An easy way to write a bestseller in recent years is to attack algorithms that drive our lives through the largest tech companies' apps, products, andAn easy way to write a bestseller in recent years is to attack algorithms that drive our lives through the largest tech companies' apps, products, and associated ads. It did not matter if all the suggestions of such books were utterly impractical as long as they succeeded in arousing the hackles by invoking the loss of privacy and choice.
Josh Simons' book is exactly the opposite and hence is unlikely to be a bestseller! The author approaches the topic pedantically with the writing style also of a career academician. The analysis is scholarly, nuanced, and result driven. The technical details, discussions of obscure philosophical points, and a tendency towards accepting the powers of some new-age forces cause the book challenging to accept for anyone looking for quick fixes or points for dinner party conversations. If one throws in some of the conclusions that argue against needless political and other interventions, the practicality and sagacity make it perfectly serious but so unsalacious that it is not a surprise this review is the first on the book's page weeks after its publication.
The following are reviewers' notes based on some of the lessons from the book and others completely independent. Technology continues to increase its influence on how we live. As much as it works in most cases, no amount of customization will make it work perfectly for all in all cases. Many commentators love imposing arbitrary limits on the workings of technology based on these negative outcomes regardless of the substantial cumulative benefits.
The critics' most strident issues are with the biases; the author mostly keeps the discussions to those more relevant in the US, but the arguments are universally applicable in different forms. Models trained on past patterns, the argument goes, are unlikely to help us move away from the plagues of race, religion, gender, wealth, and countless similar bigotries of our past.
The calls to eliminate the biases invariably turn to suggestions that the book shows will do more harm than good. Any forced removal of certain information from the models is unlikely to change the conclusions in a world where machine learning algorithms no longer work on human-created parameters or classifications. The results from algorithms may not be any different (or even worse) if the methods used are so simplistic.
The solutions are partly in assertive, outside-the-model actions that improve the prospects of the disadvantaged. The solutions are partly in the continuous monitoring of the end results by all concerned in critical life areas to permit suitable feedback loops. The solutions are in competition, and more use of technologies for higher granularity, fewer regulations on processes, judicious use of fines, simultaneous human monitoring, etc.
This is a serious book for those interested in the topic. The conclusions are not all I summarise here. They are granular and arrived at with many weighty arguments of all kinds. ...more
Little binds An Unreliable Truth to the previous Desert Plains books. The Yardley saga had reached an intriguing point at the end of the previous bookLittle binds An Unreliable Truth to the previous Desert Plains books. The Yardley saga had reached an intriguing point at the end of the previous book of the series. Unfortunately, the author blithely ignores the promising thread and drops all the first two books' characters like hot potatoes. Fortunately, those turn out to be the only significant shortcomings of the book.
As a stand-alone legal thriller, this is an outstanding novel with multiple courtroom battles. The book is an even better murder mystery with stupendous twists. The author must continue with the characters he has developed in the series. ...more
Few series have rousing middle books; unfortunately, Desert Plains falls into the majority bucket in this regard!
An intriguing (although not unexpecteFew series have rousing middle books; unfortunately, Desert Plains falls into the majority bucket in this regard!
An intriguing (although not unexpected) question is posed to the readers - affected by the author's generous hints - right at the start: can the lightning strike the same spot thrice? When the mystery element is so limited, and with the answer somewhat evident in the series thread, the story development parts that form most of the book turn superfluous.
The climax has its moments partly because of the feelings aroused by an abusive, heinous crime genre the author skillfully rails against. The main story does not move much, which is also somewhat disappointing. However, the author succeeds in providing a critical twist in the last pages, making the book a necessary read for those who want to follow the story to the end. ...more
As a course, The Big Questions of Philosophy is well-designed, effectively presented, and immensely thought-provoking. For some, this is another kind As a course, The Big Questions of Philosophy is well-designed, effectively presented, and immensely thought-provoking. For some, this is another kind of introduction to the major areas of philosophy, including metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and political philosophy. However, it is more than a course because the big questions are spot on. Their sequencing makes sense as they do not appear like excuses to introduce any set of philosophers or their theories in any particular order. More importantly, the attempts to answer are genuine, with every chapter razor focussed on the issues at hand without any needless digressions. It is almost like whatever philosophical theories one learns are just a side-effect.
