What do you think?
Rate this book
The Little Book of String Theory
The Little Book of String Theory offers a short, accessible, and entertaining introduction to one of the most talked-about areas of physics today. String theory has been called the "theory of everything." It seeks to describe all the fundamental forces of nature. It encompasses gravity and quantum mechanics in one unifying theory. But it is unproven and fraught with controversy. After reading this book, you'll be able to draw your own conclusions about string theory.
Steve Gubser begins by explaining Einstein's famous equation "E = mc2," quantum mechanics, and black holes. He then gives readers a crash course in string theory and the core ideas behind it. In plain English and with a minimum of mathematics, Gubser covers strings, branes, string dualities, extra dimensions, curved spacetime, quantum fluctuations, symmetry, and supersymmetry. He describes efforts to link string theory to experimental physics and uses analogies that nonscientists can understand. How does Chopin's Fantasie-Impromptu relate to quantum mechanics? What would it be like to fall into a black hole? Why is dancing a waltz similar to contemplating a string duality? Find out in the pages of this book.
"The Little Book of String Theory" is the essential, most up-to-date beginner's guide to this elegant, multidimensional field of physics.
Steve Gubser begins by explaining Einstein's famous equation "E = mc2," quantum mechanics, and black holes. He then gives readers a crash course in string theory and the core ideas behind it. In plain English and with a minimum of mathematics, Gubser covers strings, branes, string dualities, extra dimensions, curved spacetime, quantum fluctuations, symmetry, and supersymmetry. He describes efforts to link string theory to experimental physics and uses analogies that nonscientists can understand. How does Chopin's Fantasie-Impromptu relate to quantum mechanics? What would it be like to fall into a black hole? Why is dancing a waltz similar to contemplating a string duality? Find out in the pages of this book.
"The Little Book of String Theory" is the essential, most up-to-date beginner's guide to this elegant, multidimensional field of physics.
174 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2010
250 people are currently reading
2135 people want to read
About the author
Steven S. Gubser
4 books14 followersSteven Scott Gubser (May 4, 1972 – August 3, 2019) was a professor of physics at Princeton University.
His research focused on theoretical particle physics, especially string theory, and the AdS/CFT correspondence. He was a widely cited scholar in these and other related areas.
Gubser did foundational work in the AdS/CFT correspondence as a graduate student. In particular, his 1998 paper Gauge Theory Correlators from Non-Critical String Theory with his advisor Igor Klebanov and another Princeton physics professor Alexander Markovich Polyakov, made a precise statement of the AdS/CFT duality. It is one of the all-time top cited papers in theoretical high-energy physics, and is commonly known, along with Edward Witten's 1998 work Anti De Sitter Space And Holography, as the GKPW dictionary. After receiving a Ph.D. in 1998 from Princeton, Gubser became a Junior Fellow at Harvard University before taking a position as an assistant professor at Princeton. In 2001, he moved to the California Institute of Technology but returned to Princeton in 2002.
His research focused on theoretical particle physics, especially string theory, and the AdS/CFT correspondence. He was a widely cited scholar in these and other related areas.
Gubser did foundational work in the AdS/CFT correspondence as a graduate student. In particular, his 1998 paper Gauge Theory Correlators from Non-Critical String Theory with his advisor Igor Klebanov and another Princeton physics professor Alexander Markovich Polyakov, made a precise statement of the AdS/CFT duality. It is one of the all-time top cited papers in theoretical high-energy physics, and is commonly known, along with Edward Witten's 1998 work Anti De Sitter Space And Holography, as the GKPW dictionary. After receiving a Ph.D. in 1998 from Princeton, Gubser became a Junior Fellow at Harvard University before taking a position as an assistant professor at Princeton. In 2001, he moved to the California Institute of Technology but returned to Princeton in 2002.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 132 reviews
December 20, 2013
Could not finish
In a 150 page book for laymen,you should not be able to get your audience to the point the they can understand sentences like "...D5-branes are exchanged with solitonic 5-branes, and D3-branes are unaffected by the duality..."
Actually, you should never write sentences like that. Real articles don't even say things like that. If they do, then it is something like "GiantEquation... where the variables XYZ are exchanged to form GiantEquation..."
This dude somehow thought he just translate crazy equations into words, toss in a bit about playing the piano and cutsieness and excite people. I want to say that it totally fails and nobody will get anything from this book, but I guess some people did.
