What do you think?
Rate this book
Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature
Book by Niels Bohr
119 pages, Paperback
Published June 15, 1987
16 people are currently reading
1018 people want to read
About the author
Niels Bohr
105 books230 followersNiels Henrik David Bohr (Danish pronunciation: [ni:ls ˈboɐ̯ˀ]) was a physicist who made foundational contributions to understanding atomic structure and quantum mechanic. Bohr mentored and collaborated with many of the top physicists of the century at his institute in Copenhagen. He was part of a team of physicists working on the Manhattan Project. Bohr has been described as one of the most influential scientists of the 20th century.
In 1922 Niels Bohr was awarded the Nobel prize in physics "for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them".
Bohr married Margrethe Nørlund in 1912, and one of their sons, Aage Bohr, grew up to be an important physicist who in 1975 also received the Nobel Prize.
In 1922 Niels Bohr was awarded the Nobel prize in physics "for his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them".
Bohr married Margrethe Nørlund in 1912, and one of their sons, Aage Bohr, grew up to be an important physicist who in 1975 also received the Nobel Prize.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
September 21, 2017
في الحقيقة هذا ليس كتاب وانما هو عبارة عن مقالات مختارة للعالم الكبير نيلز بور.
سبب اعطائي نجمتين فقط كتقييم هو كتالي:
بعض الفصول مقالات تم ترجمتها من الالمانية او الدانماركية الى الانگليزية ومن ثم الى العربية والآن بستطيع القارئ ان يعرف حجم القيمة الفعلية التي ضاعت في الترجمة الى ثلاث لغات واحدة تلو الاخرى.
السبب الثاني وهو ان هذه المقالات والخطابات موجهة لعلماء واختصاصيو فيزياء اخرين وبعضها الاخر أُلقيَت بمؤتمرات ومحافل علمية وبالتالي فهي قد تكون صعبة الى حد ما لغير الفيزيائيين.
كما ان الترجمة بحسب اعتقادي لاترتقي الى المستوى المفروض لايضاح مادة الكتاب كون طرحها جافا ومختزلا.
شكرا للمترجمين على جهودهم
سبب اعطائي نجمتين فقط كتقييم هو كتالي:
بعض الفصول مقالات تم ترجمتها من الالمانية او الدانماركية الى الانگليزية ومن ثم الى العربية والآن بستطيع القارئ ان يعرف حجم القيمة الفعلية التي ضاعت في الترجمة الى ثلاث لغات واحدة تلو الاخرى.
السبب الثاني وهو ان هذه المقالات والخطابات موجهة لعلماء واختصاصيو فيزياء اخرين وبعضها الاخر أُلقيَت بمؤتمرات ومحافل علمية وبالتالي فهي قد تكون صعبة الى حد ما لغير الفيزيائيين.
كما ان الترجمة بحسب اعتقادي لاترتقي الى المستوى المفروض لايضاح مادة الكتاب كون طرحها جافا ومختزلا.
شكرا للمترجمين على جهودهم
October 28, 2019
Niels Bohr (1885-1962)
Fue premio Novel de física en 1922.
Dentro de sus hallazgos más importantes es que los electrones de un átoma saltaban de órbita a órbita sin pasar en ningún momento por el espacio intermedio y además en cero tiempo.
Fue premio Novel de física en 1922.
Dentro de sus hallazgos más importantes es que los electrones de un átoma saltaban de órbita a órbita sin pasar en ningún momento por el espacio intermedio y además en cero tiempo.
February 20, 2022
Bohr’s own introductory survey to the four articles that make up Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature was immensely helpful as I tackled each article in turn. Though written for the lay reader, and devoid of any of the math that may intimidate the uninitiated, I still found myself struggling to track Bohr’s thinking at times within each of the articles. I fault myself more than him on that though given my only passing familiarity with quantum theory and mechanics and the evolution of the thinkers and thoughts in the field. These articles were written from 1925 through 1929 and come on the heels of Heisenberg’s development of quantum mechanics from classical quantum theory and seemed to be a means to understand the structure of atoms while incorporating the uncertainty principle.