While the Professor does not equivocate, he is far more persuasive while denying or destroying proposed answers than in providing assertive, constructive resolutions to any topic. His unequivocal refutations of many cherished beliefs mean the course will have a pleasant and palatable appeal to those who already share the author’s perspective. There is likely to be a self-selection in those who pick the course; it is an echo chamber of sorts.
The biggest question for this reviewer, because of the book and not addressed in it, is why it is so easy in Philosophy to refute than to construct. This question is not as superfluous as it sounds. In a way, it is the mother of all questions that provide a context to why most philosophical arguments cannot but lead nowhere once done with criticizing others.
Conventional languages are grossly inadequate in the attempts to tackle myriads of real-life issues they try to address. History of how these languages evolved, on the one hand, and the ever-rising complexities of life as humanity progresses, on the other, make the inadequacies exponentially more flagrant over time. Philosophers' habitual efforts to arrive at one-size-fits-all generalized proclamations work until the next one sits down to rip them apart.
Imagine if the world had stuck with only Pythagorean-era Math and Newton or Bohr were needed to compose their theories in them. Conventional languages have not evolved at all compared to real life. This was when they were inadequate to address the life that was right from the start.
Philosophers' artificial constraints – imposed to arrive at universal or generalizable conclusions – make their quests doomed before they begin. Let's use another example: we know that languages do not have sufficient words to describe billions of viruses and bacteria that exist out there. Simply asserting that some virus or a bacterium causes Covid is no more helpful than ascribing it to a demon. Suppose the statement “virus causes Covid” must have a strict truth value of 0 or 1. In that case, you could almost expect a horde of intellectuals going back and forth for centuries arguing how most "viruses" do not cause this or how this statement might conflict with another one that says a virus is a cause of something non- Covid or it is not just a particular type of virus that is a cause always but only within a context.
Let's use this ridiculous example to see how similar philosophical wrangles on finding universal moral or even legal principles from conventional language are. A principal “Lying is bad” by one philosopher would evoke nothing but above virus-like, must-have wide range of exceptions to highlight the inadequacy of the dictum. This is even before the smarter ones begin debating the definition of a “Lie” or what is “Bad” in the same vein as trying to arrive at the meaning of what is meant by “conscience,” “soul,” “free will,” or “God.”
Machine Learning tools are the latest scientific/technological set proving how we cannot achieve much in a structured quest using words or categories invented by ancestors eons ago. The best philosophers spent ages trying to fine-tune the meanings of the words to make them usable, only to be summarily dismissed by the next generations.
As the professor concludes, this does not make philosophical quests, courses, or arguments unnecessary. We are wired such that many of us will want to seek the answers to the kind of big questions posed in the book, fully knowing the futility. Still, somebody should attempt a course on what could happen to a being who refuses to think about existential issues and universal principles while focusing on broad guidelines and creating room for addressing specific situations as they arise rather than looking for perpetual hypothetical answers.
A Killer's Wife is built around a couple of clever twists, but falls short in its execution.
The story is contrived to accommodate these trickeries, bA Killer's Wife is built around a couple of clever twists, but falls short in its execution.
The story is contrived to accommodate these trickeries, but try as the author might, the genuflexions required to keep things credible keep coming in the way of plausible character- or the plot-building.
The author uses an extremely rapid narrative pace to pepper over the aspects that would not make sense. The result is a tale that keeps moving without pausing for a breather to reflect, relish, or massage any other reader's feelings.
Despite these shortcomings, the novel does have its merits. The big twists are well thought-out and will keep readers guessing. Additionally, the book is short enough to be a quick and entertaining read. ...more
Elusive comes in two parts: it is a book about a man, and it is also a book about his discovery. It works more as a book on Higgs boson than on Peter Elusive comes in two parts: it is a book about a man, and it is also a book about his discovery. It works more as a book on Higgs boson than on Peter Higgs.
The book's primary objective is to look into the famous scientist's life. The author repeatedly highlights Higgs' shy and unassuming personality and how he goes to great lengths to deflect attention from himself. It is almost like the most interesting stories in the life of the celebrated scientist are all about how he makes himself uninteresting! Clearly, he does not make a good subject for a biography.
