Scan barcode
p9ng's review against another edition
4.0
Not having read this when it was popular in the 90's, I am catching up. I think the excitement over expanding physical science to recognize, I guess you would say, 'non-linear' experimental results - has quieted down a lot since then.
The book tries to bring a common perspective to a recognition in many fields that there is a set of results, within limited bounds, that appear consistent and relate the experimental input and it's output in coherent terms that can be modeled. However, at the boundaries of these predictable results everything goes haywire (the results become unpredictable). That is where chaos theory steps in.
The book tries to bring a common perspective to a recognition in many fields that there is a set of results, within limited bounds, that appear consistent and relate the experimental input and it's output in coherent terms that can be modeled. However, at the boundaries of these predictable results everything goes haywire (the results become unpredictable). That is where chaos theory steps in.
cynicusrex's review against another edition
3.0
Chaos: Making a New Science taps from an extensive amount of resources and chronicles the history well, but I frequently found it too timidly conveying the mind-blowing nature of it all—as if James Gleick assumed the reader is already reasonably versed on the matter and therefore so convinced. To the uninitiated, opt for another book. Lastly, it was a reality check to discover scientists can be just as dogmatic as religious zealots.
aly_moh's review against another edition
2.0
هكتفى بالجزء اللى قريته ف الكتاب ده فقط وهديله نجمتين لانه مليان بمبادىء فيزيائية ومعادلات ونظريات تحتاج لشخص متخصص عشان يستوعبها...لكنه حمسنى اعرف اكتر عن نظرية الفوضى
drew2718's review against another edition
2.0
Sort of interesting. It was nice to meet some of the personalities that pioneered the study of complex systems. But Gleick never went deep enough into explaining the discoveries themselves—instead he settled for reveling in subjective, high-level assessments of the significance of the discoveries. Though, I suppose if Gleick did get more technical I’d become worried by the “igon value problem.” Maybe I should just stop reading math books written by non-mathematicians.
To those that criticize the book as being a compendium of disconnected biographies: Huh? Gleick does a good job calling back to Lorenz, Mandelbrot, Feigenbaum, etc. in the chapters about the scientists that progressed their work.
To those that criticize the book as being a compendium of disconnected biographies: Huh? Gleick does a good job calling back to Lorenz, Mandelbrot, Feigenbaum, etc. in the chapters about the scientists that progressed their work.
thefriedone's review against another edition
4.0
Very readable history of a relatively new area of science (arising out of nowhere in the 60s and 70s). A few parts are a bit dense, but Gleick does a good job keeping it interesting as he varies the protagonists every few chapters and attacks the topic from many angles. Most interesting to me was the way he presents scientific resistance to the new theories (from physics, biology, mathematics, etc) and how the ideas slowly gained acceptance and popularity. A history of the way science progresses, even in the modern era, as much as a history of chaos theory itself.
beistelltischchen's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
slow-paced
4.25