In a 150 page book for laymen,you should not be able to get your audience to the point the they can understand sentences like "...D5-branes are exchanged with solitonic 5-branes, and D3-branes are unaffected by the duality..."
Actually, you should never write sentences like that. Real articles don't even say things like that. If they do, then it is something like "GiantEquation... where the variables XYZ are exchanged to form GiantEquation..."
This dude somehow thought he just translate crazy equations into words, toss in a bit about playing the piano and cutsieness and excite people. I want to say that it totally fails and nobody will get anything from this book, but I guess some people did.
June 3, 2015
This book is a mystery. "The Little Book of String Theory" occupies a strange space: not accessible enough to be a true introduction, yet not technical enough to be more than a primer for those with more familiarity with the topic. It is therefore an admirable attempt, with enough successes to invite a second read after a period of digesting its contents, but enough failures to keep it from easy recommendation.
Gubser's writing style is strangely conversational and inviting, clearly aiming at the lay audience. And while that unexpected tone is generally quite enjoyable, the writing does, unfortunately, get lost in the arcane so easily (and so suddenly) that it misses its mark. Perhaps that is not so surprising in a book about theoretical physics, as the topic lends itself to such pitfalls. Readers of the early chapters would benefit from basic awareness of quantum mechanics and relativity, as these topics are quickly reviewed (providing the strongest and most accessible chapters due to the easy subject matter), but as the book progresses that basic foreknowledge seems insufficient as half-explained concepts are introduced and given new complications as we go further into the book and wade into various string theories. The analogies were helpful to a point, but it did seem a book free of complex equations would have benefited from far more diagrams and examples--how you would achieve that when talking about objects that potentially exist in ten, eleven or twenty-six dimensions is not a question for which I have a ready answer.
In the end, I found I was more informed about string theory than when I started, but also somehow more skeptical about it. The pleasure and excitement I found in the first few chapters (including the initial forays into string theory) turned to frustration as the writing failed to clarify and instead became increasingly esoteric. I feel that I'll return to the book, but a little self-study and homework beforehand might be necessary before diving into this particular book.
Gubser's writing style is strangely conversational and inviting, clearly aiming at the lay audience. And while that unexpected tone is generally quite enjoyable, the writing does, unfortunately, get lost in the arcane so easily (and so suddenly) that it misses its mark. Perhaps that is not so surprising in a book about theoretical physics, as the topic lends itself to such pitfalls. Readers of the early chapters would benefit from basic awareness of quantum mechanics and relativity, as these topics are quickly reviewed (providing the strongest and most accessible chapters due to the easy subject matter), but as the book progresses that basic foreknowledge seems insufficient as half-explained concepts are introduced and given new complications as we go further into the book and wade into various string theories. The analogies were helpful to a point, but it did seem a book free of complex equations would have benefited from far more diagrams and examples--how you would achieve that when talking about objects that potentially exist in ten, eleven or twenty-six dimensions is not a question for which I have a ready answer.
In the end, I found I was more informed about string theory than when I started, but also somehow more skeptical about it. The pleasure and excitement I found in the first few chapters (including the initial forays into string theory) turned to frustration as the writing failed to clarify and instead became increasingly esoteric. I feel that I'll return to the book, but a little self-study and homework beforehand might be necessary before diving into this particular book.
August 31, 2020
An incredibly well-written book on ST. Makes difficult things look easy via routine use of mind-experiments.
I can imagine that for readers with aphantasia this might prove to be a chore, so they might want to skip it altogether. The ones who live to love imagining quirky stuff would benefit from it greatly.
I can imagine that for readers with aphantasia this might prove to be a chore, so they might want to skip it altogether. The ones who live to love imagining quirky stuff would benefit from it greatly.
July 19, 2020
this book had so much potential! too bad the narrative was bogged down by the lengthy analogies and the authors self inserts. any insightful thoughts were buried within the long-winded descriptions of equations, that could have easily been better represented numerically. not a book for me.
at least the cover is nice!
at least the cover is nice!
February 18, 2014
An introduction to string theory
This book starts with a brief introduction to the basic laws of physics, and the search for an ultimate theory to explain the physical reality. When the author starts describing the string theory, things get complicated. The reader must bear in mind that this is not an easy field to appreciate since it involves multi-dimensions of space and one time dimension; string theory has 26 dimensions, and superstring theory has 10 dimensions. Besides this, the fundamental particles exist as different vibrations of strings in multi spacetime. It is hard to envision how a four dimensional space would look like, and it would be even harder to appreciate the subject given the amount of mathematics that goes into constructing the theory. Although the book doesn't involve any mathematics but the author does his best to make the difficult subject interesting.