His discovery is a different matter. A part of the tale of his boson is about the particles' validation journey from around the mid-1990s until recently. A handful of books have come out on the LHC in the last few years. This book does not have much new to add to this part of the boson's rise to preeminence.
The author shines in his explanations of the discovery itself. Particle physics is a challenging topic for a popular science book, and the Higgs boson, with its intricate conceptualization, is worse. However, the author does an exceptional job of tackling the subject head-on, providing a detailed and comprehensive explanation of the relevant concepts without wasting space on more basic discussions on forces and fields commonly found in other popular books.
The author uses clear language and interesting analogies to make the topics more accessible. For example, when the author discusses why certain bosons are massless while others have mass, he explains utilizing the effect of plasma in the ionosphere. A plasma structure causes the reflection of waves below a certain frequency, causing an illusion of mass. Another good analogy is that of flat galaxy structures (and not spherical): this is an understandable example of how unstable symmetries break to create stable asymmetries. Once explained so clearly, it becomes easier for an average reader to understand the breaking of the electroweak force.
With additional arguments adopted from gauge theory (equations that remain invariant under certain transformations), the arguments move to non-zero vacuum expectation value and with associated Goldstone bosons that have mass.
Higgs' Boson story is incomplete. One knows extremely little about the underlying field and its mechanism. Those interested in the subject are assured of enhancing their understanding of what is achieved and what is pending....more
At its core, CCL is about the survival, revival, and regeneration of a book about to vanish otherwise. It is supposed to be about the book's journeys At its core, CCL is about the survival, revival, and regeneration of a book about to vanish otherwise. It is supposed to be about the book's journeys from the brinks of extinction, but it turns into the stories of individuals who lead the turnarounds.
A notable aspect of CCL is the story's center around bibliophiles. This allows the reader to see the world through the eyes of those passionate about written words. The book-lover heroes of the four eras are almost stereotypical as they are not provided with much dash, charm, or luck. The author's use of the events befalling them makes interesting arcs, but more because of the way the stories are split and laid out than because of the content.
The use of parallel narrations in the book adds vitality to the story, as it allows the reader to see the events unfolding from multiple perspectives. However, at times these narrations feel artificial or contrived, particularly when one feels that certain stories are being stalled for the others to catch up so that all can end simultaneously by the climax.
Despite these flaws, the stylistic experiments in the narration are the highlight. The author's use of unconventional structure adds intrigue that would not have existed if the narrations were straightforward. In brief, CCL is an engaging read because of the stylistic experimentations. ...more
In Strangers to Ourselves, Rachel Aviv explores the unique experiences and challenges faced by individuals struggling with mental illness.
One of the In Strangers to Ourselves, Rachel Aviv explores the unique experiences and challenges faced by individuals struggling with mental illness.
One of the main lessons of the book is that each mental patient is distinctive, with a highly unique set of problems. Through a series of case studies, Aviv demonstrates the importance of personalized, individualized treatment, rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all approach.
One of the book's strengths is the diversity of the six case studies, which showcase the breadth of issues faced by people with different mental illnesses over their decades of suffering. However, this same diversity also makes the book feel uneven, as it is difficult for readers to connect equally with every case study presented. Most importantly, the portfolio of the studies feels highly inadequate: the book could have covered more ground with at least four to five more examples.
Despite these limitations, Strangers to Ourselves is a valuable and thought-provoking read. Aviv writes with empathy and insight, and her depiction of the lives of the people she has handpicked is impactful. Overall, I hope that the debut author continues to explore these important themes in future work....more
In Detransition, Baby, Torrey Peters explores complex themes of identity, gender, and family and raises important questions about the experiences of tIn Detransition, Baby, Torrey Peters explores complex themes of identity, gender, and family and raises important questions about the experiences of trans and nonbinary individuals. However, the book is ultimately flawed by its lack of focus and indecisiveness in addressing these themes. The storytelling here is as conflicted as the story itself. The author concocts multiple real-life quandaries but cannot seem to commit on account of his conflicted views. Effectively, it is a book that drifts because of the lack of decisions.
