The Trouble with Physics

The Rise of String Theory, The Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next

By: Lee Smolin

Narrated by: Walter Dixon

Length: 14 hrs and 49 mins

Publisher's summary

In this illuminating book, the renowned theoretical physicist Lee Smolin argues that fundamental physics - the search for the laws of nature - is losing its way. Ambitious ideas about extra dimensions, exotic particles, multiple universes, and strings have captured the publics imagination - and the imagination of experts. But these ideas have not been tested experimentally, and some, like string theory, seem to offer no possibility of being tested. Yet these speculations dominate the field, attracting the best talent and much of the funding and creating a climate in which emerging physicists are often penalized for pursuing other avenues. As Smolin points out, the situation threatens to impede the very progress of science.

With clarity, passion, and authority, Smolin offers an unblinking assessment of the troubles that face modern physics - and an encouraging view of where the search for the next big idea may lead.

©2007 Lee Smolin (P)2010 Audible, Inc.

Critic reviews

"Courting controversy, Smolin is a reflective, self-confident challenger to pro-string physicist-authors Brian Greene, Leonard Susskind, and Michio Kaku." (Booklist)

What we don't know

It's odd how much we don't know about physics. We build bigger and bigger atom smashers and find smaller and smaller particles. I think one day we will have an atom smasher that rings our solar system and find even smaller particles. If it is zero or infinite, "you must acquit.” I don’t think our super smart will ever find the “God Particle” until they think there is a God. Our author even states our current state of understanding of particle physics is similar to those that hold the design theory as their “science.”

I’d recommend this book for those that want to see how little we have progressed since Einstein.

The 'What Comes Next' part is the best

The beginning of the book was about physics and was maybe a "3" as it varied between being the same old, a little above my head, and kind of a bummer. The rest of the book was a challenge to change the way we think about science in general and physics in particular. I found that section at the end more interesting.

It's better then not reading

l felt like a Sweed listening to danish while reading this book. A lot of complex vocabulary. I feel like if you're already in to this stuff you will like this book. But for me, as an outsider, the book was pretty good.

I wish I'd read this sooner!

I have dozens of physics books that I enjoyed reading but this one tops the list! I already knew the establishment was broken but I'd never read exactly how in so many tragic ways. Not a technical book but still very enlightening.

Strings snipped

This book is a consideration of some current topics in Physics and Cosmology. It is the author's contention that resources being devoted to string theory are disproportionate to any returns received or envisioned. While some points made were well over my head, the book is not at all difficult to follow. It is clearly acceptable today to be agnostic on the string theory/multiverse. Science seems to have gone a long way out on that limb. The book is clearly and expertly read by Walter Dixon.

The Trouble with Physics

Previous reviewer said everything needed to be said about this book very concisely and very accurately. The below review, however, is a bit of a critique:

This is a great book about new developments in physics. It goes over the Super String Theory and Loop Quantum Gravity sufficiently for the users to grasp their relative importance and their strengths and weaknesses (for standard model read Brian Greene’s excellent book "The Fabric of the Cosmos"). The second half of the book mostly deals with the politics of the academia, particularly, in physics departments. The author is disturbed by the internal politics of these so called institutions of science. He wants to change all that so it’s a more balanced atmosphere and helpful to the progress of physics as a science.

He’s observations are right on. The only issue is that he thinks he can, or worse, should do something about this. He is asking the prominent members of String Theory community who control most physics departments in distinguish universities to be more open to other post-doc researchers that are not working on String Theory. He believes String theory is in crisis, or perhaps, the entire science of physics is in crisis.

This is certainly overblown. Many times in the past in all fields of science, most notably medicine and physics, established scientists of the field have been protective of the accepted science of the day despite all the evidence to the contrary. The right science will ultimately prevail as it always has, but to expect that String theorist heavyweights such as Leonard Susskind embrace anything other than Super-String Theory is like to expect a father stop helping his own son get into college in favor of a stranger who appears to be smarter. This is their livelihoods after all. Yes, you may expect a few people do the right thing for a few years (assuming we can even say for sure what it is), but expecting everybody to act against their self-interest at all times is being naive at best.

PHYSICS IS BROKEN

After listening to “The Trouble with Physics, it appears physicists have been wandering in a wilderness for the last 30 years. Lee Smolin suggests a theory that explains everything about everything, a Unified Field Theory, is as far away today as it was in 1905. Smolin suggests that the science of Physics is broken.

What makes Smolin’s observations discouraging is that a physics’ break-through, at least in regard to a unified field theory, is unlikely in the near future. If young scientists are being discouraged because of their radical ideas, Smolin may be right; i.e. history shows that most, if not all, break through scientific discoveries are made by people under 30 years of age; i.e. the same people, according to Smolin, being shut out of “non-String Theory” physics’ research.

The general public’s perception is that science is advancing at an accelerating pace; now, one wonders.

Wonder mixed with frustration

If you could sum up The Trouble with Physics in three words, what would they be?

Stringy.

Who was your favorite character and why?

The narrator, because his sense of wonder and love of science are evident all throughout the book.

Have you listened to any of Walter Dixon’s other performances before? How does this one compare?

This is the only one I've listened to.

Did you have an extreme reaction to this book? Did it make you laugh or cry?

The part where the narrator gets together with his friends and tries to think of an alternative to string theory was just amazing.

Any additional comments?

Also check out Not Even Wrong, a book about the same subject.

rambling but has some good points

Any additional comments?

Any insights are found in the last 2 1/2 hours of the book. You won't learn what string theory is but you will be left with the impression that it is complex, infinitely adjustable and doesn't offer any predictions. At best it can be adjusted to explain what is already known. Also the string theory community is close minded, arrogant and has had a bad influence on science. In my opinion the scientific method offers the best means for describing the natural world. It shows how the world works. It does not explain why. Philosophers and theologians can debate that. The simplest explanation to how is always best until proven wrong and a different or more complicated explanation proves better.

Hard going, but worth it

First, the narration is IMO very good. I have no idea how Lee Smolin talks, but Mr Dixon sounds a very authentically irritated physicist. OK, he's just reading the text, but that is not as easy as it sounds. Good choice, and well done.

The text/book is hard going at times. The core points are well made, if perhaps a bit too often. As a pee-existing skeptic of string theories, he was preaching to the choir a bit in my case, but his argument is strong and supported by both logic and evidence.