A brief summary of the book is as follows: In string theory, the myriad of fundamental particle types is replaced by a single fundamental building block, a string. These strings can be closed, like loops, or open, like a hair. A string is infinitely thin and has an infinitesimal length of 10e(-34) meters. As the string moves through time it traces out a tube or a sheet (the two-dimensional string worldsheet). Furthermore, the string is free to vibrate, and different vibrational modes of the string represent the different particle types. The particles known in nature are classified according to their spin into bosons (integer spin) or fermions (odd half integer spin). The bosons carry forces, for example, the photon carries electromagnetic force; the gluon carries the strong nuclear force, and the graviton carries gravitational force. Fermions make up the matter like the electron or the quark. The string theory described bosons, it does not describe fermions. By introducing supersymmetry to string theory, we can obtain a new theory that describes both bosons and fermions: This is the theory of superstrings. This theory requires that there must be a special kind of symmetry called supersymmetry, which means for every boson (particle that transmits a force) there is a corresponding fermion (particle that makes up matter). But the problem with this theory is that there are five different superstring theories that display no mathematical inconsistencies and seem to explain bosons and fermions. It turns out that these five are different aspects of one single theory called M theory. This theory is also viewed as an 11 dimensional theory that looks 10 dimensions in spacetime, and propose a membrane as opposed to a string as the fundamental building block. The 11th dimension of the string expands infinitely into a floating membrane. According to this theory, our universe exists on a floating membrane, along with infinite parallel universes on their own membranes. Calculations also suggest that gravity might "leak" into our membrane from another nearby membrane. Thus, accounting for its relatively weak force in comparison to the other three forces (weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force, and electromagnetic force.) One would like to question how could a superstring theory with ten spacetime dimensions turn into a supergravity theory with eleven spacetime dimensions? The duality relations between two superstring quantities relate very different theories; they equate large distance of one theory with small distance of another theory, and exchange strong coupling of one theory with weak coupling of another theory. This seems to suggest that there is another fundamental theory lurking behind this mystery that holds the key for physical reality. Another interesting feature is the compactification of six spaces (out of nine) to allow three spatial dimensions of our world, also lead to the generation of all the known particles of matter.
The author notes three existing problems in physics by M theory; the tension in merging gravity and quantum physics; how strings vibrate and move in spacetime; and the evolution of spacetime from mathematical descriptions of strings. The greatest difficulties in unifying general relativity and quantum physics are due to the concept of renormalizabilty. When an electron is probed very close to it by an electric field, it splits into an electron and positron and a photon. The process multiplies due to its quantum physical uncertainties, and continues to form more photons and a cloud of progeny (virtual particles). The amazing thing is that you can keep track of this multiplicity of particles through renormalization, a mathematical method that tracks them all. The process also reduces (normalizes) the infinite mass and infinite charge of the electron (in the above picture) to its characteristic charge and mass. The trouble with gravitons is that you can't renormalize the cloud of virtual gravitons that surround them. For instance, quantum physical calculation of the force between two gravitons becomes infinite. But unlike particles, strings also respond to one another like gravitons, but they do not form a cloud of virtual particles. This is because the particle interactions occur at a single point of spacetime (at zero distance between the interacting particles) leading to infinities. In string theory, the strings collide over a small but finite distance, and the string breaks smoothly over a distance. Thus we can combine quantum mechanics and gravity, and string excitation that carries the gravitational force with minimal problems.
Another interesting concept that emerges from superstring-graviton discussion is the concept of spacetime itself. Although the superstring theory predicts gravitons from flat spacetime physics (classical physics) alone, but string theory also predicts the Einstein equation will be obeyed by a curved spacetime in which strings propagate. Actually the theory adds an infinite series of corrections to the theory of gravity. At distance scales much larger than a string, these corrections are small. But as the distance scale gets smaller, these corrections become larger until the Einstein equation no longer adequately describes the result. This illustrates that the spacetime is not fundamental according to superstring theory, but it emerges only at large distance scales or weak coupling. This has a far reaching philosophical implication about the nature of physical reality at we understand from our interaction with spacetime and matter.