For instance, the author does not want his readers to sympathize with the queers. The book revolves around the struggle of trans individuals to be understood and accepted by society. Yet, the author seems to equate extra efforts needed and put in by the outsiders to understand trans issues as unnatural and uses anecdotes in the book to deride them. The author cannot resolve even his fictional situations, variously dooming its characters' lives despite setting them up in a reasonably supportive community.
The author's internal struggles in creating a smoothly functional, co-parenthood family are far bigger, despite bravely attempting the story centered on the theme. As much as he tries, he fails in constructing the ambiance where the focus is pregnancy and the baby rather than the complicated, unsolvable parts of its parents. The story not only meanders aimlessly but also indecisive right to the end.
Overall, while Detransition, Baby brings important themes to the forefront and encourages readers to think critically about trans issues, it ultimately falls short in its execution and fails to realize the potential of its characters and storylines fully. ...more
A lot of arguments in The Sum of Us are highly debatable. The author's extreme takes convert numerous inequality, corporate greed, and electoral systeA lot of arguments in The Sum of Us are highly debatable. The author's extreme takes convert numerous inequality, corporate greed, and electoral system rigidities into race issues which is at least partly driven by the author's politics. The solutions - also reflective of the author's political and economic leanings - do not attempt to solve the inherent racism issues as much as issues of the other realms. Ideally, these non-racism issues should be debated separately for the proponents and opponents to argue the pros and cons more dispassionately.
All that said, the book refuses to pull any punches in throwing light on the topic the privileged want only to gloss over. Through discussions that often turn extreme, it covers the well-trodden grounds and exposes issues from other realms having outcomes that perpetuate and reinforce the racial divides. They are issues of inequality, corporate greed, and electoral system rigidities, which now intersect with and exacerbate issues of racism.
All humanitarians should read this book carefully, even if they are not from the United States or from vastly different economic or political schools compared to the author. ...more
I write this review around the end of 2022. An article recently talks about how the bestsellers of this year are 11% shorter in length compared to theI write this review around the end of 2022. An article recently talks about how the bestsellers of this year are 11% shorter in length compared to the last. This is a staggering decline. Trust is a proof of this trend. The book could have been much better if it had escaped the latest fad.
The story, as clear from the blurb, is fiendishly clever in its conception. It fails to fulfill the potential because of the hurtful brevity. The author could have done with an extra character or two and more surprises involving the lead couple.
That said, this is a good read for the ambitious storyline and the author's stylistic experiments. ...more
A failed rebellion, revolution, or religious movement does not get discussed as much as those that don’t. Obviously! But given the likely extent of huA failed rebellion, revolution, or religious movement does not get discussed as much as those that don’t. Obviously! But given the likely extent of human life lost in the Taiping rebellion, it needs more attention than it gets.
The book fills the void somewhat with its version of events based on the available information. The information availability, unfortunately, is such that the viewpoints are mainly of the Western colonialists, missionaries, and mercenaries based in China at the time than of the more relevant leaders of the Qing dynasty or of the heavenly kingdom.
That such a massive internal war had such little lasting impact on China’s subsequent history is another external factor reducing the narrative appeal of details discussed in the book. So while it is a rare popular book on one of the biggest global historic events, it is also a book that fails to connect what it describes with anything that came after. ...more
It is good to read books that tout blindingly obvious messages.
The book effectively has three messages: the organization should think long-term, haveIt is good to read books that tout blindingly obvious messages.
The book effectively has three messages: the organization should think long-term, have motivated workers, and not do the wrong things. It is sometimes inspiring, but at most others, it is repetitive w and with messages that are so plain that they come off preachy rather than informative.
It does not help that the examples used are curve-fitted to suit the author’s perspectives. The book refuses to pick genuine real-life examples where the decisions involve difficult compromises, unexpected fallouts, or bad outcomes. If presented with examples of someone failing while practicing the book’s methods, the author will likely find a way to make it the practitioner’s fault for not doing things exactly the way he would do them.
Going by the evidence of the book, the author is unlikely ever to admit that there are many circumstances where what he preaches could result in bad outcomes or what he preaches against may work.
