What do you think?
Rate this book
Quo Vadis Quantum Mechanics?
Each contribution is an article in itself, and great effort has been made by the authors to be lucid and not too technical. A few brief highlights of the round-table discussions are given between the chapters. Topics Quantum non-locality, the measurement problem, quantum insights into relativity, cosmology and thermodynamics, and possible bearings of quantum mechanics to biology and consciousness. Authors include Yakir Aharanov and Anton Zeilinger, plus Nobel laureates Anthony J. Leggett (2003) and Gerardus ‘t Hooft (1999). Foreword written by Sir Roger Penrose, best-selling author ( The Emperor's New Mind ) and world-renowned mathematical physicist.
- GenresPhysics
435 pages, Hardcover
First published January 19, 2005
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
October 26, 2007
well, i didn't learn much from this collection of essays. i guess i'm giving it 3 stars for trying.
some of the essays were like, "OK, here's my life's work boiled down to 20 pages." but instead of trying to express their main caoncepts in words, they sort of just listed their results, and said "go find the proofs in my papers." ugh.
other guys talked about one little technical problem, and then only very briefly connected it to the big questions of QM.
but here and there, i found a few really cool ideas, and it was nice to read some first-person essays from a bunch of guys so i could decide whether i liked their style. i liked the style of G. t'Hooft, Y. Aharonov, J. Butterfield, H.P. Durr, A. Elitzur, C. Rovelli, L. Smolin, S. Dolev, and D. Aerts. I'll look for other things they have written.
I Hated the style of J. Hartle, C. Brukner, S. Saunders, A. Zeilinger, A.J. Leggett, and G. Chew.
some of the essays were like, "OK, here's my life's work boiled down to 20 pages." but instead of trying to express their main caoncepts in words, they sort of just listed their results, and said "go find the proofs in my papers." ugh.
other guys talked about one little technical problem, and then only very briefly connected it to the big questions of QM.
but here and there, i found a few really cool ideas, and it was nice to read some first-person essays from a bunch of guys so i could decide whether i liked their style. i liked the style of G. t'Hooft, Y. Aharonov, J. Butterfield, H.P. Durr, A. Elitzur, C. Rovelli, L. Smolin, S. Dolev, and D. Aerts. I'll look for other things they have written.
I Hated the style of J. Hartle, C. Brukner, S. Saunders, A. Zeilinger, A.J. Leggett, and G. Chew.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review