This book starts with a brief introduction to the basic laws of physics, and the search for an ultimate theory to explain the physical reality. When the author starts describing the string theory, things get complicated. The reader must bear in mind that this is not an easy field to appreciate since it involves multi-dimensions of space and one time dimension; string theory has 26 dimensions, and superstring theory has 10 dimensions. Besides this, the fundamental particles exist as different vibrations of strings in multi spacetime. It is hard to envision how a four dimensional space would look like, and it would be even harder to appreciate the subject given the amount of mathematics that goes into constructing the theory. Although the book doesn't involve any mathematics but the author does his best to make the difficult subject interesting.
A brief summary of the book is as follows: In string theory, the myriad of fundamental particle types is replaced by a single fundamental building block, a string. These strings can be closed, like loops, or open, like a hair. A string is infinitely thin and has an infinitesimal length of 10e(-34) meters. As the string moves through time it traces out a tube or a sheet (the two-dimensional string worldsheet). Furthermore, the string is free to vibrate, and different vibrational modes of the string represent the different particle types. The particles known in nature are classified according to their spin into bosons (integer spin) or fermions (odd half integer spin). The bosons carry forces, for example, the photon carries electromagnetic force; the gluon carries the strong nuclear force, and the graviton carries gravitational force. Fermions make up the matter like the electron or the quark. The string theory described bosons, it does not describe fermions. By introducing supersymmetry to string theory, we can obtain a new theory that describes both bosons and fermions: This is the theory of superstrings. This theory requires that there must be a special kind of symmetry called supersymmetry, which means for every boson (particle that transmits a force) there is a corresponding fermion (particle that makes up matter). But the problem with this theory is that there are five different superstring theories that display no mathematical inconsistencies and seem to explain bosons and fermions. It turns out that these five are different aspects of one single theory called M theory. This theory is also viewed as an 11 dimensional theory that looks 10 dimensions in spacetime, and propose a membrane as opposed to a string as the fundamental building block. The 11th dimension of the string expands infinitely into a floating membrane. According to this theory, our universe exists on a floating membrane, along with infinite parallel universes on their own membranes. Calculations also suggest that gravity might "leak" into our membrane from another nearby membrane. Thus, accounting for its relatively weak force in comparison to the other three forces (weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force, and electromagnetic force.) One would like to question how could a superstring theory with ten spacetime dimensions turn into a supergravity theory with eleven spacetime dimensions? The duality relations between two superstring quantities relate very different theories; they equate large distance of one theory with small distance of another theory, and exchange strong coupling of one theory with weak coupling of another theory. This seems to suggest that there is another fundamental theory lurking behind this mystery that holds the key for physical reality. Another interesting feature is the compactification of six spaces (out of nine) to allow three spatial dimensions of our world, also lead to the generation of all the known particles of matter.
The author notes three existing problems in physics by M theory; the tension in merging gravity and quantum physics; how strings vibrate and move in spacetime; and the evolution of spacetime from mathematical descriptions of strings. The greatest difficulties in unifying general relativity and quantum physics are due to the concept of renormalizabilty. When an electron is probed very close to it by an electric field, it splits into an electron and positron and a photon. The process multiplies due to its quantum physical uncertainties, and continues to form more photons and a cloud of progeny (virtual particles). The amazing thing is that you can keep track of this multiplicity of particles through renormalization, a mathematical method that tracks them all. The process also reduces (normalizes) the infinite mass and infinite charge of the electron (in the above picture) to its characteristic charge and mass. The trouble with gravitons is that you can't renormalize the cloud of virtual gravitons that surround them. For instance, quantum physical calculation of the force between two gravitons becomes infinite. But unlike particles, strings also respond to one another like gravitons, but they do not form a cloud of virtual particles. This is because the particle interactions occur at a single point of spacetime (at zero distance between the interacting particles) leading to infinities. In string theory, the strings collide over a small but finite distance, and the string breaks smoothly over a distance. Thus we can combine quantum mechanics and gravity, and string excitation that carries the gravitational force with minimal problems.
Another interesting concept that emerges from superstring-graviton discussion is the concept of spacetime itself. Although the superstring theory predicts gravitons from flat spacetime physics (classical physics) alone, but string theory also predicts the Einstein equation will be obeyed by a curved spacetime in which strings propagate. Actually the theory adds an infinite series of corrections to the theory of gravity. At distance scales much larger than a string, these corrections are small. But as the distance scale gets smaller, these corrections become larger until the Einstein equation no longer adequately describes the result. This illustrates that the spacetime is not fundamental according to superstring theory, but it emerges only at large distance scales or weak coupling. This has a far reaching philosophical implication about the nature of physical reality at we understand from our interaction with spacetime and matter.
