What do you think?
Rate this book
Черни дупки и бебета вселени и други есета
"Разбирам черните дупки. В известен случай се чувствам техен господар."
Стивън Хокинг
През 1974 г. почти веднага след като се появява понятието "лъчение на Хокинг" Хокинг получава едно от най-големите призвания във всяка научна кариера. Едва 32 годишен е поканен за действителен член на Кралското общество.
Мисълта за такива екзотични обекти като черните дупки, които могат да изядат цялата Слънчева система на закуска завладява общественото въображение...
Стивън Хокинг
През 1974 г. почти веднага след като се появява понятието "лъчение на Хокинг" Хокинг получава едно от най-големите призвания във всяка научна кариера. Едва 32 годишен е поканен за действителен член на Кралското общество.
Мисълта за такива екзотични обекти като черните дупки, които могат да изядат цялата Слънчева система на закуска завладява общественото въображение...
272 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1993
743 people are currently reading
25741 people want to read
About the author
Stephen W. Hawking
242 books12.8k followersStephen William Hawking was an English theoretical physicist, cosmologist, and author who was director of research at the Centre for Theoretical Cosmology at the University of Cambridge. Between 1979 and 2009, he was the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge, widely viewed as one of the most prestigious academic posts in the world.
Hawking was born in Oxford into a family of physicians. In October 1959, at the age of 17, he began his university education at University College, Oxford, where he received a first-class BA degree in physics. In October 1962, he began his graduate work at Trinity Hall, Cambridge, where, in March 1966, he obtained his PhD degree in applied mathematics and theoretical physics, specialising in general relativity and cosmology. In 1963, at age 21, Hawking was diagnosed with an early-onset slow-progressing form of motor neurone disease that gradually, over decades, paralysed him. After the loss of his speech, he communicated through a speech-generating device initially through use of a handheld switch, and eventually by using a single cheek muscle.
Hawking's scientific works included a collaboration with Roger Penrose on gravitational singularity theorems in the framework of general relativity, and the theoretical prediction that black holes emit radiation, often called Hawking radiation. Initially, Hawking radiation was controversial. By the late 1970s, and following the publication of further research, the discovery was widely accepted as a major breakthrough in theoretical physics. Hawking was the first to set out a theory of cosmology explained by a union of the general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics. He was a vigorous supporter of the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.
Hawking achieved commercial success with several works of popular science in which he discussed his theories and cosmology in general. His book A Brief History of Time appeared on the Sunday Times bestseller list for a record-breaking 237 weeks. Hawking was a Fellow of the Royal Society, a lifetime member of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, and a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in the United States. In 2002, Hawking was ranked number 25 in the BBC's poll of the 100 Greatest Britons. He died in 2018 at the age of 76, having lived more than 50 years following his diagnosis of motor neurone disease.
Hawking was born in Oxford into a family of physicians. In October 1959, at the age of 17, he began his university education at University College, Oxford, where he received a first-class BA degree in physics. In October 1962, he began his graduate work at Trinity Hall, Cambridge, where, in March 1966, he obtained his PhD degree in applied mathematics and theoretical physics, specialising in general relativity and cosmology. In 1963, at age 21, Hawking was diagnosed with an early-onset slow-progressing form of motor neurone disease that gradually, over decades, paralysed him. After the loss of his speech, he communicated through a speech-generating device initially through use of a handheld switch, and eventually by using a single cheek muscle.
Hawking's scientific works included a collaboration with Roger Penrose on gravitational singularity theorems in the framework of general relativity, and the theoretical prediction that black holes emit radiation, often called Hawking radiation. Initially, Hawking radiation was controversial. By the late 1970s, and following the publication of further research, the discovery was widely accepted as a major breakthrough in theoretical physics. Hawking was the first to set out a theory of cosmology explained by a union of the general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics. He was a vigorous supporter of the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.
Hawking achieved commercial success with several works of popular science in which he discussed his theories and cosmology in general. His book A Brief History of Time appeared on the Sunday Times bestseller list for a record-breaking 237 weeks. Hawking was a Fellow of the Royal Society, a lifetime member of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, and a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in the United States. In 2002, Hawking was ranked number 25 in the BBC's poll of the 100 Greatest Britons. He died in 2018 at the age of 76, having lived more than 50 years following his diagnosis of motor neurone disease.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 543 reviews
July 25, 2012
this surprisingly relaxed and enjoyable collection of essays by Hawking didn't make me feel one bit stupid. not one bit! and i am a real dolt when it comes to much of science in general and physics in particular. thank you Hawking for not talking down to me and presenting your rich, dense pie of ideas in a way that was perfectly palatable.
there are a couple of pleasant, unpretentious essays on Hawking's personal life and history (noticeably absent in his prior bestseller) and his general thoughts on life - including some amusing comments on his computer voice's distinctly american accent. and there are some fun, bitchy barbs aimed at his own personal nemeses - "philosophers of science" (...failed physicists who found it too hard to invent new theories and so took to writing about the philosophy of physics instead. They are still arguing about the scientific theories of the early years of this century, like relativity and quantum mechanics. They are not in touch with the present frontier of physics.) perhaps that sounds harsh, particularly coming from a theoretical physicist. but apparently these dastardly Philosophers of Science have been hounding him for years, simply due to his own resistance to fitting his approach and ideas into a single, known school of thought (i.e. as nominalist or instumentalist or positivist or realist, etc... most of which have absolutely no meaning to me). go get 'em, Hawking!
the above paragraph describes only a handful of the essays. the rest are almost entirely concerned with explaining black holes, baby universe, the 4 basic interactions (strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force, electromagnetism, and - the weakest of all - our old friend gravity); concepts such as "imaginary time"; the continued relevance of quantum mechanics; and especially Hawkings' pursuit of a "Grand Unified Theory". Hawkings' work (and this collection) is overtly driven by his desire to finally create this "theory of everything" - one that will at long last lay bare the inner workings of the universe, where we have been, where we are going, how it all connects and what it is all about. is there a greater goal for a theoretical physicist? i really don't know. but this drive really gave me the impression of Hawking being one of the world's Great Men, a man who contemplates the finite and the infinite on a casual basis and whose quest in life is not so much based in ego (although that is there) but in helping to raise humanity to the next level. whatever that level may be.
one might think that God has no place in all of this. well, one would be wrong. God seems to be very much on Hawking's mind. his quest is, in a way, a striving to understand 'the mind of God'. fascinating! here are some of his thoughts on this topic:
"It is now generally accepted that the universe evolves according to well-defined laws. These laws may have been ordained by God, but it seems that He does not intervene in the universe to break the laws. Until recently, however, it was thought that these laws did not apply to the beginning of the universe. It would be up to God to wind up the clockwork and set the universe going in any way He wanted. Thus, the present state of the universe would be the result of God's choice of the initial conditions.
The situation would be very different, however, if something like the no-boundary proposal were correct. In that case the laws of physics would hold even at the beginning of the universe, so God would not have had the freedom to choose the initial conditions. Of course, He would still have been free to choose the laws that the universe obeyed. However, this may not have been much of a choice. There may only be a small number of laws, which are self-consistent and which lead to complicated beings like ourselves who can ask the question: What is the nature of God?
And if there is only one unique set of possible laws, it is only a set of equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to govern? is the ultimate unified theory so compelling that it brings about its own existence? Although science may solve the problem of how the universe began, it cannot answer the question: Why does the universe bother to exist?"
rather strange to find this kind of discussion within a book concerned with theoretical physics. but Hawking makes it not so strange; if anything, his mind illustrates its own kind of Grand Unified Theory. he connects so many things, without ever rambling - on a personal level, on a theoretical level, on a purely scientific level. he writes eloquently and passionately about his thoughts on God, on determinism vs. free will, on various moments in history, on so much... and on his favorite records! what an awesome mind. what a man!
he also answers this timeless question, posed by Sue from Desert Island Discs:
Sue: What would happen if you fell into a black hole?
Stephen: You get made into spaghetti.
there are a couple of pleasant, unpretentious essays on Hawking's personal life and history (noticeably absent in his prior bestseller) and his general thoughts on life - including some amusing comments on his computer voice's distinctly american accent. and there are some fun, bitchy barbs aimed at his own personal nemeses - "philosophers of science" (...failed physicists who found it too hard to invent new theories and so took to writing about the philosophy of physics instead. They are still arguing about the scientific theories of the early years of this century, like relativity and quantum mechanics. They are not in touch with the present frontier of physics.) perhaps that sounds harsh, particularly coming from a theoretical physicist. but apparently these dastardly Philosophers of Science have been hounding him for years, simply due to his own resistance to fitting his approach and ideas into a single, known school of thought (i.e. as nominalist or instumentalist or positivist or realist, etc... most of which have absolutely no meaning to me). go get 'em, Hawking!
the above paragraph describes only a handful of the essays. the rest are almost entirely concerned with explaining black holes, baby universe, the 4 basic interactions (strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force, electromagnetism, and - the weakest of all - our old friend gravity); concepts such as "imaginary time"; the continued relevance of quantum mechanics; and especially Hawkings' pursuit of a "Grand Unified Theory". Hawkings' work (and this collection) is overtly driven by his desire to finally create this "theory of everything" - one that will at long last lay bare the inner workings of the universe, where we have been, where we are going, how it all connects and what it is all about. is there a greater goal for a theoretical physicist? i really don't know. but this drive really gave me the impression of Hawking being one of the world's Great Men, a man who contemplates the finite and the infinite on a casual basis and whose quest in life is not so much based in ego (although that is there) but in helping to raise humanity to the next level. whatever that level may be.
one might think that God has no place in all of this. well, one would be wrong. God seems to be very much on Hawking's mind. his quest is, in a way, a striving to understand 'the mind of God'. fascinating! here are some of his thoughts on this topic:
"It is now generally accepted that the universe evolves according to well-defined laws. These laws may have been ordained by God, but it seems that He does not intervene in the universe to break the laws. Until recently, however, it was thought that these laws did not apply to the beginning of the universe. It would be up to God to wind up the clockwork and set the universe going in any way He wanted. Thus, the present state of the universe would be the result of God's choice of the initial conditions.