The messages are incontrovertible in a vacuum. Even if their utility as a decision-making framework is questionable in many cases, they are the beacons to be kept in mind even in arduous circumstances. Despite their monotony and self-evidence, hearing them now and then will provide areas for reconsideration to most real-life managers. One must suppress the impulse to dispute the examples used and how the author presents them. ...more
The book is excellent in its sweep of early history, particularly up to the second World War, and does equally well in criticizing both the extreme leThe book is excellent in its sweep of early history, particularly up to the second World War, and does equally well in criticizing both the extreme left and right economic theories. However, the discussions lose objectivity and relevance as the author turns to the recent decades. They turn blindingly self-serving and completely US-centric as many of the prescriptions are beggar-thy-neighbour variety.
The book is unique for its focus on the history of the global political economy. The author is a devout Keynesian, which allows him to be equally harsh on the free-market theories of Hayek or Friedman as well as the communist policies espoused by the likes of Marx.
Through the horrors of the twentieth century, the book easily slams down every form of political extremism. At the midpoint, it becomes clear that any group that serves itself or an ideology - irrespective of whether political or economic - is naive at best in the assumption that all societies' ills could be solved by sticking to pure theories penned in some books. The end results are almost always far worse when such ideologues use their powers to suppress their internal and external dissenters and refuse to see the most obvious harmful results of their policymaking or politics.
Alas, in trying to promote the case of Keynesianism - re-branded as democratic socialism - the author falls prey to some of the same issues that face the ideologues of other types. This is particularly staggering when we are on the verge of another inflation era globally.
One could author a book with disagreements on the book's take on the era since the 1970s. The author does not even mention how the decades-long, post-WW2 boom was partly because of the low base start and partly also because of the policies that borrowed from the future (ie, led to the corrections of the 1970s).
Another driver of that era was the standing start of the Global South that allowed the already-ahead Global North to keep outperforming. Global South also took longer to get rid of some of the ideological, extremist political, and economic ism's, prolonging its plight.
By many measures, at a global level, the world's least privileged are living more, have materially better access to basic needs, have closed the gap on information/knowledge access substantially in our information age, and are being far less discriminated against than ever. There are still too many ills in the world to self-congratulate, but the author refuses to recognise that the trends on these were not necessarily positive in the decades he yearns for - not from the viewpoint of the world.
Keynesianism, like Capitalism or Communism, becomes too extreme as a stand-alone contender theory to solve all economic issues. Communism's failures are in its suppression of individual rights, its tendency to corrupt its powerbrokers because of the lack of checks, and concentrated, inflexible decision-making on inadequate information. Capitalism - in its purest form - lacks humanity, tends to runaway inequality of all kinds, and does not have enough protection for those left behind. It is also prone to excessive cycles that hurt the unprotected the most. Keynesianism's underbelly is in inefficient state policies, the populism that invariably gives rise to inflation, and the crowding out of the private sector, including in innovation.
The reality is such that any set of economic policies - whether in pure forms or as a mix and with its roots in trying to solve the worst problems of the previous set - will create its own problems over time. The macro policies, by definition, are applied at mass levels - which means there are always some who will be left behind in some ways, and over time their plights become bigger than other positives that accrue from these policies elsewhere. A pragmatic society, with a policymaking class that is not focused on working for themselves or any ideology, will have to keep shifting and shaping to remove the excesses (particularly the harmful ones) while never compromising on society's basic rules and norms. This flexibility is most difficult where those in power are set on any fixed goals - whether in boosting growth, reducing unemployment, or fostering equality - for a long time and/or wedded to a particular theory.
A slavish Keynesian approach causes governments to over-extend. While being morally and even politically correct, policies of subsidies, transfers, guarantees, and debt forgiveness, create obvious rot of a different variety after a while. Notwithstanding the fact that Keynesian or other forms of socialistic policies do not come in one form, none of these are forever right or wrong.
Back to the book: the book is a great read up until a point, and the reader's enjoyment would then depend on how much agreement they have with the author's economic preferences....more
The book is worth reading for the case studies or stories selected. There is a lot to dislike from what is omitted (every knowledgeable reader will haThe book is worth reading for the case studies or stories selected. There is a lot to dislike from what is omitted (every knowledgeable reader will have a long list of examples that should have been included), a rather negative tone (except for the positive message in the last paragraph of the book), a lack of comparative analysis, rather cliched suggestions at the end, and a lot more.