October 15, 2017
Well, I guess the Gubser method of instruction does not work too well on me.
Having finished a beautiful, elegant popular-level explanation of the main competing quantum gravity theory to strings - LQG - I wanted to be fair and look (once again) into what the deal is with those damn strings and whether anything worthwhile has been dug up recently. However, not wanting to waste too much time on a theory I’m not sure I buy, I decided to go with this, well, little book on string theory.
It, however, fails in every which way it can. As a primer on string theory/superstring theory/M-theory it is hopelessly too short and thus confusing – yes, there are colorful metaphors that are supposed to help us understand the underlying concepts, but tacking something like Fred Astair and Ginger Rogers as a metaphor for duality onto paragraphs that read:
“Type IIB string theory has D1-branes, D3-branes, D5-branes, solitonic 5-branes, and a few other branes that are more complicated to explain. It doesn’t have D0-branes, or D2-branes, or any other even-numbered brane. It’s a string theory, not M-theory, so it doesn’t have M2-branes or M5-branes.”
… does not really help clarify things, if anything, it muddles the waters further. And the bit about there being “a few other things more complicated to explain” gives a good taste of the book in general - it is peppered with such concepts left dangling as too complicated or too long or, well, too mathematical to explain. Then why bother writing a book about them?
A good popular science book (or, well, science book in general) starts by providing you with the fundamental concepts of what you will be learning about, and then slowly fits those together to explain whatever the book is trying to explain. Here, we get very little of that, in the form of a rough overview of QM and GR. But then, right as the bit about string theory starts, we are suddenly plopped into something that feels very much like a cocktail party with a slightly tipsy guy who knows a lot about the topic, and he tries to explain things any which way he can without any preparation, with many concepts being dropped into the mix with the promise of “I’ll explain what this is later” and then, several chapters after, a lot of “remember that stuff I said I would explain?” I might say that this book would have benefited from a good editor, but the truth is, I think the book would have benefited from a more structure-minded author.
The bottom line… well. I started the book on LQG without a clear idea of how it is all supposed to work, and I came out of it with a distinct mental view of the proposed structure of spacetime and a well-defined view of where that theory is going. Here? I went in without a clear idea of how string theory is supposed to work and came out convinced that it is a convoluted mess of incomprehensibly abstract mathematical concepts with little to no connection to any reality, least of all our own. And the fact that at the time of writing the author was still hoping LHC would produce supersymmetric particles, which kinda didn’t really happen, does not help any.
Having finished a beautiful, elegant popular-level explanation of the main competing quantum gravity theory to strings - LQG - I wanted to be fair and look (once again) into what the deal is with those damn strings and whether anything worthwhile has been dug up recently. However, not wanting to waste too much time on a theory I’m not sure I buy, I decided to go with this, well, little book on string theory.
It, however, fails in every which way it can. As a primer on string theory/superstring theory/M-theory it is hopelessly too short and thus confusing – yes, there are colorful metaphors that are supposed to help us understand the underlying concepts, but tacking something like Fred Astair and Ginger Rogers as a metaphor for duality onto paragraphs that read:
“Type IIB string theory has D1-branes, D3-branes, D5-branes, solitonic 5-branes, and a few other branes that are more complicated to explain. It doesn’t have D0-branes, or D2-branes, or any other even-numbered brane. It’s a string theory, not M-theory, so it doesn’t have M2-branes or M5-branes.”
… does not really help clarify things, if anything, it muddles the waters further. And the bit about there being “a few other things more complicated to explain” gives a good taste of the book in general - it is peppered with such concepts left dangling as too complicated or too long or, well, too mathematical to explain. Then why bother writing a book about them?
A good popular science book (or, well, science book in general) starts by providing you with the fundamental concepts of what you will be learning about, and then slowly fits those together to explain whatever the book is trying to explain. Here, we get very little of that, in the form of a rough overview of QM and GR. But then, right as the bit about string theory starts, we are suddenly plopped into something that feels very much like a cocktail party with a slightly tipsy guy who knows a lot about the topic, and he tries to explain things any which way he can without any preparation, with many concepts being dropped into the mix with the promise of “I’ll explain what this is later” and then, several chapters after, a lot of “remember that stuff I said I would explain?” I might say that this book would have benefited from a good editor, but the truth is, I think the book would have benefited from a more structure-minded author.