The situation would be very different, however, if something like the no-boundary proposal were correct. In that case the laws of physics would hold even at the beginning of the universe, so God would not have had the freedom to choose the initial conditions. Of course, He would still have been free to choose the laws that the universe obeyed. However, this may not have been much of a choice. There may only be a small number of laws, which are self-consistent and which lead to complicated beings like ourselves who can ask the question: What is the nature of God?
And if there is only one unique set of possible laws, it is only a set of equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to govern? is the ultimate unified theory so compelling that it brings about its own existence? Although science may solve the problem of how the universe began, it cannot answer the question: Why does the universe bother to exist?"
rather strange to find this kind of discussion within a book concerned with theoretical physics. but Hawking makes it not so strange; if anything, his mind illustrates its own kind of Grand Unified Theory. he connects so many things, without ever rambling - on a personal level, on a theoretical level, on a purely scientific level. he writes eloquently and passionately about his thoughts on God, on determinism vs. free will, on various moments in history, on so much... and on his favorite records! what an awesome mind. what a man!
he also answers this timeless question, posed by Sue from Desert Island Discs:
Sue: What would happen if you fell into a black hole?
Stephen: You get made into spaghetti.
February 7, 2017
This is a very different book from A Brief History of Time. Hawking notes he doesn’t want to write an autobiography, and puts off people who try to persuade him by saying he’s “considering it” when he’s just avoiding it. I actually think this reads a bit like an autobiography; half of it is devoted to childhood anecdotes, why he got into physics, how his disease affects him (or doesn’t), how he feels about his celebrity and his image with the public.
I can never decide how much I like Hawking. He can be lowkey condescending at times, but on the other hand he admits his shortcomings freely and quickly and has this droll tone conveyed throughout that makes him irresistible. (“When I was twelve, one of my friends bet another friend a bag of sweets that I would never come to anything. I don’t know if this bet was ever settled and, if so, which way it was decided.”)
He also says something rather interesting about the machine that conveys his speech: “The synthesizer is by far the best I have heard because it varies the intonation. The only trouble is that it gives me an American accent. However, by now I identify with its voice. I would not want to change it even if I were offered a British-sounding voice. I would feel I had become a different person.” - This reminds me of the EXTREMELY interesting cyborg movement led by Neil Harbisson, which seeks for non-organic bodily additions (antennae, implants, wheelchairs, prosthetic limbs, etc.) to be legally/ethically/socially recognized as part of the body.
I do have a little hatred in my heart for Hawking because of how much he hates philosophy, and how little he seems to understand of it. I’m not saying he *couldn’t*, of course, he certainly could if he bothered to. But from what he says, it seems he’s read very, very little philosophy, and generally refuses to think about it, but is happy to criticize it out of spite (because apparently some philosophers criticize him). Because his criticisms of what philosophy of science accomplishes is, to borrow a phrase from I-can’t-remember-whom, “picking the stick up from the other end.” Same stick, different end, totally different point. The goals he says philosophers of science are failing at simply aren’t their goals.
I also don’t really agree with this fiction that he’s the best at explaining cosmology to laymen. He’s not bad, but I’ve definitely read better-phrased material on the same subjects. He also sometimes has a tendency to mess up his pacing. Like he’ll natter on for days about something that I’m like “Yeah, duh, we all know this, Stephen, don’t talk down to us, move on.” And then other things that absolutely bewilder me, he skips over all “yeah duh of course” but no, not duh.
I did learn, which I had not previously known, that there may well be “white holes” in the universe which are the counterpart to black holes; as black holes suck matter in, they expel that matter, though not, of course, in any recognizable way. And that baby universes might exist where particles go while inside a black hole, before they are emitted by the white hole that is born somewhere else. Lovely.
I can never decide how much I like Hawking. He can be lowkey condescending at times, but on the other hand he admits his shortcomings freely and quickly and has this droll tone conveyed throughout that makes him irresistible. (“When I was twelve, one of my friends bet another friend a bag of sweets that I would never come to anything. I don’t know if this bet was ever settled and, if so, which way it was decided.”)
He also says something rather interesting about the machine that conveys his speech: “The synthesizer is by far the best I have heard because it varies the intonation. The only trouble is that it gives me an American accent. However, by now I identify with its voice. I would not want to change it even if I were offered a British-sounding voice. I would feel I had become a different person.” - This reminds me of the EXTREMELY interesting cyborg movement led by Neil Harbisson, which seeks for non-organic bodily additions (antennae, implants, wheelchairs, prosthetic limbs, etc.) to be legally/ethically/socially recognized as part of the body.
I do have a little hatred in my heart for Hawking because of how much he hates philosophy, and how little he seems to understand of it. I’m not saying he *couldn’t*, of course, he certainly could if he bothered to. But from what he says, it seems he’s read very, very little philosophy, and generally refuses to think about it, but is happy to criticize it out of spite (because apparently some philosophers criticize him). Because his criticisms of what philosophy of science accomplishes is, to borrow a phrase from I-can’t-remember-whom, “picking the stick up from the other end.” Same stick, different end, totally different point. The goals he says philosophers of science are failing at simply aren’t their goals.
I also don’t really agree with this fiction that he’s the best at explaining cosmology to laymen. He’s not bad, but I’ve definitely read better-phrased material on the same subjects. He also sometimes has a tendency to mess up his pacing. Like he’ll natter on for days about something that I’m like “Yeah, duh, we all know this, Stephen, don’t talk down to us, move on.” And then other things that absolutely bewilder me, he skips over all “yeah duh of course” but no, not duh.
I did learn, which I had not previously known, that there may well be “white holes” in the universe which are the counterpart to black holes; as black holes suck matter in, they expel that matter, though not, of course, in any recognizable way. And that baby universes might exist where particles go while inside a black hole, before they are emitted by the white hole that is born somewhere else. Lovely.
April 18, 2019
Wenn man die kurze Geschichte der Zeit gelesen hat, dann erübrigt sich dieses Buch meiner Ansicht nach. Es handelt sich um eine Sammlung von Essays, die inhaltlich nicht aufeinander abgestimmt sind. Ja, manche Ausführungen, wie z.B. die Erklärung der Relativitätstheorien wiederholen sich sogar wortwörtlich in den einzelnen Kapiteln und sind absolut redundant.
Das Buch beginnt mit einem autobiografischen Abschnitt, der relativ lieblos herunter erzählt wird. Da merkt man, dass Hawking Wissenschaftler, aber kein Romancier ist. Zudem erklärt er mehrmals, dass es sich hier um ein populärwissenschaftliches Buch handelt, welches den Leser in einfachen Worten die Zusammenhänge im Universum erklären soll. Er kann nichts für meine Unwissenheit, aber über weite Strecken konnte ich nur fasziniert zu hören, mit was sich Menschen so beschäftigen. Meine Begeisterung für die Astrophysik wurde nicht geweckt. Ja, mein Gott, dann ist Raum und Zeit halt gekrümmt und die imaginäre Zeit der Schlüssel zum Verständnis. Ich habe es auch nach mehrmalige Erklären immer noch nicht verstanden. Und der Humor von Hawking, ist so vorhersehbar und billig, dass dies nicht zur Erheiterung beitrug.
Das Buch beginnt mit einem autobiografischen Abschnitt, der relativ lieblos herunter erzählt wird. Da merkt man, dass Hawking Wissenschaftler, aber kein Romancier ist. Zudem erklärt er mehrmals, dass es sich hier um ein populärwissenschaftliches Buch handelt, welches den Leser in einfachen Worten die Zusammenhänge im Universum erklären soll. Er kann nichts für meine Unwissenheit, aber über weite Strecken konnte ich nur fasziniert zu hören, mit was sich Menschen so beschäftigen. Meine Begeisterung für die Astrophysik wurde nicht geweckt. Ja, mein Gott, dann ist Raum und Zeit halt gekrümmt und die imaginäre Zeit der Schlüssel zum Verständnis. Ich habe es auch nach mehrmalige Erklären immer noch nicht verstanden. Und der Humor von Hawking, ist so vorhersehbar und billig, dass dies nicht zur Erheiterung beitrug.
December 28, 2024
Romanian review: Nu îmi propusesem să citesc cartea aceasta în 2018. Între timp, Stephen Hawking a murit și m-am hotărât că măcar atât pot face în onoarea lui. Până acum, de Stephen Hawking citisem doar primele 3 cărți din seria pentru copii ,,George", scrisă împreună cu fiica sa, Lucy. Cu alte cuvinte, nu citisem nicio carte de știință în adevăratul sens al cuvântului. Mă bucur că am ales să o citesc pe aceasta.
Nu voi nega că nu am înțeles toate părțile științifice, deși Stephen Hawking are un stil accesibil. El scrie cu scopul de a populariza știința, de a o face accesibilă tuturor, nu pentru a se lăuda în cercurile academice.
Cartea cuprinde o parte biografică, o parte de știință și un interviu din 1992— care mai de care fiind mai interesantă decât precedenta.
Citind acest volum, am aflat multe lucruri noi și, în același timp, am realizat și că sunt o mulțime de lucruri pe care nu le înțeleg încă. Ca rezultat, îmi propun să mă informez cât mai mult în domeniul mecanicii cuantice, relativității generale și cosmosului, și asta cât mai curând.
Unul dintre lucrurile care pot spune că mi-a schimbat viziunea asupra lumii este informația că se cunoaște modul prin care se poate stabili dacă Universul se va extinde la infinit sau va colapsa. Până acum, știam, într-adevăr, că nu se cunoaște dacă Universul și timpul vor avea un sfârșit, dar nu știam nimic despre conceptul densității critice. A fost fascinant să aflu că se cunoaște modul prin care, în viitor, se va determina soarta Universului. Și asta este numai una dintre informațiile interesante pe care le-am aflat din carte. Prin urmare, pot spune că a fost o lectură valoroasă pentru mine.
Este interesant că, la un moment dat, în carte Stephen Hawking afirmă că nu ar vrea să se facă un film despre viața lui, și totuși, în 2014 s-a făcut filmul "The Theory of Everything" cu Eddie Redmayne (care a avut o performanță extraordinară, demnă de Oscarul pe care l-a primit). Se pare că, în 21 de ani, opinia lui Stephen Hawking s-a schimbat.
