What do you think?
Rate this book
The State of the Universe: A Primer in Modern Cosmology
The universe is a mess. Or rather, our understanding of it is. That’s the message of this lively introduction to the conundrums shaking up the field of cosmology. Pedro G. Ferreira, a noted lecturer in astrophysics at Oxford, explains how a universe once ruled by Einstein’s simple equations has given way to a more complex and confusing one, where mysterious dark matter” outweighs visible matter a hundred to one, and dark energy” seems to be hurling the galaxies apart. Ferreira takes readers on a fascinating journey through the history of astronomy to show how we arrived here, clarifying today’s many contending theories.
Hardcover
First published January 1, 2006
10 people are currently reading
119 people want to read
About the author
Pedro G. Ferreira
7 books22 followersPEDRO G. FERREIRA is a professor of astrophysics at the University of Oxford. An expert in cosmology, the early universe and general relativity, he writes frequently for trade and academic science publications and is a regular commentator for the BBC.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
October 19, 2011
This book was surprisingly accessible in explaining complex concepts of the universe. I was enthralled with ideas such as the red shift, radio waves, and expansion v. inflation theories that contributed to the beginning of the the universe. Whereas I am not opposed to the idea of a "Big Bang", it sure is mind boggling to try to comprehend the shape, size, forces and sub-atomic particles that make up the universe....i mean, if nothing else i learned some really cool scrabble words like gravitron, muon, fermions, positrons, neutrinos...etc. Nerdy, Oh. Yes. I highly recommend this book!
January 7, 2024
Another rare trip down the non-fiction lane for this one. It was an easy sell when I read the back in the book shop as regular readers will know I’m all about anything to do with space.
I found the book fell into three parts.
The first part was very interesting, well written and easy to follow. Following the history of how our understanding of space, the universe and Earth’s place in it was fascinating as was the explanation of Newton’s theories of gravity and Einstein’s theories of relativity.
The second part started to delve into dark matter and dark energy and possible causes for the universe expanding faster than expected. As I was reading this section my brain started to hurt.
The final part went off the deep end talking about quantum mechanics, string theory, the topology of the universe, the nature of infinity and higher dimensions that we can’t see. This was the point my brain went beyond hurt to danger of exploding!!!
Pleased I read this book but it’s Professor Brian Cox for me next time!!
I found the book fell into three parts.
The first part was very interesting, well written and easy to follow. Following the history of how our understanding of space, the universe and Earth’s place in it was fascinating as was the explanation of Newton’s theories of gravity and Einstein’s theories of relativity.
The second part started to delve into dark matter and dark energy and possible causes for the universe expanding faster than expected. As I was reading this section my brain started to hurt.
The final part went off the deep end talking about quantum mechanics, string theory, the topology of the universe, the nature of infinity and higher dimensions that we can’t see. This was the point my brain went beyond hurt to danger of exploding!!!
Pleased I read this book but it’s Professor Brian Cox for me next time!!
March 1, 2016
As a primer, much if not most of this book has been covered elsewhere by others. Still, a few points the author makes stood out: (1) The more particles are pinned down, the more they jitter; they push against each other, trying to create space, countering “the pull of gravity.” (2) Gravity may apply only to Newtonian-like environment, as a classical force, and it may not apply at the quantum level. (3) The weak and strong nuclear forces act within the nucleus, and the strong force overcomes electromagnetic repulsion; the electromagnetic force acts at the atomic level (nucleus and electrons; molecules), without which there are no elements or objects. (4) Moving back in time toward the initial singularity, gravity is no longer valid and a new (quantum) regime takes control (but, then, the author states that “under negative pressure” the universe expands eternally and doesn’t start out from a singularity, which I didn't understand [see below]). (5) The younger light is, the more distant it is (which interestingly reformulates the notion that the light from “the “Big Bang” is older). (6) Scientists have determined that more mass (hidden, and by a large factor) exists in the Milky Way because its spiral arms are rotating faster the further away they are from the center ( they should be slower); the galactic spiral arms “are pulled out” by something (dark matter?). (7) Gravity is attractive, yet the author writes that masses resist gravitational attraction with speed (kinetic energy); centrifugal force is movement forward, which counters gravitational pull. (8) Einstein’s special theory of relativity demotes time to the status of just another coordinate, entangled with space. (9) It’s said that photons have no mass, yet they are referred to as particles; the author also writes that “the energy density of particles which have no mass,” which raises the question, if it’s not a “thing,” what is a particle?
I struggled with the book in more than a few places. This was particularly the case with the author’s discussion of gravity as a repulsive force. Ferreira states that Einstein’s “cosmological constant” can be dusted off and understood as a new form of energy “which repels itself under gravity.” This is a significant statement as gravity is understood to be an attractive force, drawing masses together, as opposed to a force that pushes them apart as the author’s states. The author discusses this in terms of some sort of negative pressure but I don’t know what this means. Einstein’s cosmological constant, though he later admitted he was wrong, was thought to counteract the cosmos collapsing into itself, thereby keeping it in a steady state. Ferreira writes that Einstein’s cosmological constant can be understood as “a repulsive force, as negative gravity - where energy density decreases after a Big Bang-like event because energy and particles move further away from each other. Is this a repulsive force “under gravity”? Per Newton, gravity’s “force” depends on distance. Under a Big Bang scenario, is there a mid-point where gravity’s power ceases to be effective, and the dissipation of energy as heat, free of gravity, takes over?