Developing a visual model that incorporates unvisualizable characteristics makes Bohr’s attempts feel more metaphysical at times rather than a treatise by a physicist. Apparently, Bohr did have strong leanings toward philosophy and I have seen him elsewhere (full disclosure: Wikipedia) described as a philosopher almost as a much as a physicist. But Bohr saw that potential characterization when he discussed the problems of distinguishing between subject and object in quantum mechanics. When the act of observation affects the act observed there is an opening for all forms of thought; including mysticism. But Bohr does nor dispense with classical forms inquiry. He sees value in the constant building on thought and not creating whole new understandings from new cloth. As Bohr states: “we can no more hope to attain to a clear understanding in physics without facing the difficulties arising in the shaping of concepts and the use of the medium of expression than we can in other fields of human understanding.” Pg. 15.
However, Bohr is cognizant of how the uncertainties that quantum mechanics presents goes beyond merely reforming past classical theories. He hints that there is no reason to think that physics exists in isolation as to our lives and consciousness. In his final paragraph of the book, and the end of his article on the Description of Nature, the philosopher-version of Bohr leaves parting words:
Developing a visual model that incorporates unvisualizable characteristics makes Bohr’s attempts feel more metaphysical at times rather than a treatise by a physicist. Apparently, Bohr did have strong leanings toward philosophy and I have seen him elsewhere (full disclosure: Wikipedia) described as a philosopher almost as a much as a physicist. But Bohr saw that potential characterization when he discussed the problems of distinguishing between subject and object in quantum mechanics. When the act of observation affects the act observed there is an opening for all forms of thought; including mysticism. But Bohr does nor dispense with classical forms inquiry. He sees value in the constant building on thought and not creating whole new understandings from new cloth. As Bohr states: “we can no more hope to attain to a clear understanding in physics without facing the difficulties arising in the shaping of concepts and the use of the medium of expression than we can in other fields of human understanding.” Pg. 15.
However, Bohr is cognizant of how the uncertainties that quantum mechanics presents goes beyond merely reforming past classical theories. He hints that there is no reason to think that physics exists in isolation as to our lives and consciousness. In his final paragraph of the book, and the end of his article on the Description of Nature, the philosopher-version of Bohr leaves parting words:
Besides, the fact that consciousness, as we know it, is inseparably connected with life ought to prepare us for finding that the very problem of the distinction between the living and the dead escapes comprehension in the ordinary sense of the word. That a physicist touches upon such questions may perhaps be excused on the ground that the new situation in physics has so forcibly reminded us of the old truth that we are both onlookers and actors in the great drama of existence. Pg. 119.
March 27, 2022
Bohr wrote these four essays in the late 1920s, just as physicists at that time realized that something was not right at the micro-scale (Einstein having handled the macro-scale refinement to Newton), known then and now as the quantum world. These essays are not an easy read for the layperson. The language and ideas covered here are, I’d say, more than dense. Fortunately, what Bohr covers, groundbreaking at the time, has been described subsequently by many others.
The theme in these essays seems to be that quantum phenomena cannot be known at the individual level because the act of observation (via light beams) impacts what is being observed. This interaction between what is observed and the observer introduces at the heart of reality an insurmountable subjectivity regarding what can be known.
Also, particles that move at the quantum level do so, Bohr seems to say, as non-particle waves. (1) Thus, strict causal movement - x moves to y position - cannot be determined on a particle-by-particle basis. Quantum movement can only be known through collections of quantum phenomena, described in terms of statistical probability. (2)
From this bottom-line picture of quantum reality, Bohr’s fourth essay touches on three major philosophical points. First, and consistent with Einstein's theory of relativity where “knowing” depends on one’s frame of reference, subjectivity lies at the heart of scientific observation; there are no things-in-themselves. We cannot know reality because we, as subject, influence the object.
Second, Bohr suggests that a “free will” exists at the quantum level: “behavior,” such as spontaneous radiation from certain elements, cannot be predicted. In looking at it this way, human consciousness is tied tightly to non-life’s laws of operation (i.e. consciousness is free just as quantum phenomena are free). Consciousness, moreover, observes these random phenomena and probabilistically determines an underlying law-like behavior. It, Bohr says, imposes an order on what is ultimately random. (3)
Third, Bohr’s materialistic, philosophical foundations seem clear enough when he states that, ultimately, there’s no difference between “the propagation of sense impressions in the nerves and the conduction of electricity in a metal wire” and that the interaction of life with the world may be, fundamentally “so small that it approaches the quantum of action” (this also might be Bohr’s attempt to locate free will at the heart of all life).