Îmi pare rău că Stephen Hawking a murit, iar lumea a rămas mai săracă cu încă o personalitate extraordinară, dar mă bucur că a trăit cu peste 50 de ani mai mult decât i-au prezis doctorii și că a reușit să facă descoperi uimitoare.
La începutul cărții, Stephen Hawking a vorbit despre cum este o coincidență că s-a născut la fix 300 de ani de la moartea lui Galileo Galilei (8 ianuarie). Sunt curios dacă ar fi spus același lucru despre faptul că a murit în aceeași zi în care s-a născut Albert Einstein (14 martie).
English review: I hadn’t planned to read this book in 2018. However, after Stephen Hawking passed away, I decided that reading it was the least I could do in his honor. Until then, the only books by Stephen Hawking I had read were the first three in the “George” children’s series, which he co-wrote with his daughter, Lucy. In other words, I hadn’t read any of his scientific works in the truest sense. I’m glad I chose this one.
I won’t deny that I didn’t understand all the scientific parts, even though Stephen Hawking’s writing style is accessible. He writes with the goal of popularizing science and making it accessible to everyone, not to flaunt his knowledge in academic circles.
The book comprises a biographical section, a scientific section, and a 1992 interview—each more interesting than the last.
Reading this volume, I learned many new things while also realizing how much I still don’t understand. As a result, I’ve decided to delve deeper into quantum mechanics, general relativity, and cosmology as soon as possible.
One piece of information that genuinely changed my perspective on the world is the fact that we know how to determine whether the universe will expand forever or eventually collapse. Until now, I knew that we didn’t yet know whether the universe and time would have an end, but I wasn’t aware of the concept of critical density. Learning that there’s a way to determine the universe’s fate in the future was fascinating. And this is just one of the many interesting insights I gained from the book. It was, without a doubt, a valuable read for me.
Interestingly, at one point in the book, Stephen Hawking mentions that he wouldn’t want a movie made about his life. Yet in 2014, "The Theory of Everything" was released, starring Eddie Redmayne (who delivered an extraordinary, Oscar-worthy performance). It seems that in 21 years, Stephen Hawking’s opinion on this matter changed.
I’m saddened by Stephen Hawking’s passing, as the world has lost yet another extraordinary figure. But I’m grateful that he lived over 50 years longer than doctors predicted and managed to make incredible discoveries during that time.
At the beginning of the book, Stephen Hawking remarks on the coincidence of being born exactly 300 years after Galileo Galilei’s death (January 8). I wonder if he would have said the same about the fact that he passed away on the same day Albert Einstein was born (March 14).
April 24, 2019
"Bir erken ölüm olasılığı ile karşı karşıya olduğunuzda yaşamın yaşanmaya değer olduğunu ve yapmak istediğiniz birçok şey bulunduğunu kavrarsınız."
"Evren'in çok daha derinliklerine inmek istiyordum. Belki bir ölçüde başarmış bulunuyorum, fakat hâlâ bilmek istediğim çok şey var."
"Fakat tüm kanıtlar Tanrı'nın uslanmaz bir kumarbaz olduğunu ve mümkün olan her vesileyle zar attığını göstermektedir."
"Evren'in çok daha derinliklerine inmek istiyordum. Belki bir ölçüde başarmış bulunuyorum, fakat hâlâ bilmek istediğim çok şey var."
"Fakat tüm kanıtlar Tanrı'nın uslanmaz bir kumarbaz olduğunu ve mümkün olan her vesileyle zar attığını göstermektedir."
January 3, 2017
За Живота, Вселената и всичко останало важно разказва Хокинг: http://knigolandia.info/book-review/c...
Ей така трябва да изглежда науката на хартия – солидна твърда примамлива корица, а отвътре струи страст, не само сухи формули. Стивън Хокинг е символ на съвременното ни разбиране за Вселената, без съмнение и заради неговото заболяване, което го е приковало към инвалиден стол, но не е пречупило духа му. 53200Мечтаещ дух, заклещен в немощно тяло. И “Черни дупки и бебета вселени и други есета” е повече книга за самия него, за неговия живот и влияние, за ролята му на популяризатор не просто на науката, а на живота и разумното отношение към него, отколкото за неговите теории, които му носят слава и популярност във и извън научните среди. Шестнайсетте есета следват някаква хронологическа линия, но както самият Хокинг въвежда идеята за имагинерно време, което да обясни сливането на гравитацията и квантовата механика, както и сингулярността преди (макар да е нямало преди поради липсата на време в смисъла, който ние влагаме) Големия взрив, така и тук не можем да се осланяме на линейността му. Отчитам, че е огромен пропуск да не съм чел “Кратка история на времето”, това трябва да се поправи.
Издателска къща БАРД
http://knigolandia.info/book-review/c...
Ей така трябва да изглежда науката на хартия – солидна твърда примамлива корица, а отвътре струи страст, не само сухи формули. Стивън Хокинг е символ на съвременното ни разбиране за Вселената, без съмнение и заради неговото заболяване, което го е приковало към инвалиден стол, но не е пречупило духа му. 53200Мечтаещ дух, заклещен в немощно тяло. И “Черни дупки и бебета вселени и други есета” е повече книга за самия него, за неговия живот и влияние, за ролята му на популяризатор не просто на науката, а на живота и разумното отношение към него, отколкото за неговите теории, които му носят слава и популярност във и извън научните среди. Шестнайсетте есета следват някаква хронологическа линия, но както самият Хокинг въвежда идеята за имагинерно време, което да обясни сливането на гравитацията и квантовата механика, както и сингулярността преди (макар да е нямало преди поради липсата на време в смисъла, който ние влагаме) Големия взрив, така и тук не можем да се осланяме на линейността му. Отчитам, че е огромен пропуск да не съм чел “Кратка история на времето”, това трябва да се поправи.
Издателска къща БАРД
http://knigolandia.info/book-review/c...
Read
September 28, 2019This is a collection of personal and scientific articles written by Stephen Hawking over the period 1976 to 1992. If you have read some of Stephen Hawking's major books, you'll find this one repetitive and unnecessary. If you haven't, it might be a good introduction.
October 22, 2025
The book contains autobiographical sketches and speeches between 1976 to 1992. It also includes a transcript of a Desert Island Discs program from 1992. Stephen was a big fan of opera especially Wagner Rings cycle and Mozart.
The 14 chapters include memories of his childhood and time as a student at Oxford and Cambridge. He discusses his diagnosis of having motor neurone disease and how it motivated him as well as getting married. How he was surprised by the runaway success of A Brief History of Time.
Other essays cover black holes, Einstein’s theory of relativity, the uncertainty principle, quantum theory and a possibility one day of a unified theory, imaginary time line, the universe and the physics behind these ideas.
The book ends with his interview on Desert Island Discs which was fascinating. I went on BBC archives and listened to his choice of music.
The 14 chapters include memories of his childhood and time as a student at Oxford and Cambridge. He discusses his diagnosis of having motor neurone disease and how it motivated him as well as getting married. How he was surprised by the runaway success of A Brief History of Time.
Other essays cover black holes, Einstein’s theory of relativity, the uncertainty principle, quantum theory and a possibility one day of a unified theory, imaginary time line, the universe and the physics behind these ideas.
The book ends with his interview on Desert Island Discs which was fascinating. I went on BBC archives and listened to his choice of music.
December 26, 2022
Само Хокинг може да пише толкова остроумно за черни дупки.
March 1, 2025
أليس العنوان جذابا جدا؟!
الكتاب مقالات كتبت لمجلات علمية او محاضرات اضافة الى لقاء في برنامج الجزيرة المهجورة the desert island discs .
The Desert Island Discs
المقالات الثلاث الاولى كانت اشبه بسيرة ذاتية ،عن حياة هوكنج مع المرض وتفاصيل اخرى . اما باقي المقالات فهي علمية اكثر ،ذات عناوين جذابة جدا .:
موقف الجمهور حيال العلم
اصل ومصير الكون
احلام اينشتاين
مستقبل الكون
هل كل شيء محتوم ؟
هل نهاية الفيزياء النظرية منظورة ؟
ميكانيك الكم والثقوب السوداء
وبالتأكيد العنوان ذو السحر :الثقوب السوداء والاكوان الطفلة
فكرة انك تسقط داخل ثقب اسود لتخرج من ثقب ابيض في مكان مجهول من الكون -او ربما كون اخر اساسا ! هي بالتأكيد تثير الخيال ،و"اشبه بروايات
الخيال العلمي "على حد تعبير الكاتب !!.اتفق مع المحاورة في "تسجيلات الجزيرة المهجورة "التي قالت :ان مفهوم الثقب الاسود ،هو الذي راق خيال الناس وجدد الاهتمام بالعلم " ؛اذا حسبما اعتقد ، الناس يميلون دائما الى الغامض الملغز -واي غامض بعد الثقب الاسود !!!
وصف هوكنج قوانين الفيزياء بانها :"تتمتع بخاصية تدعى الفوضى ،بمعنى ان المعادلات قد تكون غير مستقرة " وبذلك فان اي تغيير بسيط في المنظومة ، يؤثر كثيرا على قدرتنا بالتنبؤ بمستقبلها . كنت اعتقد ان القوانين تسمح لنا بالتنبؤ بشكل دقيق نسبيا ،ربما "قلت فوضوية" القوانين بعد ثلاثين سنة تقريبا من حديث هوكنج هذا .
ان افكارا مثل :"هل كل شيء محتوم ؟" حقا تثير التساؤل ، والذي يثيره اكثر هو جواب هوكنج :"الجواب هو نعم ،لكنه قد يكون لا؛ لاننا لانتستطيع ابدا معرفة ما هو المحتوم " حقا؟!!
المقالات فيها الكثير من التشابه والتكرار ،الذي اعتذر منه الكاتب في المقدمة ،ربما يراه بعض القراء مملا او غير ذا جدوى ؛لكن بالنسبة لي ،كان مفيدا جدا ان اقرأ نفس الفكرة مرات عديدة ،بأساليب مختلفة لايصالها الى المتلقي ،مما يزيد الفهم ويرسخ المعلومات -ربما يعود ذلك الى اني لست "خبيرة "بالفيزياء .