Ferreira’s discussion of space is confusing. At one point he seems to refer to it as a referencing mechanism (reference frame) to measure the distance between two points.* But he also refers to space “as an entity in itself, a living and evolving thing,” and he writes of the “texture of space-time,” as a something that bends and warps and moves mass and light. At one point, he says space is a vacuum but then writes of the “energy of empty space,” which seems to be a contradiction as “energy” is in space. Elsewhere he states that space is mostly radiation with a “sprinkling of atoms.” How is it that space is a vacuum or empty if it is filled with radiation (or dark matter and energy, whatever these may be)? In his discussion of energy density (energy per unit of volume), Ferreira states that initially the cosmos (in a singularity-like state) was contained by space – pressure was created by the three dimensions of space, which suggests that space pre-exists, as walls of sorts that pressure builds against. This seems counter to an alternative view of space that is created as the universe expands (energy and particles move further from each other and density decreases).
*“We have built up a picture of an evolving universe, expanding and cooling over time. This expansion manifests itself as space stretching, with any two points in space moving further and further apart as it evolves.”
I struggled with the book in more than a few places. This was particularly the case with the author’s discussion of gravity as a repulsive force. Ferreira states that Einstein’s “cosmological constant” can be dusted off and understood as a new form of energy “which repels itself under gravity.” This is a significant statement as gravity is understood to be an attractive force, drawing masses together, as opposed to a force that pushes them apart as the author’s states. The author discusses this in terms of some sort of negative pressure but I don’t know what this means. Einstein’s cosmological constant, though he later admitted he was wrong, was thought to counteract the cosmos collapsing into itself, thereby keeping it in a steady state. Ferreira writes that Einstein’s cosmological constant can be understood as “a repulsive force, as negative gravity - where energy density decreases after a Big Bang-like event because energy and particles move further away from each other. Is this a repulsive force “under gravity”? Per Newton, gravity’s “force” depends on distance. Under a Big Bang scenario, is there a mid-point where gravity’s power ceases to be effective, and the dissipation of energy as heat, free of gravity, takes over?
Ferreira’s discussion of space is confusing. At one point he seems to refer to it as a referencing mechanism (reference frame) to measure the distance between two points.* But he also refers to space “as an entity in itself, a living and evolving thing,” and he writes of the “texture of space-time,” as a something that bends and warps and moves mass and light. At one point, he says space is a vacuum but then writes of the “energy of empty space,” which seems to be a contradiction as “energy” is in space. Elsewhere he states that space is mostly radiation with a “sprinkling of atoms.” How is it that space is a vacuum or empty if it is filled with radiation (or dark matter and energy, whatever these may be)? In his discussion of energy density (energy per unit of volume), Ferreira states that initially the cosmos (in a singularity-like state) was contained by space – pressure was created by the three dimensions of space, which suggests that space pre-exists, as walls of sorts that pressure builds against. This seems counter to an alternative view of space that is created as the universe expands (energy and particles move further from each other and density decreases).
*“We have built up a picture of an evolving universe, expanding and cooling over time. This expansion manifests itself as space stretching, with any two points in space moving further and further apart as it evolves.”
September 19, 2008
This book is a fantastic cosmology primer. I have a penchant for reading physics books and this one describes all the missing pieces I have about cosmology. Many of you have probably heard of dark matter, he explains why scientists think this exists, rather than just going on about trying to prove it. He lays down some necessary basics like how we measure the distances to stars and galaxies and how me measure the speeds that they are traveling. It uses the vast amounts of new data we now have thanks to Hubble, Chandra, Spitzer, COBE and the WMAP satellites and tells the reader with clear explanations what it all means as relating to our current standard model. Or lacking complete understanding of an area, he expounds on the latest theories that physicists are grappling with in trying to unify physics. Overall, this is a great book with a lot of information succinctly delivered to give the reader an excellent primer on modern cosmology.
October 5, 2009
Due back at the library before I had a chance to finish it; I'd like to try and complete it sometime. Not very exciting since it starts with the basics, but I feel like it probably will get more interesting as the book progresses from what we definitely know to what we're not sure about.
January 17, 2013
A nice survey. Pretty dry, but the author did the best he could given the enormous complexity of the subject matter. He makes use of quite a few helpful analogies to explain concepts like relativity and planetary orbits.
April 19, 2012
Delivered on it's promise to be a primer in modern cosmology, an excellent one at that.
The dark matter the author refers to is in my view negative energy that will have to be dispered with light.
The dark matter the author refers to is in my view negative energy that will have to be dispered with light.
March 30, 2017
Awesome read for anyone who is interested in cosmology. Very accessible.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews