The Science of Discworld (1999)

Overall, a good science book for the non-science-minded. I'm not sure how much I'll retain, but I enjoyed reading the book.

Oh, and I feel smart now, too. *grin* ( )

This is quite an unusual book, in that it is really science-fiction. Rather, it is a science book, with scientific subjects, intermixed with chapters of fiction set in the Discworld.

It is co-authored by Ian Steward and Jack Cohen, who helped write the science chapters.

The book sets out to explain every single aspect of our universe, from its very beginning al the way up to the probable demise, interspersed with Pratchett's witty humour and footnotes.

If you are even the tiniest bit interested in physics then this book is an absolute gem. ( )

Very enjoyable book, with the science clearly explained. I loved the Discworldy-insert bits, especially Ponder Stibbons. It's terribly accurate about academics wizards. The only extra thing I could have done with is a bibliography so I can track down some of the books they mention. ( )

http://eska-rina.livejournal.com/536582.html ( )

The science of Discworld is actually a book about communicating science to the ordinary person on the street, and explaining to that person the way science works. Essentially, there are two books here. A book that covers the basics of science and scientific thinking aimed at non-scientists with some vague mentions of the Discworld thrown in every so often so we don't forget what we're reading and a book that deals with the wizards of the unseen university generating a worl and poking it a bit, with occasional nods at the real world so we don't forget what we're reading. Both fine in themselves, I'm not sure combining them brings anything to the mix.

Never the less, though out of date now in some aspects, the science is written well. It's accessible and easy to follow for those who are novices, like me with physics. I have to say, I didn't agree with their downplaying on genetics (but I wouldn't because that's how I pay my rent) and thought the example they chose to illustrate the epigenetic effect (prions) was a little odd. Their unfortunate habit of putting genetics up as absolute determinism annoyed me a little too, though they do get major points for their fair treatments of the aquatic ape theory which is always worth mentioning. However, the parts I read as a amature, rather then a baised expert, were deeply enjoyable and informative, even if they be amout to lies-to-children in the grander scale of complexity.

All in all, the science was written well and in a easily accessably way, which is the main thing. If a few more people read the science because of the side story about the Wizards arsing around then who am I to compain? ( )