تعجبني طريقة هوكنج في طرح افكاره ؛ فهي خالية من التعقيد ،ومتضمنة حسا فكاهيا ،واقتباسا ادبية في بعض الاحيان .
الكتاب مقالات كتبت لمجلات علمية او محاضرات اضافة الى لقاء في برنامج الجزيرة المهجورة the desert island discs .
The Desert Island Discs
المقالات الثلاث الاولى كانت اشبه بسيرة ذاتية ،عن حياة هوكنج مع المرض وتفاصيل اخرى . اما باقي المقالات فهي علمية اكثر ،ذات عناوين جذابة جدا .:
موقف الجمهور حيال العلم
اصل ومصير الكون
احلام اينشتاين
مستقبل الكون
هل كل شيء محتوم ؟
هل نهاية الفيزياء النظرية منظورة ؟
ميكانيك الكم والثقوب السوداء
وبالتأكيد العنوان ذو السحر :الثقوب السوداء والاكوان الطفلة
فكرة انك تسقط داخل ثقب اسود لتخرج من ثقب ابيض في مكان مجهول من الكون -او ربما كون اخر اساسا ! هي بالتأكيد تثير الخيال ،و"اشبه بروايات
الخيال العلمي "على حد تعبير الكاتب !!.اتفق مع المحاورة في "تسجيلات الجزيرة المهجورة "التي قالت :ان مفهوم الثقب الاسود ،هو الذي راق خيال الناس وجدد الاهتمام بالعلم " ؛اذا حسبما اعتقد ، الناس يميلون دائما الى الغامض الملغز -واي غامض بعد الثقب الاسود !!!
وصف هوكنج قوانين الفيزياء بانها :"تتمتع بخاصية تدعى الفوضى ،بمعنى ان المعادلات قد تكون غير مستقرة " وبذلك فان اي تغيير بسيط في المنظومة ، يؤثر كثيرا على قدرتنا بالتنبؤ بمستقبلها . كنت اعتقد ان القوانين تسمح لنا بالتنبؤ بشكل دقيق نسبيا ،ربما "قلت فوضوية" القوانين بعد ثلاثين سنة تقريبا من حديث هوكنج هذا .
ان افكارا مثل :"هل كل شيء محتوم ؟" حقا تثير التساؤل ، والذي يثيره اكثر هو جواب هوكنج :"الجواب هو نعم ،لكنه قد يكون لا؛ لاننا لانتستطيع ابدا معرفة ما هو المحتوم " حقا؟!!
المقالات فيها الكثير من التشابه والتكرار ،الذي اعتذر منه الكاتب في المقدمة ،ربما يراه بعض القراء مملا او غير ذا جدوى ؛لكن بالنسبة لي ،كان مفيدا جدا ان اقرأ نفس الفكرة مرات عديدة ،بأساليب مختلفة لايصالها الى المتلقي ،مما يزيد الفهم ويرسخ المعلومات -ربما يعود ذلك الى اني لست "خبيرة "بالفيزياء .
تعجبني طريقة هوكنج في طرح افكاره ؛ فهي خالية من التعقيد ،ومتضمنة حسا فكاهيا ،واقتباسا ادبية في بعض الاحيان .
September 19, 2020
Came for the science, stayed for the humour.
"Black holes might be useful for getting rid of garbage or even some of one's friends."
"Black holes might be useful for getting rid of garbage or even some of one's friends."
April 11, 2019
اعملك كوباية شاي وروق على نفسك كده، وتعالى فضيلي دماغك واستمتع..
مهم مهم مهم (سبق تاريخي للبشرية) "نصيحة تكمله للأخر عشان ممتع جدًا ومفيد"
---
تعالى قبل ماقولك الأول على السبق التاريخي دا، أفهمك حاجتين بأبسط شكل ممكن يكون :"|
الجاذبية دي زي مانت عارف، هو انه الاجسام بتشد بعض، زي شد الشمس للكواكب، والارض للقمر وهكذا.. الشد دا بيحصل ليه وإزاي بقى! تعالى هاقولهالك بشكل بسيط جدًا جدًا.
احنا مانعرفش أي عناصر حوالينا في الكون غير المكان بتاعنا، والزمان اللي احنا فيه، فتخيل معايا انه الكون دا كله عبارة عن شبكة مكونة من عنصرين وهما الزمان والمكان.. الكون بتاعنا اللي هو عبارة عن شبكة من الزمكان دا، مليان بأجسام ضخمة زي النجوم والكواكب زي ما انت عارف، والأجسام دي كل واحد منهم ليه كتلة طبعًا وحجم وكثافة.
تخيل معايا انه احنا عندنا شبكة صيد ضخمة جدًا جدًا ومرنة.. يعني بتتمدد معاك زي ما تحب، وجينا رمينا جبل في وسط شبكة الصيد دي.. طبعًا هتاخد الشبكة وتنزل تحت جدًا تعمل زي حفرة مخروطية عميقة جدًا جدًا وكل ما زاد كتلة الجبل، كل ما كبرت الحفرة اللي بيعملها في الشبكة، فطبيعي اي حاجة تانية بالقرب من الحفرة المخروطية دي في الشبكة، هتسقط في الحفرة دي.
تعالى بقى نطبق دا عالكون بتاعنا..
الكون زي ما قولا فوق هو شبكة من المكان والزمان، وكل الاجسام الكونية دي ليها كتلة، فلما تتوجد الأجسام دي في نسيج او شبكة الزمكان، هتاخد الشبكة وتنزل تعمل حفرة كبيرة جدًا زي أول صورة تحت عندك كده.
يعني الأرض كتلتها بسيطة مقارنة بباقي الاجسام، فعاملة انحناء خفيف في الشبكة بس مش قوي زي الحفرة اللي عملاها الشمس.. فالجاذبية هنا بشكل بسيط جدًا جدًا، هو انه الاجسام بتميل لانها تقع في الحفرة دي او الانحناء بتاع الحفرة، وكل ما عمق الحفرة كبر، كل ما مالت الاجسام اللي حواليها اها تقع في الحفرة وهنا تحصل الجاذبية.
يعني الكواكب دي كلها متمسكة بالشمس بتاعنا (منجذبة ليها)، عشان الشمس عاملة انحناء او حفرة في شبكة الزمان والمكان، فالكواكب دي قريبة لدرجة انها في حيز الفوهه بتاع الحفرة دي.. يعني احنا اتفقنا خلاص انه كل مازاد كتلة الجسم، كل ما هيعمل انحناء او حفرة اكبر، كل ما هيزيد ميل الاجسام اللي حواليه ليه، كل ما هتزيد جاذبيته.. بس خد بالك، الاجسام بتنجذب ليه في حيز الحفرة اللي فوق دي، في الفوهه فوق، لكن ما بتقعش جوه لا.
امتى تقع بقى في الحفرة الكبيرة دي؟!
تقع جواها لما يبقى كتلة الجسم اللي تحت (اللي هو الجبل في المثل فوق) ضخمة جدًا جدً جدًا من هنا لغاية نهاية حياتك.. والكون بتاعنا مليان أجسام كتلتها مهولة بشكل صعب على عقولنا انها تستوعبه اصلًا.. يعني عندك نجم الشمس بتاعنا حجمه ضخم إزاي! في نجوم تانية حجمها قد القمر الصغير بتاعنا دا، لكن في نفس الوقت كتلتها تتجاوز اضعاف كتلة الشمس.. زي اكنك قدام كرة أكبر منك من الفوم، وفي ايدك كره صغيرة من الحديد الصلب. بالرغم من كبر حجم الفوم، الا انها خفيفه ريشة مقارنة بالكورة الصلب اللي في ايدك ل��نه كثافة الحديد وكتلتة اكبر.
فتخيل معايا بقى انه كورة الفوم الضخمة دي، هي الشمس، مقارنة بنجوم تانية في الكون زي النجم النيتروني، بالرغم من انه يجي 1 على 1000 مثلا من حجم الشمس، إلا انه اتقل منها بحوالي 3 ولا اربع اضعاف.. فتخيل انه الشمس فوق قدرت بكتلتها الصغيرة دي تجذب 9 كواكب بأقمارهم بكل دا، فلما نجم تاني اتقل منها يجي 4 مرات، هيجذب قد ايه! هيعمل حفرة عميقة في شبكة الزمكان قد ايه!
**كل اللي فات دا كان تمهيد للي جاي..
طب تعالى بقى للثقب الأسود.. ايه دا!
دا يا سيدي الفاضل حاجة مانعرفهاش او جسم كان ليه كتلة او شيء مجهول كان تقيل بشكل لا يمكنك ا��تيعابه بعض العلماء بيقولوا انه كتلته اكبر من مليون شمس زي شمسنا، عمل حفرة في شبكة الزمكان كبيرة لدرجة انه الضوء والزمان والمكان نفسه انسحب جواه! مستوعب!
الجسم او الكيان او اي كان ايه دا، كان تقيل وكثافته كبيرة لدرجة انه جذب الضوء نفسه.. جذب الشبكة والزمان والمكان جواه من كتر ما هو تقيل.. عارف يعني ايه جذب الضوء جواه! يعني بيظهر في الفضاء او بمعنى اصح في الصور كمساحة سوداء قاتمة فاضية مش عارفين نبص فيها لانه الضوء اللي بيخلينا نشوف، مشفوط جواها زي المكنسة اصلا فمش عارف اشوف هو دا جسم ولا فراغ ولا في ايه في اخر الحفرة دي!
الثقب الاسود دا اللي بيدخل الحفرة بتاعه ما بيرجعش.. مانعرفش اصلا بيروح فين (تظهر هنا نظريات الابعاد التانية وبيطلع على ابعاد غيرنا واكوان تانية وكل الكلام دا) طب وعالفوهه بتاعه بيحصل ايه!
بيحصل انه بيجذب كل واي حاجة حواليه.. عشان كده بتشوفه في الصور والأفلام انه ثقب اسود معتم وحواليه منور جدا جدا جدا جدا، ودا نتيجة انه جاذب عالفوهه او الانحناء بتاعه كم ضخم جدا من النجوم واللي بدورها مخلياه ينور، وبمجرد مالنجم يقع في الحفرة، ما بيبقاش في نور لانه اتشفط زي ما قولتلك فوق.