Bohr’s philosophical speculations are interesting and I like that a scientist of his standing extends himself in this way, pondering the connection between life and physics. Still, I wonder if his suggestive tie of quantum randomness (the inability to pin down particle behavior at the individual level) to free will is accurate. First, such randomness is limited by our technical ability to know because of the observer’s effect on the object, and the fact that individual particle behavior in its wave form is obscured. Right off, that does not seem to mean that quantum phenomena are random. Rather, we just can’t “know” what is going on, particle-by-particle, at the quantum level. Second, free will gets high-centered when it conflates instrumental choice with ultimate choice (Aristotle’s efficient cause and final clause). Instrumental ends are but means to more important ends, and the nature of life, especially with conscious human mind, is the flexibility to change behavior, to choose the objects of behavior, including the instrumental ends to fit some higher end - such as life’s need to survive. Once the latter is acknowledged, life becomes teleological and all behavior (all that is essential for life) can be traced back to life’s core need to survive. So, in this counter view, life is anything but a random existence, which is where Bohr seems to be going with his thoughts. It is, rather, highly directed, “determined” by (i.e. strongly disposed to) its need to survive.
As a final note, Bohr repeatedly references “the nature of light” and the “nature of matter.” In doing so, he seems to be saying that energy is the fundamental cosmic reality (high or low movement toward equilibrium states), and that matter (particle) and light (massless particles) are energy’s two manifestations. Though I can't say this for sure, Bohr also seems to suggest that matter is an equilibrium state (a harmonic collection of particles that move internally, not externally), and that light is a dynamic state (the transfer of energy from high to low and from low to high).
1. Bohr gets fuzzy for me here. He refers to the “quantum of action” that sounds like it might be movement at the quantum level, but maybe it’s something altogether different. He also refers to space and time and almost seems to suggest that at the quantum scale the observer can determine either position at a point in time or movement across space, thus locating both space and time at the smallest, quantum scale. He adds that such determinations are “mutually exclusive.”
2. This might be the meaning of Bohr’s correspondence principle that ties quantum phenomena to (Newtonian) classic physics. Causality is present, but now it’s described in a statistically, probabilistic sense. Bohr’s complementarity principle is related in the sense that a quantum entity exhibits both particle- and wave-like behavior, but never at the same time. “The quantum system” contains complementary but mutually exclusive particle and wave characteristics. Note the finesse word “entity” above in this footnote: Is it energy? Is it particles? Is it non-particle waves?
3. Bohr writes that, “Just as the freedom of the will is an experiential category of our psychic life, causality may be considered as a mode of perception by which we reduce our sense impressions to order.”
The theme in these essays seems to be that quantum phenomena cannot be known at the individual level because the act of observation (via light beams) impacts what is being observed. This interaction between what is observed and the observer introduces at the heart of reality an insurmountable subjectivity regarding what can be known.
Also, particles that move at the quantum level do so, Bohr seems to say, as non-particle waves. (1) Thus, strict causal movement - x moves to y position - cannot be determined on a particle-by-particle basis. Quantum movement can only be known through collections of quantum phenomena, described in terms of statistical probability. (2)
From this bottom-line picture of quantum reality, Bohr’s fourth essay touches on three major philosophical points. First, and consistent with Einstein's theory of relativity where “knowing” depends on one’s frame of reference, subjectivity lies at the heart of scientific observation; there are no things-in-themselves. We cannot know reality because we, as subject, influence the object.