The author does an excellent job narrating half a dozen historic examples. These well-written episodes provide a lot of good, relevant information that will help readers see the arc of how today's corporates came into being. Even while the author does not explicitly talk about what happened in communities that adapted to this route of doing collective work late, the examples are clear enough to help readers see the changes wrought themselves.
A quick, easy, and unique read for what is offered....more
The Illusion of Control covers all the standard concepts linked to risk management. While the author props up to shoot down many a strawman to create The Illusion of Control covers all the standard concepts linked to risk management. While the author props up to shoot down many a strawman to create the feeling that he is making some radical new points, there is almost nothing radically original. Readers new to the topic might find the book a good introductory guide, but it is unlikely to provide new insights to those familiar.
Awareness of risk management tools or their importance does not make anyone less vulnerable in the financial world. Adherence requires enormous discipline and continuous training. Many professionals could use the book as a refresher despite familiarity with the topics covered. The book's discussions might just prompt some to re-check something long forgotten, making a quick read worthwhile.
The author's arguments are straightforward. Criticisms are largely reserved for nameless policymakers - keeping the content even less controversial. The book's excessive focus on risks measured in the form of liquid securities' price movements makes it miss many other measures of risks, though. The book barely mentions the importance of balance sheet analysis, rating agency models, evaluation of qualitative factors like management quality, liquidity and opaqueness of structures involved, the keyman risk, and a number of other tools employed by loan officers, investors in private markets, or even those in public markets.
The author's arguments against artificial intelligence (for whatever it means) expose the book's underbelly - ie, its inability to discuss anything recent and forward-looking. The reality of risk sciences, more than anything else in practical life, is that what is measured and managed is a function of the available tools. As tools evolve, so do methods and practices. Discussing risk without discussing the latest in data sciences or criticizing "artificial intelligence" with vague generalities is equivalent to discussing modern physics with Einstein's discoveries and suggesting sciences stop there.
The author's recommendations are often towards models that are too static (with the changing inputs) and increasingly archaic. From calculators through spreadsheets, applications providing ever more complex statistical results, and programmed databases through to machine learning algorithms now, Riskometers are constantly changing. The roles of data and processing power continue to rise, while the input of human decision-making - still critical - continues to evolve (and need one daresay, diminish). The new-age risk models - which too will surely fail - even at the most unsophisticated organizations use analysis far more complex than the ARCH, value-at-risk, etc. invented decades ago. The book's understanding of what artificial intelligence means and how it is changing is plain wrong and self-serving (to the criticisms offered).
The end sections have other fears, which are also made up. For example, the author worries needlessly about everyone using the same risk models in a couple of contexts without realizing the real-life participants' needs to do better risk management than their peers as a competitive tool. While risk models are never perfect - as the author shows, this is theoretically given with reality in its infinite potential always shapeshifting to fill the corners left vacant by limited risk models - few prudent actors stop at implementing the bare minimum suggested by policy directives. Of course, it neither means policymakers have no roles to play nor implies an absence of nefarious players ignoring the most elementary guidelines for ill-gotten gains. The main point the book misses is that risk management is more in the intent and details, as it needs to use as much data/processing power as possible while also having the best human oversight. ...more
Midway through the book, I was wondering whether the book deserves even three stars. The title is misleading, as the book is less about numbers and moMidway through the book, I was wondering whether the book deserves even three stars. The title is misleading, as the book is less about numbers and more about cosmology, relativity, particle physics, quantum physics, and everything else that one would associate with early and mid-twentieth-century physics. That early chapters rehash the well-trodden explanations of relativity with little new insights add to the disappointment.
The reviewer was baffled as the author suddenly switched to the topics of incomprehensibly large Graham's and Tree (3) numbers. As baffling as this was, there were some new learnings.
After the halfway mark, the sections on particle physics had a lot well covered in countless popular books, but bursts of inspirational writing became more frequent. By the time the book ended, the reviewer had walked away with some new understanding of De Sitter space, chirality, gauge theory, tachyonic field, Calabi-Yau manifolds, continuum hypothesis, and a few others.