احنا لحد وقتنا الحالي دا، عارفين بوجودها من الدراسات والابحاث والاشعة الكونية وغيره، بس عمرنا ما عرفنا شكل الثقب الاسود دا عامل ازاي! كل اللي انت بتشوفه فيالافلام والصور، دا مجرد تخيل علمي لشكله على حسب دراستنا احنا البسيطة، لكن شكله الحقيقي عامل ازاي! ولا نعرف نهائي لانه مانمتلكش القدرة ولا التكنولوجيا الكافية لاننا نعرف لانه اولا اي حاجة هتتبعت تصور مش هتشوف حاجة جواه لانه زي ماقولتلك بيشفط حتى الضوءفبيفضل اسود قاتم، وفي نفس الوقت جاذبيته ضخمة لدرجة ممكن يجذب او يسحب جواه اللي رايح يصوره دا.
من يوم ماعرفنا انه في حاجة اسمها ثقب اسود في الفضاء ومن يوم نظرية النسبية بتاع اينشتاين، وكان شكل الثقب الاسود مجرد خيال لا اكثر ولا اقل، لغاية النهاردة.. اليوم التاريخي في حياة البشر كلهم من بدايتهم وحتى الان، انه هنقدر نشوف شكل معتمد او حقيقي اكتر للثقب الاسود.
في الوقت اللي انت بتقرأ فيه البوست دا، في مجموعة تليسكوبات واقمار صناعية وغيره، بتحاول تلقط شكل لأقرب ثقب أسود ممكن، بس مش للثقب نفسه بسبب الاسباب اللي قولتهالك فوق.. هما هيلتقطوا صورة ليه من اقرب مكان ممكن نشوف فيه الثقب او اللي صادر منه.
يعني "لنقل" انه الضوء بيفضل مسحوب جواه لغاية مسافة 20 كيلو متر منه، وبعد كده يبدأ يكون في ضوء هارب من جاذبيته، منور المنطقة حواليه.. البشر بقى اخيرًا هيقدروا يصوروا من النقطة دي.
دا سبق للبشرية أجمع ويعتبر حادث ضخم بشكل مش طبيعي انه نقدر اخيرًا نشوف حاجة زي دي.. اننا نشوف جزء اساسي من الكون يكاد يكون إلاهي من شدة عظمته وضخامته.
هو الحدث بيحصل بينما انت بتقرأ دلوقت، هحطلك لينكات ممكن تتفرج بيها بنفسك وتتابع لحظه بلحظة لحدث زي دا ممكن تحكي لاولادك عنه انك عاصرته.
*ملحوظة، الصورة الحمراء الاخيرة دي الصورة الحقيقية اللي لسه مصورينها من 10 دقايق.
----
اتمنى اكون عرفت ابسطلكم الموضوع والفكرة عمومًا بأفضل وأوضح شكل، وعرف اصحابك بقى وخليهم يتفرجوا معاك.
مهم مهم مهم (سبق تاريخي للبشرية) "نصيحة تكمله للأخر عشان ممتع جدًا ومفيد"
---
تعالى قبل ماقولك الأول على السبق التاريخي دا، أفهمك حاجتين بأبسط شكل ممكن يكون :"|
الجاذبية دي زي مانت عارف، هو انه الاجسام بتشد بعض، زي شد الشمس للكواكب، والارض للقمر وهكذا.. الشد دا بيحصل ليه وإزاي بقى! تعالى هاقولهالك بشكل بسيط جدًا جدًا.
احنا مانعرفش أي عناصر حوالينا في الكون غير المكان بتاعنا، والزمان اللي احنا فيه، فتخيل معايا انه الكون دا كله عبارة عن شبكة مكونة من عنصرين وهما الزمان والمكان.. الكون بتاعنا اللي هو عبارة عن شبكة من الزمكان دا، مليان بأجسام ضخمة زي النجوم والكواكب زي ما انت عارف، والأجسام دي كل واحد منهم ليه كتلة طبعًا وحجم وكثافة.
تخيل معايا انه احنا عندنا شبكة صيد ضخمة جدًا جدًا ومرنة.. يعني بتتمدد معاك زي ما تحب، وجينا رمينا جبل في وسط شبكة الصيد دي.. طبعًا هتاخد الشبكة وتنزل تحت جدًا تعمل زي حفرة مخروطية عميقة جدًا جدًا وكل ما زاد كتلة الجبل، كل ما كبرت الحفرة اللي بيعملها في الشبكة، فطبيعي اي حاجة تانية بالقرب من الحفرة المخروطية دي في الشبكة، هتسقط في الحفرة دي.
تعالى بقى نطبق دا عالكون بتاعنا..
الكون زي ما قولا فوق هو شبكة من المكان والزمان، وكل الاجسام الكونية دي ليها كتلة، فلما تتوجد الأجسام دي في نسيج او شبكة الزمكان، هتاخد الشبكة وتنزل تعمل حفرة كبيرة جدًا زي أول صورة تحت عندك كده.
يعني الأرض كتلتها بسيطة مقارنة بباقي الاجسام، فعاملة انحناء خفيف في الشبكة بس مش قوي زي الحفرة اللي عملاها الشمس.. فالجاذبية هنا بشكل بسيط جدًا جدًا، هو انه الاجسام بتميل لانها تقع في الحفرة دي او الانحناء بتاع الحفرة، وكل ما عمق الحفرة كبر، كل ما مالت الاجسام اللي حواليها اها تقع في الحفرة وهنا تحصل الجاذبية.
يعني الكواكب دي كلها متمسكة بالشمس بتاعنا (منجذبة ليها)، عشان الشمس عاملة انحناء او حفرة في شبكة الزمان والمكان، فالكواكب دي قريبة لدرجة انها في حيز الفوهه بتاع الحفرة دي.. يعني احنا اتفقنا خلاص انه كل مازاد كتلة الجسم، كل ما هيعمل انحناء او حفرة اكبر، كل ما هيزيد ميل الاجسام اللي حواليه ليه، كل ما هتزيد جاذبيته.. بس خد بالك، الاجسام بتنجذب ليه في حيز الحفرة اللي فوق دي، في الفوهه فوق، لكن ما بتقعش جوه لا.
امتى تقع بقى في الحفرة الكبيرة دي؟!
تقع جواها لما يبقى كتلة الجسم اللي تحت (اللي هو الجبل في المثل فوق) ضخمة جدًا جدً جدًا من هنا لغاية نهاية حياتك.. والكون بتاعنا مليان أجسام كتلتها مهولة بشكل صعب على عقولنا انها تستوعبه اصلًا.. يعني عندك نجم الشمس بتاعنا حجمه ضخم إزاي! في نجوم تانية حجمها قد القمر الصغير بتاعنا دا، لكن في نفس الوقت كتلتها تتجاوز اضعاف كتلة الشمس.. زي اكنك قدام كرة أكبر منك من الفوم، وفي ايدك كره صغيرة من الحديد الصلب. بالرغم من كبر حجم الفوم، الا انها خفيفه ريشة مقارنة بالكورة الصلب اللي في ايدك ل��نه كثافة الحديد وكتلتة اكبر.
فتخيل معايا بقى انه كورة الفوم الضخمة دي، هي الشمس، مقارنة بنجوم تانية في الكون زي النجم النيتروني، بالرغم من انه يجي 1 على 1000 مثلا من حجم الشمس، إلا انه اتقل منها بحوالي 3 ولا اربع اضعاف.. فتخيل انه الشمس فوق قدرت بكتلتها الصغيرة دي تجذب 9 كواكب بأقمارهم بكل دا، فلما نجم تاني اتقل منها يجي 4 مرات، هيجذب قد ايه! هيعمل حفرة عميقة في شبكة الزمكان قد ايه!
**كل اللي فات دا كان تمهيد للي جاي..
طب تعالى بقى للثقب الأسود.. ايه دا!
دا يا سيدي الفاضل حاجة مانعرفهاش او جسم كان ليه كتلة او شيء مجهول كان تقيل بشكل لا يمكنك ا��تيعابه بعض العلماء بيقولوا انه كتلته اكبر من مليون شمس زي شمسنا، عمل حفرة في شبكة الزمكان كبيرة لدرجة انه الضوء والزمان والمكان نفسه انسحب جواه! مستوعب!
الجسم او الكيان او اي كان ايه دا، كان تقيل وكثافته كبيرة لدرجة انه جذب الضوء نفسه.. جذب الشبكة والزمان والمكان جواه من كتر ما هو تقيل.. عارف يعني ايه جذب الضوء جواه! يعني بيظهر في الفضاء او بمعنى اصح في الصور كمساحة سوداء قاتمة فاضية مش عارفين نبص فيها لانه الضوء اللي بيخلينا نشوف، مشفوط جواها زي المكنسة اصلا فمش عارف اشوف هو دا جسم ولا فراغ ولا في ايه في اخر الحفرة دي!
الثقب الاسود دا اللي بيدخل الحفرة بتاعه ما بيرجعش.. مانعرفش اصلا بيروح فين (تظهر هنا نظريات الابعاد التانية وبيطلع على ابعاد غيرنا واكوان تانية وكل الكلام دا) طب وعالفوهه بتاعه بيحصل ايه!
بيحصل انه بيجذب كل واي حاجة حواليه.. عشان كده بتشوفه في الصور والأفلام انه ثقب اسود معتم وحواليه منور جدا جدا جدا جدا، ودا نتيجة انه جاذب عالفوهه او الانحناء بتاعه كم ضخم جدا من النجوم واللي بدورها مخلياه ينور، وبمجرد مالنجم يقع في الحفرة، ما بيبقاش في نور لانه اتشفط زي ما قولتلك فوق.
احنا لحد وقتنا الحالي دا، عارفين بوجودها من الدراسات والابحاث والاشعة الكونية وغيره، بس عمرنا ما عرفنا شكل الثقب الاسود دا عامل ازاي! كل اللي انت بتشوفه فيالافلام والصور، دا مجرد تخيل علمي لشكله على حسب دراستنا احنا البسيطة، لكن شكله الحقيقي عامل ازاي! ولا نعرف نهائي لانه مانمتلكش القدرة ولا التكنولوجيا الكافية لاننا نعرف لانه اولا اي حاجة هتتبعت تصور مش هتشوف حاجة جواه لانه زي ماقولتلك بيشفط حتى الضوءفبيفضل اسود قاتم، وفي نفس الوقت جاذبيته ضخمة لدرجة ممكن يجذب او يسحب جواه اللي رايح يصوره دا.