Second, Bohr suggests that a “free will” exists at the quantum level: “behavior,” such as spontaneous radiation from certain elements, cannot be predicted. In looking at it this way, human consciousness is tied tightly to non-life’s laws of operation (i.e. consciousness is free just as quantum phenomena are free). Consciousness, moreover, observes these random phenomena and probabilistically determines an underlying law-like behavior. It, Bohr says, imposes an order on what is ultimately random. (3)
Third, Bohr’s materialistic, philosophical foundations seem clear enough when he states that, ultimately, there’s no difference between “the propagation of sense impressions in the nerves and the conduction of electricity in a metal wire” and that the interaction of life with the world may be, fundamentally “so small that it approaches the quantum of action” (this also might be Bohr’s attempt to locate free will at the heart of all life).
Bohr’s philosophical speculations are interesting and I like that a scientist of his standing extends himself in this way, pondering the connection between life and physics. Still, I wonder if his suggestive tie of quantum randomness (the inability to pin down particle behavior at the individual level) to free will is accurate. First, such randomness is limited by our technical ability to know because of the observer’s effect on the object, and the fact that individual particle behavior in its wave form is obscured. Right off, that does not seem to mean that quantum phenomena are random. Rather, we just can’t “know” what is going on, particle-by-particle, at the quantum level. Second, free will gets high-centered when it conflates instrumental choice with ultimate choice (Aristotle’s efficient cause and final clause). Instrumental ends are but means to more important ends, and the nature of life, especially with conscious human mind, is the flexibility to change behavior, to choose the objects of behavior, including the instrumental ends to fit some higher end - such as life’s need to survive. Once the latter is acknowledged, life becomes teleological and all behavior (all that is essential for life) can be traced back to life’s core need to survive. So, in this counter view, life is anything but a random existence, which is where Bohr seems to be going with his thoughts. It is, rather, highly directed, “determined” by (i.e. strongly disposed to) its need to survive.
As a final note, Bohr repeatedly references “the nature of light” and the “nature of matter.” In doing so, he seems to be saying that energy is the fundamental cosmic reality (high or low movement toward equilibrium states), and that matter (particle) and light (massless particles) are energy’s two manifestations. Though I can't say this for sure, Bohr also seems to suggest that matter is an equilibrium state (a harmonic collection of particles that move internally, not externally), and that light is a dynamic state (the transfer of energy from high to low and from low to high).
1. Bohr gets fuzzy for me here. He refers to the “quantum of action” that sounds like it might be movement at the quantum level, but maybe it’s something altogether different. He also refers to space and time and almost seems to suggest that at the quantum scale the observer can determine either position at a point in time or movement across space, thus locating both space and time at the smallest, quantum scale. He adds that such determinations are “mutually exclusive.”
2. This might be the meaning of Bohr’s correspondence principle that ties quantum phenomena to (Newtonian) classic physics. Causality is present, but now it’s described in a statistically, probabilistic sense. Bohr’s complementarity principle is related in the sense that a quantum entity exhibits both particle- and wave-like behavior, but never at the same time. “The quantum system” contains complementary but mutually exclusive particle and wave characteristics. Note the finesse word “entity” above in this footnote: Is it energy? Is it particles? Is it non-particle waves?
3. Bohr writes that, “Just as the freedom of the will is an experiential category of our psychic life, causality may be considered as a mode of perception by which we reduce our sense impressions to order.”
October 12, 2020
The Danish theoretician Niels Bohr stands out among twentieth-century physicists not solely owing to his stunningly original contributions to the old quantum mechanics but also because of his curious personality. Unlike so many others, he was not particularly gifted with technical virtuosity; indeed, his papers rarely contain anything more than elementary calculations. Yet, the physical insight that resides behind his deductions is tremendous. Without his brilliant synthetic intellect, the course taken by physics during the twentieth century must certainly have been far more halting. For how long would we have had to wait until somebody else hit upon his startlingly counter-intuitive quantization condition, which underlies his pioneering model of the hydrogen atom in 1913 and which got the ball rolling? Sommerfeld, Ehrenfest and Schwarzschild may have performed the hard calculations (and this too has its place, as it tends to confirm the overall self-consistency of the nascent theory), but it was Bohr again who proposed the correspondence principle in 1918, a key stepping-stone along the way to a more adequate formulation of the quantum theory, and Bohr who, along with Pauli, thought the hardest about the implications of the theory for the building-up of the chemical elements during the early 1920’s. By then, he had become something like the conscience of the physics community; everyone went to his institute in Copenhagen to enlist him as a sparring partner and recognized him as the one who, more than any other, took it as his overriding concern to understand what the meaning of the quantum and its relation to the classical really could be.
The four lectures reprinted in this first volume of Bohr’s philosophical writings, representing the period from 1925 to 1929, showcase the physicist at his best. Let the reader not be misled by the fact that they were written for a general audience; they are well worth perusal by the expert as they explain Bohr’s views on the conceptual significance of the mature version of quantum mechanics that emerged over the interval during which they were composed. They contain no equations, but neither does the seminal paper by Bohr, Kramers and Slater on the quantized radiation field in 1924! This latter paper, everyone knows, was instrumental in stimulating the young Werner Heisenberg to his epochal discovery of the matrix mechanics in 1925.
The first article in the present volume reproduces the text of a lecture given by Bohr shortly after the appearance of Heisenberg’s first paper on matrix mechanics, and gives a condensed survey of the state of the field up to that point. Its main points concern the correspondence principle, the inadequacy of mechanical pictures purporting to portray events in the quantum world and Bohr’s impression of what Heisenberg actually did. The second article derives from an important lecture Bohr gave at the international conference at Lake Como in 1927. Here for the first time crops up mention of Bohr’s signature principle of complementarity, and he also grapples with Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation, de Broglie’s wave hypothesis and Schrödinger’s wave equation, which had meanwhile come to the fore of the physics community’s attention. What the present-day reader will find most valuable in this contribution is Bohr’s more mature and articulate thought on the connection between the spatio-temporal coordination of atomic processes and their causal description as well as his discussion of the reality of stationary states. Anyone in our generation who has been trained in quantum mechanics as an undergraduate will find it most instructive to read what Bohr has to say about how he views things, as he does not feel very comfortable with our smooth and polished formal, or what he calls symbolical, approach, and therefore has to struggle to comprehend quantum phenomena by means of his outmoded classical world-view, a tall order! In the process of modernization leading to today’s textbooks, however, his acute physical intuition has largely gone lost.
In the third article, from Bohr’s contribution to Planck’s fiftieth doctoral jubilee in 1929, he gets philosophical on the subject of measurement in quantum theory and his ideas on complementarity undergo a minute terminological evolution. Anyone who wants to trace the development of Bohr’s philosophical views will have to wade through this chapter en route to later volumes. The fourth article, also deriving from a lecture given in 1929, is less substantial than the other three and somewhat repetitive of what he has already expressed in them, but does contain Bohr’s earliest application of the lessons of quantum physics to the problem of the living organism, a topic on which he would continue to speculate for the remainder of his life.
The present slim (at just 119 pages) and non-technical volume will occupy one for an afternoon and can be warmly recommended to those who, not content with mere calculational facility in mathematical physics, would seek adequately to understand our mysterious quantum world!
The four lectures reprinted in this first volume of Bohr’s philosophical writings, representing the period from 1925 to 1929, showcase the physicist at his best. Let the reader not be misled by the fact that they were written for a general audience; they are well worth perusal by the expert as they explain Bohr’s views on the conceptual significance of the mature version of quantum mechanics that emerged over the interval during which they were composed. They contain no equations, but neither does the seminal paper by Bohr, Kramers and Slater on the quantized radiation field in 1924! This latter paper, everyone knows, was instrumental in stimulating the young Werner Heisenberg to his epochal discovery of the matrix mechanics in 1925.
The first article in the present volume reproduces the text of a lecture given by Bohr shortly after the appearance of Heisenberg’s first paper on matrix mechanics, and gives a condensed survey of the state of the field up to that point. Its main points concern the correspondence principle, the inadequacy of mechanical pictures purporting to portray events in the quantum world and Bohr’s impression of what Heisenberg actually did. The second article derives from an important lecture Bohr gave at the international conference at Lake Como in 1927. Here for the first time crops up mention of Bohr’s signature principle of complementarity, and he also grapples with Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation, de Broglie’s wave hypothesis and Schrödinger’s wave equation, which had meanwhile come to the fore of the physics community’s attention. What the present-day reader will find most valuable in this contribution is Bohr’s more mature and articulate thought on the connection between the spatio-temporal coordination of atomic processes and their causal description as well as his discussion of the reality of stationary states. Anyone in our generation who has been trained in quantum mechanics as an undergraduate will find it most instructive to read what Bohr has to say about how he views things, as he does not feel very comfortable with our smooth and polished formal, or what he calls symbolical, approach, and therefore has to struggle to comprehend quantum phenomena by means of his outmoded classical world-view, a tall order! In the process of modernization leading to today’s textbooks, however, his acute physical intuition has largely gone lost.