The bottom line… well. I started the book on LQG without a clear idea of how it is all supposed to work, and I came out of it with a distinct mental view of the proposed structure of spacetime and a well-defined view of where that theory is going. Here? I went in without a clear idea of how string theory is supposed to work and came out convinced that it is a convoluted mess of incomprehensibly abstract mathematical concepts with little to no connection to any reality, least of all our own. And the fact that at the time of writing the author was still hoping LHC would produce supersymmetric particles, which kinda didn’t really happen, does not help any.
February 11, 2018
It was interesting, but it would've been better without so many unnecessary analogies. Especially the ones where the author went on a wild tangent in order to find some excuse to show off about his rock climbing abilities. 'One time, I was rock climbing this really hard mountain, and it was super cool and I'm awesome and a really good rock climber' - this goes on for like three pages - 'and in a way, rock climbing reminds me of gluons...' and then there's a dumb one-line analogy about particle physics that isn't helpful at all.
December 25, 2018
I agree almost word-to-word with the other critical reviews of this book on here. This book is neither enlightening, not entertaining.
I got no sense of why string theory is supposed to be beautiful, or even what problems it is attempting to solve and why no other theory is as good a candidate as string theory to solve those problems. Nor did I get a sense of why it is not successful yet, except that it is really difficult to make a pop science book out of.
I got no sense of why string theory is supposed to be beautiful, or even what problems it is attempting to solve and why no other theory is as good a candidate as string theory to solve those problems. Nor did I get a sense of why it is not successful yet, except that it is really difficult to make a pop science book out of.
June 26, 2013
An inconsistent, confusing and incomplete treatment of a complex subject. Filled with jargon and random detail that will confound most casual readers but stops well short of presenting deeper explanations that would be useful to the more technically inclined.
Read
March 10, 2025Me gusta que resulta fácil de entender incluso aunque no tengas muchos conocimientos de física
May 12, 2017
Olayi ana hatlariyla anlatan bir kitap. Okuyup not alip, sonra isin matematigine gomulmek gerek. Bir iki ilginc fikir vermedi degil. Arada tekrar tekrar okumam gerekecek.
September 14, 2019
Despite my having an M.S. in Math, I found this book incomprehensible (beyond the first 3 chapters which do not deal with S.T.). Couldn't finish it. Perhaps if at least some aspects of S.T. were proven - or even testable - I'd have tried doubling down to understand what seemed like gobbledygook .... but life is too short. S.T. is often widely touted as being 'beautiful' (in the mathematical sense of beauty). This book couldn't even demonstrate that.
December 4, 2020
Gubser does a fine job of explaining most of the concepts covered in this book, notably supersymmetry, but had a harder time with string theory itself, though that has more to do with how abstract and unintuitive string theory is. He does unfortunately repeatedly use weird or inappropriate analogies, and his repeated misspellings of "Fantaisie impromptu" irrationally annoyed me.
As a side note - his climbing/mountaineering analogies feel eerie and prophetic after his tragic, untimely death
As a side note - his climbing/mountaineering analogies feel eerie and prophetic after his tragic, untimely death
July 4, 2018
Somehow, a book about string theory made me really doubt the whole field... The explanations are poorly written, and often leave the reader more confused than enlightened. The numerous analogies for the layman are both not able to encapsulate the problem well, and are tediously long. However, the underlying theoretical ideas are none the less fascinating.
August 4, 2011
I generally love books about physics and math. This book, however, had me yawning. If you want a good book about physics I would recommend Leonard Susskind, Vilenkin, or deGrasse Tyson. This book is horrible.
August 17, 2010
Another popular science attempt that they had no idea what to do with.
April 20, 2015
Very confusing, poorly written.
October 25, 2021
Sadly, I discovered that Steven has died in the year 2019 at the age of 47. The present book is an interesting attempt to introduce the reader to superstring theory. Was it successful? Well, by no means, actually. Just like any other book on the subject this one falls short. The author is not to blame, however. The complexity of this theory makes it unsurmountable peak for mere mortals (pun intended, sorry Steve). A mess of mathematical mumbo-jumbo, highly abstract ideas, forbiddingly large array of prerequisite knowledge, esoterically speculative nature of this theory renders it absolutely intractable and turns to sacral symbol of science about Universe. Yet still, was it that bad in itself? I mean the book, not the theory. Definitely no. The author is quite honest about the topic, he doesn't strive to sell you big bright superstringy future. He admits the difficulties and tries to explain things as simple as possible. But way too simple, so that it won't get any clearer. See above. The effort was worth it.
