with equal parts clarity and cogency to a lay audience in physics, at least.