من يوم ماعرفنا انه في حاجة اسمها ثقب اسود في الفضاء ومن يوم نظرية النسبية بتاع اينشتاين، وكان شكل الثقب الاسود مجرد خيال لا اكثر ولا اقل، لغاية النهاردة.. اليوم التاريخي في حياة البشر كلهم من بدايتهم وحتى الان، انه هنقدر نشوف شكل معتمد او حقيقي اكتر للثقب الاسود.
في الوقت اللي انت بتقرأ فيه البوست دا، في مجموعة تليسكوبات واقمار صناعية وغيره، بتحاول تلقط شكل لأقرب ثقب أسود ممكن، بس مش للثقب نفسه بسبب الاسباب اللي قولتهالك فوق.. هما هيلتقطوا صورة ليه من اقرب مكان ممكن نشوف فيه الثقب او اللي صادر منه.
يعني "لنقل" انه الضوء بيفضل مسحوب جواه لغاية مسافة 20 كيلو متر منه، وبعد كده يبدأ يكون في ضوء هارب من جاذبيته، منور المنطقة حواليه.. البشر بقى اخيرًا هيقدروا يصوروا من النقطة دي.
دا سبق للبشرية أجمع ويعتبر حادث ضخم بشكل مش طبيعي انه نقدر اخيرًا نشوف حاجة زي دي.. اننا نشوف جزء اساسي من الكون يكاد يكون إلاهي من شدة عظمته وضخامته.
هو الحدث بيحصل بينما انت بتقرأ دلوقت، هحطلك لينكات ممكن تتفرج بيها بنفسك وتتابع لحظه بلحظة لحدث زي دا ممكن تحكي لاولادك عنه انك عاصرته.
*ملحوظة، الصورة الحمراء الاخيرة دي الصورة الحقيقية اللي لسه مصورينها من 10 دقايق.
----
اتمنى اكون عرفت ابسطلكم الموضوع والفكرة عمومًا بأفضل وأوضح شكل، وعرف اصحابك بقى وخليهم يتفرجوا معاك.
partially-read
June 2, 2018Chapter 12 of this book of Stephen Hawking's occasional writings reproduces a lecture given at the University of Cambridge in April 1990. It is entitled "Is Everything Determined?" This essay is a work of art—perfectly organized, in simple but elegant language, and mostly well reasoned.
Hawking concluded that science can neither prove nor disprove that free will is impossible in the face of scientific determinism and that, pending such proof, we "may as well adopt the effective theory that humans are free agents who can choose what to do." In the course of arriving at this conclusion, Hawking stated:
"I have noticed that even people who claim that everything is predestined and that we can do nothing to change it look before they cross the road. Maybe it's just that those who don't look don't survive to tell the tale.
"One cannot base one's conduct on the idea that everything is determined, because one does not know what has been determined. Instead, one has to adopt the effective theory that one has free will and that one is responsible for one's actions. This theory is not very good at predicting human behavior, but we adopt it because there is no chance of solving the equations arising from the fundamental laws. There is also a Darwinian reason that we believe in free will. A society in which the individual feels responsible for his or her actions is more likely to work together and survive to spread its values. . . . A collection of free individuals who share mutual aims . . . can collaborate on their common objectives and yet have the flexibility to make innovations. Thus, such a society is more likely to prosper and to spread its system of values.
"The concept of free will belongs to a different arena from that of fundamental laws of science. If one tries to deduce human behavior from the laws of science, one gets caught in the logical paradox of self-referencing systems."
Stephen Hawking, "Is Everything Determined?," in "Black Holes and Baby Universes" and Other Essays (New York: Bantam Books, 1994), 134-35, 138.
Considering my current interest in the issue of free will, I am not now reading the other essays in this book and accordingly am not rating the book as a whole.
Alan E. Johnson
(revised June 2, 2018)
Hawking concluded that science can neither prove nor disprove that free will is impossible in the face of scientific determinism and that, pending such proof, we "may as well adopt the effective theory that humans are free agents who can choose what to do." In the course of arriving at this conclusion, Hawking stated:
"I have noticed that even people who claim that everything is predestined and that we can do nothing to change it look before they cross the road. Maybe it's just that those who don't look don't survive to tell the tale.
"One cannot base one's conduct on the idea that everything is determined, because one does not know what has been determined. Instead, one has to adopt the effective theory that one has free will and that one is responsible for one's actions. This theory is not very good at predicting human behavior, but we adopt it because there is no chance of solving the equations arising from the fundamental laws. There is also a Darwinian reason that we believe in free will. A society in which the individual feels responsible for his or her actions is more likely to work together and survive to spread its values. . . . A collection of free individuals who share mutual aims . . . can collaborate on their common objectives and yet have the flexibility to make innovations. Thus, such a society is more likely to prosper and to spread its system of values.
"The concept of free will belongs to a different arena from that of fundamental laws of science. If one tries to deduce human behavior from the laws of science, one gets caught in the logical paradox of self-referencing systems."
Stephen Hawking, "Is Everything Determined?," in "Black Holes and Baby Universes" and Other Essays (New York: Bantam Books, 1994), 134-35, 138.
Considering my current interest in the issue of free will, I am not now reading the other essays in this book and accordingly am not rating the book as a whole.
Alan E. Johnson
(revised June 2, 2018)
April 27, 2015
Wonderful book for theoretical astrophysics neophytes such as me! The book is written in the same clear and simple style as 'A Brief History of Time'. Hawking dumbs down his work enough to make it accessible to the masses without compromising on its intrigue or wonder.
I was particularly impressed by his explanation for imaginary time, a concept I have been struggling to understand for some time. More importantly, it is the kind of book that turns people on to science. Well done, Mr. Hawking!
I was particularly impressed by his explanation for imaginary time, a concept I have been struggling to understand for some time. More importantly, it is the kind of book that turns people on to science. Well done, Mr. Hawking!
April 19, 2017
This book is the Shrödinger's cat of physics books: both lacking for a physicist and simultaneously too complicated for the layman. Even though it is a collection of speeches and essays, Hawkings writing is not to my liking. It is too plain and not detailed enough in topics of actual interest. I'm glad this book was short but even so it was a struggle to complete.
November 29, 2023
مقالات تروي البعض من قصة ستيفن هوكينغ الذاتية والعلمية، ورؤاه حول الثقوب السوداء، وعلم الكونيات، وطبيعة الزمن.
يتناول هوكينج في معرض مقالاته العديد من الأسئلة الكونية، بما في ذلك أصل الكون، ومصيره النهائي،( هل سيتمدد الكون إلى الأبد أم سينكمش) وإمكانية السفر عبر الزمن. ويدرس مفهوم الزمن التخيلي، وهو أداة رياضية تستخدم في الفيزياء لوصف ظواهر معينة.
كيف نشأ الكون؛ هل من الانفجار العظيم أو الحالة المستقرة(تعرف أيضا بنظرية الكون اللامتناهي أو الخلق المستمر. اقترحه لأول مرة عالم الفلك البريطاني فريد هويل، إحدى النظريات التي تناولت في أوائل القرن العشرين موضوع الكون، وقالت إنه يتوسع دائما، ولكن هناك دائما مادة جديدة تظهر في الفراغ لتحل محل أخرى.)؟
أثبت هوكينغ في أطروحته ( الدكتوراة) أن نظرية الحالة المستقرة للكون تناقض نفسها رياضيًا، وقال إن الكون بدأ بنقطة متناهية الصغر، متناهية الكثافة أسماها "حالة التفرد"، واليوم تحظى نظرية هوكينغ بالقبول بين العلماء إلى حد الإجماع.
في الثقوب السوداء والأكوان الطفلة ؛ يناقش خصائصها، وتكوينها، ودورها المحتمل في خلق أكوان جديدة. يستكشف مفهوم "الأكوان الصغيرة" - أكوان صغيرة افتراضية يمكن أن تتشكل داخل الثقوب السوداء. وآثارها المحتملة على فهمنا للكون.
تجلت عبقرية هوكينغ عندما مزج بين معادلات أينشتاين الرياضية مع معادلات ميكانيكا الكم، ليحول ما كان في السابق افتراضًا نظريًا إلى ظاهرة كونية حقيقية وموجودة، وقد جاء الإثبات الأخير على صحة هوكينغ في عام 2019 عندما التقط "تلسكوب أفق الحدث" (Event Horizon Telescope) صورة مباشرة لثقب أسود عملاق يكمن في قلب المجرة العملاقة "مسييه 87" (Messier 87).
إلى جانب الفيزياء تطرق إلى مواضيع اخرى إشكالية في الفلسفة أو فلسفة العلم من مثل؛ العلاقة بين العلم والدين، وطبيعة الوعي، ومستقبل البشرية، والأسئلة الكبيرة حول الوجود.
فيما يلي بعض أبرز إنجازات هوكينج:
* كان أول من وصف قوانين الديناميكا الحرارية للثقب الأسود.
* كتب العديد من الكتب العلمية الشهيرة، بما في ذلك "تاريخ موجز للزمن"، الذي بيع منه أكثر من 10 ملايين نسخة حول العالم.
* ظهر في عدد من الأفلام الوثائقية التليفزيونية، بما في ذلك "تاريخ موجز للزمن"( 1991) و "هوكينغ.(2013)"
* كان عضواً في الجمعية الملكية، والأكاديمية البابوية للعلوم، والأكاديمية الوطنية للعلوم.
* حصل على وسام كوبلي ووسام ألبرت أينشتاين ووسام الحرية الرئاسي.
الترجمة رائعة كعادة الفيزيائي يوسف البناي. كتاب جميل للمهتمين بعلم الكونيات والفيزياء عموماً.