In contrast to some other books about the subject this one is probably less ambitious. It's very light description of the theory, hoveeer containing explanations about some very important concepts in physics (like symmetries and gauge symmetry in the first row). Don't expect much, don't seek for good understanding here and for answers to the all of questions of the Universe here and the book won't disappoint you. No really, at least there's Kaku with his introductory book on strings (not to be confused with his futuristic fantasies). And if you're not a faint-hearted one, go for it. This book in contrast is very light and it doesn't pretend to make you into someone as cool as Sheldon from the BBT.
In contrast to some other books about the subject this one is probably less ambitious. It's very light description of the theory, hoveeer containing explanations about some very important concepts in physics (like symmetries and gauge symmetry in the first row). Don't expect much, don't seek for good understanding here and for answers to the all of questions of the Universe here and the book won't disappoint you. No really, at least there's Kaku with his introductory book on strings (not to be confused with his futuristic fantasies). And if you're not a faint-hearted one, go for it. This book in contrast is very light and it doesn't pretend to make you into someone as cool as Sheldon from the BBT.
August 20, 2020
A marvelous and incredibly detailed introduction for science literate audiences on the horizons of string theory in theoretical physics. While I did enjoy this I also found the ideas around string theory to be challenging, which it is even for physicists, but I recognize that this is better suited for those who have some more advanced understanding of physics including quantum mechanics and black holes, of which I only know a little about them and almost nothing of their mathematics. I congratulate Gubser on his ability to take such a complex set of equations and try to bring them down to earth. While I think the book is sometimes a bit confusing I think this is a great articulation of 2010’s understanding of our universe.
November 26, 2023
A bit like going back to some university classes - you have to suspend your understanding of the current description with the hope that after enough context and examples a fraction of it will come together in your head. It’s not a bad book by any means. And for those in the field/with an existing understanding I’m sure the descriptions of simplified and concise. For the rest of us (even if you’ve studied undergraduate quantum mechanics), you just have to be willing to get in over your head and not understand everything.
August 19, 2020
Like several other reviewers, I found the density of the information here, at times, quite off-putting. Other writers of science (Covelli, Hawking, Gould) manage to make their thinking more accessible. Gubser has so long retreated into his field that he does not understand what it means to re-emerge. (His use of exclamation marks, for instance, show his passion for the comparative mass of different sub-atomic particles, and I suppose I'm expected to share that excitement . . . .)
That aside, the book and its implications are crazy significant if we take the time to let ourselves in. I found myself following the metaphors and mathematics until they crashed together in a heap and then had to struggle out by re-assembling the stages and leaps that take us to the future of the field.
My non-science brain puzzled a bit over the language as it impacts methodology. For instance, at several points, Gubser puzzles over two frameworks/theories and then figuratively shrugs to choose one, claiming that "the math works better" or something similar. Wait. Is he suggesting that reality must yield to the human system of math or that, presuming that all things fit math, it must therefore follow? Or something else? Since he isn't bashful about changing some math concepts further in, it seems odd to not suggest that reality is a bit more complex than our current constructs allow for.
In all, the book in a bit more than "little" in its magnitude and importance, and a bit more in terms of an intro to the field.
That aside, the book and its implications are crazy significant if we take the time to let ourselves in. I found myself following the metaphors and mathematics until they crashed together in a heap and then had to struggle out by re-assembling the stages and leaps that take us to the future of the field.
My non-science brain puzzled a bit over the language as it impacts methodology. For instance, at several points, Gubser puzzles over two frameworks/theories and then figuratively shrugs to choose one, claiming that "the math works better" or something similar. Wait. Is he suggesting that reality must yield to the human system of math or that, presuming that all things fit math, it must therefore follow? Or something else? Since he isn't bashful about changing some math concepts further in, it seems odd to not suggest that reality is a bit more complex than our current constructs allow for.
In all, the book in a bit more than "little" in its magnitude and importance, and a bit more in terms of an intro to the field.
March 8, 2021
I would have to say this book was in my opinion not the best introduction to string theory.
Coming from a physics perspective, it seemed like too much was trying to be explained in too brief a time with not enough depth?
I also feel due to how fleetingly the tops are explored it wouldn't be good for someone without a science background, even though it is lacking 'scary' equations.
Overall, it is what it is, a little book on string theory, now I want to find one that really goes in depth on these topics.
Coming from a physics perspective, it seemed like too much was trying to be explained in too brief a time with not enough depth?