It is staggering how the book accommodated such diverse topics under the garb of "fantastic numbers" along with (a relatively large number of depressing) stories of a handful of scientists. Overall, a worthwhile read for the new insights that keep coming from the left fields....more
If this was a fairytale- or superhero-type fantasy book, the book's laughably utopian solutions to all the world's ills would have been more readable.If this was a fairytale- or superhero-type fantasy book, the book's laughably utopian solutions to all the world's ills would have been more readable. A reader could have enjoyed the escapism offered without thinking much about the impracticality of each solution offered. As it stands, the author seems to feel that at least some of the proferred dozens of panaceas should be considered carefully by the revolutionaries of our era. Almost each one of them is as bad as a magic wand in real life.
The author sets a lofty target for himself: to reduce carbon in the atmosphere, eliminate inequality, end capitalism, eradicate borders, save wildlife, end glaciers' melting, employ everyone, accommodate all the refugees, and solve a few more equally vexatious issues facing humanity. By using the most unbelievable economic (issuing a carbon-sequestration-backed global currency to all that would somehow lord over all the currencies), technological (the most ludicrous use of "blockchain" to eliminate tax frauds, for instance), scientific (to prevent the melting of the glaciers), political, terrorist, etc. methods, he just makes these problems disappear.
Notwithstanding the story that somehow does not hang together well after a great start or the uneven writing that hinders more than help, one is most distracted thinking about the naivety of everything written. The worry for our society is the harm done by such foolishness when taken seriously, no matter how right the underlying intentions are. In their righteousness, the proposers will always blame others when the results do not match their expectations rather than accept the unviability of such ideas while working with others on solutions that have higher chances of success. ...more
Existential Physics is a rare book I read twice back-to-back. This was not because it was difficult to understand (actually, some of the technical andExistential Physics is a rare book I read twice back-to-back. This was not because it was difficult to understand (actually, some of the technical and philosophical discussions are) but because I wanted to ponder more over so many new points the author had put forward.
Ms. Hossenfelder is an accomplished, empirical experimentalist scientist who is also a gifted writer. She is clear about what she believes in and why. More importantly, she is clear about what she does not believe in, cannot believe in, would not believe in, and where she has no way of knowing whether to believe in or not. Her conceptual clarity may not convert others who do not share the same views, but they would surely spark many worthwhile new thoughts.
The author is not exactly a fan of theoretical physicists. If the previous books had not clarified this clearly, it comes out far more forcefully in Existential Physics. The armchair physicists are frequently put in the same category as the prophets, sages, charlatans, and others from time immemorial that claimed to have figured out how the world works. The path chosen to come down heavily on this group is through the notion of scientific versus ascientific theories. The author makes it clear that just like most religious assertions, theories like inflation, loop quantum, string, etc., are speculative without any basis in known or even knowable science. The book is about how much we really know and what we can know. It does the first part extremely well. But it isn't easy to agree with the author's binning of a lot of good theoretical work despite their speculative nature.
Some propositions and assertions, often misnamed as theories, are clearly wrong. In taking a liberal view, the author not only shies away from picking the most obvious wrong ones, but she also refuses to acknowledge that some of the theoretical physicists' suppositions are significantly less wrong compared to made-up assertions from other fields. Historic, non-rational theories are issued as given; they are unmodifiable and non-mathematic. To equate them with mathematical, modifiable forms with current theoretical physicists' is needlessly extreme in many cases.
As the author says herself, we need hypotheses for science to progress. From a given circle of relatively proven "science," one path of progress is by observing and fitting more data (and, in the process, expanding our equations/theories). This is the path of experimentalists like the author. The other path is by first hypothesizing what further progress could be and then looking for data for confirmation or repudiation.
The second method, by definition, will start speculatively. It may often have to turn bombastic, too, like in search of better math (or alternate math) that can deal with the infinities/singularities that recur in current mathematical equations (of science) but somehow get resolved without problems in reality as we experience. For example, the Navier-Stokes equation could be more resolvable using completely outlandish math, like Fermat's last theorm. If such math is proposed Today, it may not appear to have any utility at the outset until it suddenly begins solving unsolvable equations using current methods.
