felitfelix's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging informative inspiring reflective medium-paced

4.0

bookreviews1's review

Go to review page

hopeful informative inspiring reflective medium-paced

4.5

benjaminvr's review

Go to review page

3.0

Lately, many popular science books delve deep into historical points. 'The Universe Speaks in Numbers' is one of them. And, as a person who has read a lot about the history of science, I no longer find much interest in the topic. Therefore, I think I would have enjoyed it a little bit more has the book been centered around more aspects of current relevance in the branch of science.

maryesthernev's review

Go to review page

5.0

I found this book extremely fascinating however I am sure that if I hadn’t majored in Math for my undergrad I would have been horribly bored by the topics covered. This book details the long standing mercurial relationship between the mathematical community and the physics community. I loved learning how all of the theories we use on a daily basis came to be. I loved learning about all the quirky mathematicians and physicists throughout history and what they actually contributed to what we know today. This book gave me a deeper admiration for the beauty and aesthetic of both mathematics and physics. I found the layout of the book confusing at times since it wasn’t chronological. Overall, for a math book, it was extremely intriguing!

beccadamb's review

Go to review page

challenging informative reflective slow-paced

3.25

jasonfurman's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

I wanted a book on why the universe seems to be explicable in terms of math at a deeper philosophical level. Instead I got a decent history of physics that covers some familiar ground (the birth of relativity and quantum mechanics) and some unfamiliar ground (recent mathematical advances in gauge theory), with the combination of capsule biographies and light explanations that are not enough to fully explain.

What made the book a little more than that was the overarching narrative about the different styles of physics, experimental, theoreticians responding to experiments, and theoreticians who treat mathematical beauty as an end unto itself. Graham Farmelo argues that Einstein and Dirac were exemplars of this last approach and their modern heirs are string theorists who are working entirely unmoored from experiments or even commonsense reality, but Farmelo is still betting on them because of the mathematical beauty of their approach. Over the course of the story, Farmelo describes a period of falling out between math and physics and how they came back together again that I had not previously been aware of.

Overall, interesting but the main argument is more asserted and proven and less new and creative than I would have hoped. I might have to try [b:Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality|19395553|Our Mathematical Universe My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality|Max Tegmark|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1386860656i/19395553._SY75_.jpg|24895576].

haikx's review

Go to review page

3.0

Lately, many popular science books delve deep into historical points. 'The Universe Speaks in Numbers' is one of them. And, as a person who has read a lot about the history of science, I no longer find much interest in the topic. Therefore, I think I would have enjoyed it a little bit more has the book been centered around more aspects of current relevance in the branch of science.

obviouslyyuta's review

Go to review page

4.75

I didn’t understand half of it but im still so goddanm inspired and motivated 🤧😭🤌🏼✨

teoboy's review

Go to review page

challenging hopeful informative inspiring reflective medium-paced

4.0

northernatlas's review

Go to review page

2.0

While the objective of this book was to indicate how helpful and harmonious the use of mathematical equations, in lieu of data-driver formulas, can and have been in the history of physics, this book spent the vast majority of its lengthy page count on a Who’s Who of theory through the ages. With such a focus on history and citation, it’s a shame this book was not better marketed to explain what it truly is. It didn’t meet expectations (how could it?) and it’s historical focus was quite dry.