I also feel due to how fleetingly the tops are explored it wouldn't be good for someone without a science background, even though it is lacking 'scary' equations.
Overall, it is what it is, a little book on string theory, now I want to find one that really goes in depth on these topics.
January 28, 2022
String Theory is a noble attempt to find a Theory of Everything. I don't know if anything it states is proven yet, but the math turns out well. The Large Hadron Collider is several years old by now. The Higgs Boson was found and other stuff.
The Little Book of String Theory covers the basics; black holes, relativity, absolute zero, and other concepts are explained.
The book goes by quickly, but it's very short.
Thanks for reading my review, and see you next time.
The Little Book of String Theory covers the basics; black holes, relativity, absolute zero, and other concepts are explained.
The book goes by quickly, but it's very short.
Thanks for reading my review, and see you next time.
October 10, 2022
I appreciated the decision to avoid the math and give explanations in laymen’s terms. That said, I don’t know that it helped this layman very much. 🙃
December 13, 2021
String theory has been explained as simply as possible in this book. As for if Gubser covers all aspects, I'm no expert.
August 1, 2024
Erm according to my calculations ☝️🤓
January 20, 2019
Not easy to understand if you do not have a science background. However if you do you won’t be disappointed with this purchase as the author does an amazing job of describing string theory in layman’s terms.
May 7, 2019
به شدت غیرقابل درک
March 26, 2021
The book The Little Book of String Theory by Steven S. Gubser is a good book to read for someone who already has a basic understanding of the concept of String Theory to gain more knowledge about the subject. Although writing is clearly not Steven S. Gubser's strong suit, theoretical physics certainly is. The Little Book of String Theory is lacking in the sense of high quality writing that engages the reader, but is plentiful in well researched information pertaining to M-Theory and Super String Theory. I found this book and decided to read it because I have already read a book in this "series" called The Little Book of Cosmology by Lyman Page. Although this book was not quite as enjoyable of a read as The Little Book of Cosmology, it was still just as informative. Steven S. Gubser takes the reader from the development of the understanding of human understanding of the forces of nature, to the internal mechanics of how the common interpretation of the fundamental forces of the universe as portrayed through the standard model of particle physics can be unified and explained through the theoretical lense of String Theory. He explains the issues that String Theory still has, and the continued search for the framework that would secure the unification of general relativity and quantum mechanics. Overall, I would recommend this book to anyone who already has a decent understanding of the basic mechanics of quantum physics and would like to learn more about the leading candidate for the Theory of Everything.
January 12, 2024
I really wanted to love this book and apparently people can understand it, but not me. It is not well written, horribly organized, and a ramble mess. The guy looks like just the sort of nerd I would love to talk to, but don't ever want to read a book by him again. I am on a snow day so finished it but it was pure work. If you are unsure if you want to buy this book let me give you a sneak peak. Page 92 "A big problem in string theory into give a more precise description of black holes made out of vibrating D-branes. The best-understood case involves D1-branes and D5-branes. Another important case is the D3-branes. The D0-brane case is harder to work out quantitatively, but there has nevertheless been significant progress."
Let that paragraph sink in. His hands were typing lots of words but where did we go? NO WHERE. I am a humanities guy and I freely admit that but I read a decent amount of science books and this is convoluted, stream of consciousness, poorly organized mess. I love quantum mechanics and intermittently read books on it so wanted to dive into string theory but this is painful, sorry to say. It is "little" however each page is dense as fudge. It takes concreted effort to get through this. If you understand this with no previous string theory knowledge, pat yourself on the back and ask your boss for a raise because you probably deserve it. I have a doctorate (obviously not in this shite) and I felt physically ill with a headache and my head spinning trying to sort through it. I will be searching for a book on string theory for beginners not physics PhDs.
Let that paragraph sink in. His hands were typing lots of words but where did we go? NO WHERE. I am a humanities guy and I freely admit that but I read a decent amount of science books and this is convoluted, stream of consciousness, poorly organized mess. I love quantum mechanics and intermittently read books on it so wanted to dive into string theory but this is painful, sorry to say. It is "little" however each page is dense as fudge. It takes concreted effort to get through this. If you understand this with no previous string theory knowledge, pat yourself on the back and ask your boss for a raise because you probably deserve it. I have a doctorate (obviously not in this shite) and I felt physically ill with a headache and my head spinning trying to sort through it. I will be searching for a book on string theory for beginners not physics PhDs.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 132 reviews