يتناول هوكينج في معرض مقالاته العديد من الأسئلة الكونية، بما في ذلك أصل الكون، ومصيره النهائي،( هل سيتمدد الكون إلى الأبد أم سينكمش) وإمكانية السفر عبر الزمن. ويدرس مفهوم الزمن التخيلي، وهو أداة رياضية تستخدم في الفيزياء لوصف ظواهر معينة.
كيف نشأ الكون؛ هل من الانفجار العظيم أو الحالة المستقرة(تعرف أيضا بنظرية الكون اللامتناهي أو الخلق المستمر. اقترحه لأول مرة عالم الفلك البريطاني فريد هويل، إحدى النظريات التي تناولت في أوائل القرن العشرين موضوع الكون، وقالت إنه يتوسع دائما، ولكن هناك دائما مادة جديدة تظهر في الفراغ لتحل محل أخرى.)؟
أثبت هوكينغ في أطروحته ( الدكتوراة) أن نظرية الحالة المستقرة للكون تناقض نفسها رياضيًا، وقال إن الكون بدأ بنقطة متناهية الصغر، متناهية الكثافة أسماها "حالة التفرد"، واليوم تحظى نظرية هوكينغ بالقبول بين العلماء إلى حد الإجماع.
في الثقوب السوداء والأكوان الطفلة ؛ يناقش خصائصها، وتكوينها، ودورها المحتمل في خلق أكوان جديدة. يستكشف مفهوم "الأكوان الصغيرة" - أكوان صغيرة افتراضية يمكن أن تتشكل داخل الثقوب السوداء. وآثارها المحتملة على فهمنا للكون.
تجلت عبقرية هوكينغ عندما مزج بين معادلات أينشتاين الرياضية مع معادلات ميكانيكا الكم، ليحول ما كان في السابق افتراضًا نظريًا إلى ظاهرة كونية حقيقية وموجودة، وقد جاء الإثبات الأخير على صحة هوكينغ في عام 2019 عندما التقط "تلسكوب أفق الحدث" (Event Horizon Telescope) صورة مباشرة لثقب أسود عملاق يكمن في قلب المجرة العملاقة "مسييه 87" (Messier 87).
إلى جانب الفيزياء تطرق إلى مواضيع اخرى إشكالية في الفلسفة أو فلسفة العلم من مثل؛ العلاقة بين العلم والدين، وطبيعة الوعي، ومستقبل البشرية، والأسئلة الكبيرة حول الوجود.
فيما يلي بعض أبرز إنجازات هوكينج:
* كان أول من وصف قوانين الديناميكا الحرارية للثقب الأسود.
* كتب العديد من الكتب العلمية الشهيرة، بما في ذلك "تاريخ موجز للزمن"، الذي بيع منه أكثر من 10 ملايين نسخة حول العالم.
* ظهر في عدد من الأفلام الوثائقية التليفزيونية، بما في ذلك "تاريخ موجز للزمن"( 1991) و "هوكينغ.(2013)"
* كان عضواً في الجمعية الملكية، والأكاديمية البابوية للعلوم، والأكاديمية الوطنية للعلوم.
* حصل على وسام كوبلي ووسام ألبرت أينشتاين ووسام الحرية الرئاسي.
الترجمة رائعة كعادة الفيزيائي يوسف البناي. كتاب جميل للمهتمين بعلم الكونيات والفيزياء عموماً.
May 24, 2012
Fascinating and Stimulating
Like others who have reviewed this work, I can endorse it as a stimulating and thoughtful book. It is in essence however not a coherent book with a single theme. It is a compilation of articles and as such there is much in the book that is repetitive. Hawking acknowledges this and disclaims it at the outset. Even with the forewarning I found that element to be a tad annoying.
I listened to the audio version of the book while commuting and I found it overall to be a fascinating read. The biographical material about Hawking helped to put a "person" to the personality. Hawking is, without doubt, brilliant. His ability to reduce difficult concepts to listener sound bites speaks to that brilliance. I came away with an appreciation for his brilliance and abilities as well as the field of cosmological science that I did not have before.
Of particular note, I found Hawking's treatment of metaphysics to be interesting but ultimately no more valuable than anyone else's opinions in that area. Physics will never answer the question of why the universe exists or whether God in fact exists and created this universe. Science can only answer how the universe works and what laws govern its behavior. Hawkings admits this himself so I took no offense to his words, I just found it interesting that his position did not make his insights in that regard any more valuable.
The final segment of transcript from a radio show read by the narrator struck me a an opportunity missed to allow Hawking to finish with his own voice and presence. I was disappointed they did not use the original sound feed and chose to read the transcript.
Well worth the read or the listen. Entertaining. Already dated though and perhaps his more recent works would be of more value to most listeners.
Like others who have reviewed this work, I can endorse it as a stimulating and thoughtful book. It is in essence however not a coherent book with a single theme. It is a compilation of articles and as such there is much in the book that is repetitive. Hawking acknowledges this and disclaims it at the outset. Even with the forewarning I found that element to be a tad annoying.
I listened to the audio version of the book while commuting and I found it overall to be a fascinating read. The biographical material about Hawking helped to put a "person" to the personality. Hawking is, without doubt, brilliant. His ability to reduce difficult concepts to listener sound bites speaks to that brilliance. I came away with an appreciation for his brilliance and abilities as well as the field of cosmological science that I did not have before.
Of particular note, I found Hawking's treatment of metaphysics to be interesting but ultimately no more valuable than anyone else's opinions in that area. Physics will never answer the question of why the universe exists or whether God in fact exists and created this universe. Science can only answer how the universe works and what laws govern its behavior. Hawkings admits this himself so I took no offense to his words, I just found it interesting that his position did not make his insights in that regard any more valuable.
The final segment of transcript from a radio show read by the narrator struck me a an opportunity missed to allow Hawking to finish with his own voice and presence. I was disappointed they did not use the original sound feed and chose to read the transcript.
Well worth the read or the listen. Entertaining. Already dated though and perhaps his more recent works would be of more value to most listeners.
March 15, 2016
هذا الكتاب عبارة عن مجموعة مقالات متنوعة كتبها ستيفن هوكنج بين السبعينات والتسعينات
للأسف فإن المقالات الثلاثة الأولى والخامس مكررة حرفيًا لأن الكاتب استخدمها في كتابه عن سيرته الذاتية والذي قرأته قبل يومين فقط أما المقالات الأخرى في الكتاب فغالبيتها أفكار مكررة من كتبه السابقة واحيانًا قليلة تتكرر المعلومات التي في أحد المقالات في مقال آخر وهو أمر اعتذر عنه الكاتب في المقدمة. أمر آخر أزعجني هو تقديم فرضيته حول تكون أكوان جديدة من خلال الثقوب السوداء وكأنه حقيقة علمية ثابتة.. كان حريًا به توضيح الفرق بين ما ثبت حقًا وبين الفرضيات والظنون.
في المحصلة تقييمي المنخفض هذا هو لسبب أساسي وهو التشبع من كتب ستيفن هوكنج والتي لا اعتقد أني سأعود لها قريبا - في الحقيقة لقد استمعت إلى كل كتبه المسموعة المجانية التي عثرت عليها على شبكة الانترنت.
للأسف فإن المقالات الثلاثة الأولى والخامس مكررة حرفيًا لأن الكاتب استخدمها في كتابه عن سيرته الذاتية والذي قرأته قبل يومين فقط أما المقالات الأخرى في الكتاب فغالبيتها أفكار مكررة من كتبه السابقة واحيانًا قليلة تتكرر المعلومات التي في أحد المقالات في مقال آخر وهو أمر اعتذر عنه الكاتب في المقدمة. أمر آخر أزعجني هو تقديم فرضيته حول تكون أكوان جديدة من خلال الثقوب السوداء وكأنه حقيقة علمية ثابتة.. كان حريًا به توضيح الفرق بين ما ثبت حقًا وبين الفرضيات والظنون.
في المحصلة تقييمي المنخفض هذا هو لسبب أساسي وهو التشبع من كتب ستيفن هوكنج والتي لا اعتقد أني سأعود لها قريبا - في الحقيقة لقد استمعت إلى كل كتبه المسموعة المجانية التي عثرت عليها على شبكة الانترنت.
September 18, 2025
(4,5⭐) Begon het boek te lezen voor het begrijpen van de limieten van een zwart gat en de radiatie die het uitstraalt, om zijn bekende Hawking straling te begrijpen (vandaar ook het lezen van het Chernobyl boek, iets waarin ik altijd leergierig in ben geweest. Al gaat deze DNF worden, want het is nogal taaie tekst). Ik had het boek al eens gelezen 10 jaar geleden en wist nog het toen al een geweldig boek te vinden. Hierbij moet ik dus toevoegen dat ik na ongeveer de helft het een beetje ''snel'' begon te lezen, want ik herinnerde me er meer van dan ik had gedacht. Deze mening is niet veranderd na al die tijd, ik ben het zelfs meer gaan waarderen en begrijpen.
Stephan legt de relativiteit van ruimte, tijd en energie in een taal uit wat goed te begrijpen is. Er komt geen formule ten pas (ook wel weer jammer al had dit mijn intellect toch overschreden. Al is het toch leuk om te zien)! Zeker een aanrader voor jong en oud.
Stephan legt de relativiteit van ruimte, tijd en energie in een taal uit wat goed te begrijpen is. Er komt geen formule ten pas (ook wel weer jammer al had dit mijn intellect toch overschreden. Al is het toch leuk om te zien)! Zeker een aanrader voor jong en oud.
April 23, 2017
„Черни дупки и бебета вселени и други есета – ново преработено издание” от Стивън Хокинг (изд. „Бард”, 2017; превод: Румяна Бикс, Венцислав Божилов) е красив начин да подарите на някого цялата Вселена.
http://knijno.blogspot.bg/2017/04/blo...
http://knijno.blogspot.bg/2017/04/blo...
April 17, 2015
Not as complex as I thought. Its very descriptive and give to the reader a lot of examples to understand the theories and the concepts.
April 1, 2021
For a look at Stephen Hawking's Desert Island Playlist which he gave on Christmas Day 1992, check out my blog post with the list:
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...