In the third article, from Bohr’s contribution to Planck’s fiftieth doctoral jubilee in 1929, he gets philosophical on the subject of measurement in quantum theory and his ideas on complementarity undergo a minute terminological evolution. Anyone who wants to trace the development of Bohr’s philosophical views will have to wade through this chapter en route to later volumes. The fourth article, also deriving from a lecture given in 1929, is less substantial than the other three and somewhat repetitive of what he has already expressed in them, but does contain Bohr’s earliest application of the lessons of quantum physics to the problem of the living organism, a topic on which he would continue to speculate for the remainder of his life.
The present slim (at just 119 pages) and non-technical volume will occupy one for an afternoon and can be warmly recommended to those who, not content with mere calculational facility in mathematical physics, would seek adequately to understand our mysterious quantum world!
September 15, 2014
كتاب يتحدث عن نظرية الكم والمفاهيم الرياضية فى النظرية الذرية وتطبيقات القوانين الفيزيائية او السيكولوجية والمقارنة بالنظرية النسبية .... لم يعجبنى الكتاب ربما لانه يتناول الجزء الاول فقط ويمكن ان يتضح مغزاه لو اطلعت على باقى الاجزاء ان وجدت .... ولكنى ارى ان الترجمة سيئة جداً
Read
May 10, 2014I understand nothing
February 6, 2017
Mă așteptam ca aceasta să fie o carte de popularizare științifică, însă nu a fost așa. Cele patru eseuri sunt destul de tehnice și ai nevoie de un background destul de bogat în fizică pentru a putea înțelege 95% din ideile prezentate. Să nu mai adaug că s-au ivit și niște ecuații, care m-au pierdut cu desăvârșire...
Cu toate acestea, ideile esențiale ce se repetă de-a lungul întregii cărți sunt acelea că: în fizica cuantică nu mai putem vorbi de relații de cauzalitate din cauza indivizibilității cuantei de acțiune descoperită de Plank, ce poate lua numai valori întregi și astfel nu există o continuitate a fenomenelor la nivel atomic. Și, de asemenea, conceptele de spațiu și timp nu își mai au sensul, căci principiul de incertitudine formulat de Heisenberg demonstrează că nu putem determina poziția și impulsul unui particule în același timp, ceea ce înseamnă că pentru descrierea fenomenelor cuantice trebuie să ne rezumăm la probabilități statistice.
Aceste două principii din fizica cuantică ne împiedică să ne mai putem folosi de conceptele vizualizabile din fizica clasică. Cu toate că par incompatibile, fizica clasică și cea cuantică, spune Bohr, nu sunt două contrarii, ci se află într-o relație de complementaritate, cea din urmă fiind o generalizare a celei dintâi.
În ciuda aparenței și a faptului că e destul de subțirică, "Teoria atomică și descrierea naturii” este o carte destul de greoaie pentru cei ca mine, adică neinstruiți în domeniul fizicii.
Cu toate acestea, ideile esențiale ce se repetă de-a lungul întregii cărți sunt acelea că: în fizica cuantică nu mai putem vorbi de relații de cauzalitate din cauza indivizibilității cuantei de acțiune descoperită de Plank, ce poate lua numai valori întregi și astfel nu există o continuitate a fenomenelor la nivel atomic. Și, de asemenea, conceptele de spațiu și timp nu își mai au sensul, căci principiul de incertitudine formulat de Heisenberg demonstrează că nu putem determina poziția și impulsul unui particule în același timp, ceea ce înseamnă că pentru descrierea fenomenelor cuantice trebuie să ne rezumăm la probabilități statistice.