This hypothesis-first path of theoretical scientists has worked spectacularly for centuries. Given the state of Today's data, tools, and science, it might not be possible for humans sitting behind a desk to produce the correct theories out of thin air like Einstein before, but proposals that make some sense could be put forward by machines too. If they are not falsifiable in their first versions, many of these proposals could be modified/amended in their equations to become more verifiable over time. This reviewer is with the author in seeing a diminished role for theoretical innovations in the periods ahead, but to equate their ascientific theories with other ascientific theories from the non-physics realm, like the way the author does, is extreme.
The book makes some excellent points on fundamental versus emergent theories. The author asserts that there are no strongly emergent theories. All emergent properties, like the structure of DNA or waves of an ocean (let alone consciousness or love the mother has for her child), emerge from more fundamental laws of particle physics/relativity, even if we may not be able to provide the full calculation linkages Today. As much as the author claims that she is not a reductionist - ontological or theoretical - her assertions against strong emergence appear ascientific. If Today's fundamental theories - along with 26 constants, 25 particles, four forces, and the current set of equations - cannot precisely explain why the H-O-H bond in a water molecule is 104.5 degrees and not 125 degrees or predicate why proteins take certain shapes but not others, there might be something in emergent properties not completely available in fundamental theories as we know them.
In other words, we are supposed to take it for granted that all higher-level emergent properties come out of the same lower-level equations even when it is not mathematically possible to achieve it currently. The reviewer, like the author, believes that there is no mind or consciousness or free will below the emergent properties of underlying forces and matter, but this is another ascientific assertion, in a way. This is not much different from multiverses the author argues against because they are ascientific and arbitrary.
The larger point is that almost all of us are prone to fall for unprovable assertions without realizing them. The author is far more obviously ascientific in her views on artificial general intelligence.
The book is not only good in addressing many philosophical issues but also in explaining many scientific concepts. One example is the discussions on why it might not always be possible to predict completely deterministic systems. The author explains this through quantum uncertainty and then the chaotic nature of calculations first, but soon moves beyond. Godel's incompleteness theorem and the halting problem are used to show how notwithstanding the rest, there are always problems that cannot be solved in finite steps using any mathematical system. There are many other problems that encounter singularities and infinities in the math we operate, even while they resolve beautifully in real life.
Here are some other small nuggets of information:
-- Is the world mathematical, or is math just the language we use for its description? The second is demonstrably true, while the first is an ascientific assumption. It is unlikely we figured out what the world is or even what the best description language of the world is on our first try
-- All laws are time irreversible, except the collapse of the wave function and the information lost at the black hole.
-- Quantum collapse is something that happens when a wave function interacts with any sufficiently impactful macro matter. There are non-zero chances of quantum equations being emergent and not fundamental.
-- Time irreversibility means that from any fully described system, we can deterministically determine both the full past and present.
-- Today's theoretical world is full of speculative conjectures on items 10-15 orders different from our best ability to observe - like inflation, protein decay, black hole evaporation, etc. One should realize that these ascientific theories are hopeless in many ways.
-- Quantum entanglement is observed non-locally but has to be enacted locally.
-- General relativity does not limit the speed of light but merely states that acceleration from below the speed of light level to above requires infinite energy.
-- No cloning means you cannot ever copy a neuron completely faithfully
Overall, the book has many extreme conclusions for almost any type of reader. The author stands her ground well. As a result, she will make her readers think deeply to understand what they honestly disagree with. ...more
Even for a reader who generally loves Bosch books for their languid style, interwoven crime stories, rapid pace, and likable leads, there is a lot thaEven for a reader who generally loves Bosch books for their languid style, interwoven crime stories, rapid pace, and likable leads, there is a lot that does not sit as well in the latest version.
Mr. Connelly allows his characters to grow old, which is excellent, except that Bosch's lack of energy also seems to pervade the novel. Our hero cannot be afforded livewire action scenes. But even his dialogues appear tired, with the trademark grumpiness more irritating than charming.
The new department does not have the supporting cast as a team to create the right environment while helping push multiple stories forward in lockstep. Given the nature of Harry's new role, there are no crime scene tales, either. The author cannot generate as much excitement through desk work and secondary research.
Unlike in most previous books, the multiple cases do not move simultaneously but sequentially, which exposes their uncomplicated resolutions. While the book reads like a tv series script, the main problem is that one of the two cases appears stretched needlessly to increase the book length to the minimum needed, while the other appears too hastily wound up under time pressure. ...more
Loading...