December 8, 2014
My favorite aspect of this collection of essays is that Hawking reveals himself as well as his science. The book includes two autobiographical essays and an interview in which Hawking tells the reader about his early history and his contraction of motor neuron disease, as well as his transformation from a bored young adult to a well-established and cutting-edge theoretical physicist. I like Hawking and his style as much as I enjoy learning about (and reviewing) key tenets of astrophysics. I also like the fact that Hawking doesn't shy away from giving other people credit for their discoveries. It's endearing.
Each of the essays in this collection was easy to follow and held my attention for different reasons. I like that Hawking is positive and life affirming. I like that he doesn't ever deny the existence of God. I like his obvious admiration of Einstein. I like that Hawking is always conscious of his reader and clearly wants his reader to understand and appreciate the value of physics and the reasons that it matters for everyday life.
I highly recommend this book to people interested in astrophysics, Stephen Hawking, and how things work and why they work the way they do (after all, that's what got Hawking started with science: wanting to know why and how).
Each of the essays in this collection was easy to follow and held my attention for different reasons. I like that Hawking is positive and life affirming. I like that he doesn't ever deny the existence of God. I like his obvious admiration of Einstein. I like that Hawking is always conscious of his reader and clearly wants his reader to understand and appreciate the value of physics and the reasons that it matters for everyday life.
I highly recommend this book to people interested in astrophysics, Stephen Hawking, and how things work and why they work the way they do (after all, that's what got Hawking started with science: wanting to know why and how).
February 23, 2017
Страхотна книга и, с риск да се повторя, прекрасно издание!
Имаше известна повтаряемост в разглежданите теми, но понеже става дума за въпроси от физиката, това не беше чак толкова лошо. Аз, като човек "от другата страна на бариерата", който е по-скоро любител и не разбира чак толкова нещата, винаги съм харесвала подхода на Стивън Хокинг. Смея да кажа обаче, че "Великият дизайн" е с една идея по-достъпна от тази му книга, поне като начин на разработване на темите. Те са сходни, но в предишната бяха представени с доста повече скици и достъпни шеги. Тук такива неща също имаше към края. Хумор имаше и в някои от другите есета, което също харесвам при Хокинг.
В тази книга също така имаше значително повече информация за него самия като учен и човек, което... ами да кажем, че беше интересно.
Издразни ме интервюто обаче. Поне на хартия звучи доста... злобарски. Нещо като нашенска журналистка от жълтата преса.
Никога няма да съм нещо повече от любител на научната фантастика, но пък с книги като тази се чувствам малко по-близо до звездите. Защото това да си историк не ти пречи да си мечтаеш за тях.
И видях в книгата да се дава за пример един от любимите ми филми! Автоматично хайпнах (ако се пишеше така), наистина!
Имаше известна повтаряемост в разглежданите теми, но понеже става дума за въпроси от физиката, това не беше чак толкова лошо. Аз, като човек "от другата страна на бариерата", който е по-скоро любител и не разбира чак толкова нещата, винаги съм харесвала подхода на Стивън Хокинг. Смея да кажа обаче, че "Великият дизайн" е с една идея по-достъпна от тази му книга, поне като начин на разработване на темите. Те са сходни, но в предишната бяха представени с доста повече скици и достъпни шеги. Тук такива неща също имаше към края. Хумор имаше и в някои от другите есета, което също харесвам при Хокинг.
В тази книга също така имаше значително повече информация за него самия като учен и човек, което... ами да кажем, че беше интересно.
Издразни ме интервюто обаче. Поне на хартия звучи доста... злобарски. Нещо като нашенска журналистка от жълтата преса.
Никога няма да съм нещо повече от любител на научната фантастика, но пък с книги като тази се чувствам малко по-близо до звездите. Защото това да си историк не ти пречи да си мечтаеш за тях.
И видях в книгата да се дава за пример един от любимите ми филми! Автоматично хайпнах (ако се пишеше така), наистина!
March 24, 2017
oh Stephen... lo has logrado nuevamente.
Un libro que pasa a formar parte importante de mi vida. Tarde poquito más de un año en leerlo, pero quería darle su tiempo a cada conferencia, y leer a consciencia.
La principal razón por la que hace algun tiempo me comencé a interesar en leer libros de divulgación científica es que, muchas veces me surgen dudas del universo, y ya pasó algo de tiempo desde que me di cuenta que nadie me va a dar las respuestas que necesito. Pero Stephen Hawking se ha acercado más de una vez. Escribe con el balance casi perfecto entre terminología de astrofísica, filosófia y ejemplos muy accesibles para cualquier persona, que como yo, no tenía ni la más remota idea de que pasó, pasará, está pasando, en el universo.
Stephen Hawking será por siempre una de mis personas favoritas; no solo él, cualquier científico que se anime a quebrarse la cabeza para explicar como funcionan las cosas sumamente complejas, es digno de mi admiración.
y... ya entiendo que es un agujero negro!!!
Un libro que pasa a formar parte importante de mi vida. Tarde poquito más de un año en leerlo, pero quería darle su tiempo a cada conferencia, y leer a consciencia.
La principal razón por la que hace algun tiempo me comencé a interesar en leer libros de divulgación científica es que, muchas veces me surgen dudas del universo, y ya pasó algo de tiempo desde que me di cuenta que nadie me va a dar las respuestas que necesito. Pero Stephen Hawking se ha acercado más de una vez. Escribe con el balance casi perfecto entre terminología de astrofísica, filosófia y ejemplos muy accesibles para cualquier persona, que como yo, no tenía ni la más remota idea de que pasó, pasará, está pasando, en el universo.
Stephen Hawking será por siempre una de mis personas favoritas; no solo él, cualquier científico que se anime a quebrarse la cabeza para explicar como funcionan las cosas sumamente complejas, es digno de mi admiración.
y... ya entiendo que es un agujero negro!!!
February 27, 2019
Me ha gustado bastante, principalmente por tres razones:
a)Son pequeños ensayos que escribió a lo largo de varios años. Éstos incluyen desde su infancia, el impacto que fue descubrir que tenía ELA y cómo eso no evitó que siguiera con sus investigaciones.
b)Sólo hubo dos ensayos que no comprendí del todo; el resto es súper entendible porque su manera de expresarse es sencilla. Mi especial interés fue lo del tiempo imaginario y lo de qué pasa cuándo algo cae en un agujero negro. Me ha parecido súper interesante.
c)Lo admiro mucho, la verdad.
a)Son pequeños ensayos que escribió a lo largo de varios años. Éstos incluyen desde su infancia, el impacto que fue descubrir que tenía ELA y cómo eso no evitó que siguiera con sus investigaciones.
b)Sólo hubo dos ensayos que no comprendí del todo; el resto es súper entendible porque su manera de expresarse es sencilla. Mi especial interés fue lo del tiempo imaginario y lo de qué pasa cuándo algo cae en un agujero negro. Me ha parecido súper interesante.
c)Lo admiro mucho, la verdad.
February 26, 2016
الفصول الممتعة في هذا الكتاب هي التي تحدث فيها ستيفن هوكينغ عن نفسه وحياته
May 8, 2017
a universally enjoyable read (crappy pun intended)
June 13, 2018
I learned too much with this book, I don't like this type of books, but, its very helpful
April 20, 2018
Pubblicato 5 anni dopo il suo primo libro (e bestseller) Dal big bang ai buchi neri - Breve storia del tempo, Buchi neri e universi neonati sceglie un'altra strada per il processo divulgativo.
Il libro è infatti una raccolta di scritti di varia natura (prevalentemente letture) a cui Hawking ci invita non prima di aver fatto cenno alla sua vita (La mia infanzia e Oxford e Cambridge), e alla sua malattia (La mia esperienza della malattia). In questo libro vengono proposte, in linea generale, le teorie da lui già espresse nel suo primo libro, anche se con qualche modifica e nuove ipotesi (L'origine dell'universo, La meccanica quantistica dei buchi neri e Buchi neri e universi neonati). Viene poi dedicato un breve capitolo al suo libro precedente (Breve storia di una Breve storia), al perchè sempre più persone dovrebbero interessarsi alla scienza (Atteggiamenti pubblici verso la scienza), quali sono le sue credenze e speranze riguardo ad una teoria unificata (La mia posizione), nonchè le teorie che ci hanno permesso di arrivare al problema della fusione tra la meccanica quantistica e la teoria della relatività (Il sogno di Einstein). Non mancano domande di carattere etico e filosofico nel capitolo È tutto determinato?, nè le sue predizioni sulle scoperte future ne Il futuro dell'universo.
Chiude poi il libro una trascrizione della storica trasmissione radiofonica inglese BBC Desert Island Discs andata in onda il giorno di Natale del 1992, in cui durante una normale intervista all'ospite viene anche chiesto quali 8 dischi porterebbe su un'isola deserta, quale oggetto di lusso e quale libro. Per chi fosse curioso,
Il libro è infatti una raccolta di scritti di varia natura (prevalentemente letture) a cui Hawking ci invita non prima di aver fatto cenno alla sua vita (La mia infanzia e Oxford e Cambridge), e alla sua malattia (La mia esperienza della malattia). In questo libro vengono proposte, in linea generale, le teorie da lui già espresse nel suo primo libro, anche se con qualche modifica e nuove ipotesi (L'origine dell'universo, La meccanica quantistica dei buchi neri e Buchi neri e universi neonati). Viene poi dedicato un breve capitolo al suo libro precedente (Breve storia di una Breve storia), al perchè sempre più persone dovrebbero interessarsi alla scienza (Atteggiamenti pubblici verso la scienza), quali sono le sue credenze e speranze riguardo ad una teoria unificata (La mia posizione), nonchè le teorie che ci hanno permesso di arrivare al problema della fusione tra la meccanica quantistica e la teoria della relatività (Il sogno di Einstein). Non mancano domande di carattere etico e filosofico nel capitolo È tutto determinato?, nè le sue predizioni sulle scoperte future ne Il futuro dell'universo.
Chiude poi il libro una trascrizione della storica trasmissione radiofonica inglese BBC Desert Island Discs andata in onda il giorno di Natale del 1992, in cui durante una normale intervista all'ospite viene anche chiesto quali 8 dischi porterebbe su un'isola deserta, quale oggetto di lusso e quale libro. Per chi fosse curioso,
Displaying 1 - 30 of 543 reviews