Aceste două principii din fizica cuantică ne împiedică să ne mai putem folosi de conceptele vizualizabile din fizica clasică. Cu toate că par incompatibile, fizica clasică și cea cuantică, spune Bohr, nu sunt două contrarii, ci se află într-o relație de complementaritate, cea din urmă fiind o generalizare a celei dintâi.
În ciuda aparenței și a faptului că e destul de subțirică, "Teoria atomică și descrierea naturii” este o carte destul de greoaie pentru cei ca mine, adică neinstruiți în domeniul fizicii.
May 29, 2012
It is a collection of a great mind in physics writing in German that was translated to English to an audience of great minds in physics. This is probably not for guys like me, a novice in physics, but it is a good mental exercise.
The book is old data for physics, as it is written in the 30s, so physicists already covered this in class and not for the layman physicists. Still, I am enjoying reading it. I had to read the 1st one twice to get anything out of it.
The book is old data for physics, as it is written in the 30s, so physicists already covered this in class and not for the layman physicists. Still, I am enjoying reading it. I had to read the 1st one twice to get anything out of it.
December 4, 2015
قريت 57 صفحة و سبته, الكتاب ما ينفعش يتباع لعامة الشعب غير المتخصصين في الفيزياء الكلاسكية, الكتاب صعب جدا و المشكلة كمان ان الترجمة زي الزفت فبتعقد المواضيع اكتر مش بتبسطها ..
في ظروف تانية مكنتش هقيم الكتاب غير لما اقراه كله بس ديه محاولة لزق الchallenge :D
هقراه تاني بعد ما اقرا 10 كتب في الفيزياء الكلاسكية علشان استعد لنقضها في الكتاب ده ..
في ظروف تانية مكنتش هقيم الكتاب غير لما اقراه كله بس ديه محاولة لزق الchallenge :D
هقراه تاني بعد ما اقرا 10 كتب في الفيزياء الكلاسكية علشان استعد لنقضها في الكتاب ده ..
Read
June 12, 2012Translation of the General Introduction
Read
November 5, 2012the survey and the second article were both much entertaining. a great and significant work had been done.
February 8, 2014
أسوأ ترجمة فى العالم !
November 20, 2015
استعدينا تترجم استعددنا
يبدو أن المترجم على عكس ما ذكر في مقدمته من الصعوبة التي واجهته لم يكن مختصا بالموضوع المترجم اصلا أم أنه ضعف وعدم إلمام بمفردات اللغة العربية
يبدو أن المترجم على عكس ما ذكر في مقدمته من الصعوبة التي واجهته لم يكن مختصا بالموضوع المترجم اصلا أم أنه ضعف وعدم إلمام بمفردات اللغة العربية
Want to read
December 9, 2015want to read
August 19, 2023
Lo leí drogado y flashee mal
January 16, 2020
As Euripides said about Heraclites : What I have undersood is fantastic, I also think that things I haven't understood are but I will need a diver from Delphi to retrieve them.
This book is the mixture of philosophy and physics. Some of the most important quantum physics laws are analyzed like Heisenberg's principle of uncertainty, Bohr's principle of corespodence and complementarity. I have read it for exam in philosophy of physics without prior knowledge of mathematics and formulas presented in the text therefore one part of not understanding is because of my bad knowledge of physics. However, until it remained written in words that could be understood I think the book was a fine example of important laws and principles in quantum physics.
This book is the mixture of philosophy and physics. Some of the most important quantum physics laws are analyzed like Heisenberg's principle of uncertainty, Bohr's principle of corespodence and complementarity. I have read it for exam in philosophy of physics without prior knowledge of mathematics and formulas presented in the text therefore one part of not understanding is because of my bad knowledge of physics. However, until it remained written in words that could be understood I think the book was a fine example of important laws and principles in quantum physics.
Read
March 24, 2020Bohr was the first to discover that electrons travel in separate orbits around the nucleus and that the number of electrons in the outer orbit determines the properties of an element.
December 20, 2020
"Perhaps the greatest successes of mechanics lie in the domain of astronomy."
October 3, 2024
الترجمة سيئة
April 10, 2025
Concepts way over my head, but I would have appreciated it going into further detail. Can't fault the book though. Was completely engrossed still.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews