Roger Penrose
Author of The Emperor's New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics
About the Author
Born in England, the son of a geneticist, Roger Penrose received a Ph.D. in 1957 from Cambridge University. Penrose then became a professor of applied mathematics at Birkbeck College in 1966 and a Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University in 1973. Penrose, a mathematician and show more theoretical physicist, has done much to elucidate the fundamental properties of black holes. With Stephen Hawking, Penrose proved a theorem of Albert Einstein's general relativity, asserting that at the center of a black hole there must evolve a "space-time singularity" of zero volume and infinite density, in which the current laws of physics do not apply. He also proposed the hypothesis of "cosmic censorship," which claims that such singularities must possess an event horizon. In 1969 Penrose described a process for the extraction of energy from a black hole, as well as how rotational energy of the black hole is transferred to a particle outside the hole. In addition, Penrose has done much to develop the mathematics needed to unite general relativity, which deals with the gravitational interactions of matter, and quantum mechanics, which describes all other interactions. (Bowker Author Biography) show less
Image credit: Roger Penrose at Festival della Scienza Oct 29 2011
Series
Works by Roger Penrose
The Emperor's New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics (1989) 3,443 copies, 29 reviews
Consciousness and the Universe: Quantum Physics, Evolution, Brain & Mind (2011) — Editor — 33 copies
Cuestiones cuanticas y cosmologicas / Quantum and Cosmologic questions (Spanish Edition) (1995) 9 copies
Spinors and Space-Time 4 copies
I BUCHI NERI 3 copies
Kralın Yeni Usu 2: Fiziğin gizemi 2 copies
Dal Big Bang all'Eternità 1 copy
Space-time and Cosmology 1 copy
Relativity 1 copy
Associated Works
Six Not-So-Easy Pieces: Einstein's Relativity, Symmetry, And Space-Time (1963) 1,731 copies, 10 reviews
What Is Life? : With Mind and Matter and Autobiographical Sketches (1992) — Foreword, some editions — 975 copies, 12 reviews
Six Easy Pieces and Six Not-So-Easy Pieces (1963) — Introduction, some editions — 417 copies, 1 review
'Nature and the Greeks' and 'Science and Humanism' (Canto original series) (1996) — Foreword, some editions — 104 copies
The Future of Theoretical Physics and Cosmology: Celebrating Stephen Hawking's Contributions to Physics (2002) — Contributor — 57 copies, 1 review
Tagged
Common Knowledge
- Canonical name
- Penrose, Roger
- Birthdate
- 1931-08-08
- Gender
- male
- Education
- University College London (BSc ∙ 1952)
University of Cambridge (St. John's College ∙ Ph.D ∙ Mathematics | 1958) - Occupations
- mathematician
philosopher of science
theoretical physicist
professor - Organizations
- University of Oxford
Birkbeck College, University of London
King's College, University of London
Bedford College, University of London
International Society on General Relativity and Gravitation
British Humanist Association - Awards and honors
- Order of Merit (2000)
Royal Society (Fellow, 1972)
Nobel Prize (Physics, 2020)
Copley Medal (2008)
De Morgan Medal (2004)
Knight Bachelor (1994) (show all 22)
Royal Society Royal Medal (1985)
Albert Einstein Medal (1990)
Naylor Prize (1991)
Wolf Prize (1988)
Dannie Heineman Prize (1971)
Fonseca Prize (2011)
Richard R. Ernst Medal (2012)
Institute of Physics (Honorary Fellow, 1989)
Eddington Medal (1975)
Paul Dirac Medal and Prize (1989)
Polish Academy of Sciences (1994)
United States National Academy of Sciences (Foreign Associate, 1998)
Australian Institute of Physics Dirac Medal (2005)
American Philosophical Society (International Member, 2011)
Commandino Medal (2017)
James Scott Prize Lectureship (1997-2000) - Relationships
- Penrose, Lionel S. (father)
Penrose, Roland (uncle)
Rindler, Wolfgang (colleague)
Penrose, J. Doyle (grandfather)
Leathes, John Beresford (grandfather)
Penrose, Oliver (brother) (show all 9)
Hodgson, Shirley (sister)
Penrose, Jonathan (brother)
Newman, Max (step-father) - Short biography
- Sir Roger Penrose has been producing original and important scientific ideas for half a century, having earned his Ph.D. from St. Johns College, Cambridge in 1957. His work is characterized by exceptional geometrical and physical insight. He applied new mathematical techniques to Einstein's general relativity and led the renaissance in gravitation theory in the 1960s. His novel ideas on space and time and his concept of "twistors" are increasingly influential. This remarkable mathematical theory combining algebraic and geometrical methods has been one of his major breakthroughs. Even his recreations have had intellectual impact: for instance, his studies of the "impossible figures" in Escher's artwork, and the never-repeating patterns of "Penrose tiling." He has influenced and stimulated a wide public through his lectures and his best-selling and wide-ranging books, including: Techniques of Differential Topology in Relativity, 1972; (with W. Rindler) Spinors and Space-Time, Vol. 1, 1984, Vol. 2, 1986; The Emperor's New Mind, 1989; Shadows of the Mind, 1996; Collected Works (six volumes), 2010. He has won a number of awards, including the W. H. Heinemann Prize (1971), the Science Book Prize (1990), Order of Merit (1994), the Eddington Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society, De Morgan Medal of the London Mathematical Society (2004) and the Copley Medal of the Royal Society (2008), and belongs to a number of academic societies, including the Royal Society, the Royal Irish Academy, the Polish Academy of Sciences, and the National Academy of Sciences (1998). Roger Penrose won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2020. He was elected a member of the American Philosophical Society in 2011.
- Nationality
- UK
- Birthplace
- Colchester, Essex, England, UK
- Places of residence
- Colchester, Essex, England, UK
London, England, UK
Cambridge, England, UK
Oxford, Oxfordshire, England, UK - Map Location
- England, UK
Members
Reviews
Lo que está claro es que los libros de David Foster Wallace, o te gustan o no te gustan. Personalmente, prefiero cuando le da más importancia al fondo de la historia, que a la forma de contarla. Cuando no me gusta es cuando experimenta. En este sentido, 'Extinción' es el libro que más me ha gustado por ahora de DFW.
La característica más destacable de la escritura de DFW no es su calidad literaria, que la tiene y mucha, ni las historias que cuenta, que son magníficas, todo un prodigio show more de imaginación, agudeza y erudición; lo que destaca por encima de todo es su visión del mundo, su inteligencia a la hora de abrirnos los ojos a la realidad que nos rodea. Su ojo, su mente, es como un bisturí con el cual disecciona todo lo que cae bajo su punto de observación. DFW narra como si tuviera un zoom, está contándote una historia, para a continuación pasar a otro sub-tema, y a continuación a otro sub-sub-tema, todo ello con la máxima minuciosidad. No se trata de historias dentro de historias, como hace Paul Auster. Lo que desea hacer DFW es contarnos la historia abarcando todos los puntos de vista y con todos los detalles posibles, utilizando para ello estadísticas, Historia, matemáticas, física, etc., pero siempre con unas dosis de observación extraordinarias. Creo que DFW sacaría un buen relato hasta del prospecto de un medicamento.
Esta manera de narrar tan singular puede dejarte exhausto en algunos momentos (desde luego, no se trata de una lectura de metro), pero merece la pena no rendirse y seguir leyendo porque al acabar de leer el relato te das cuenta de la profundidad de DFW como escritor y persona. Su prosa puede parecer aséptica hasta cierto punto, sobre todo cuando entra en algunos detalles, pero es sólo una sensación superficial. A un nivel más profundo llegas a conocer tan íntimamente a los personajes que deseas seguir acompañándolos en sus tribulaciones.
Otro detalle a destacar de las historias de DFW es que no tienen ni principio ni final. Al término de sus relatos, da la impresión de que prodría seguir y seguir ad infinitum. DFW quería abarcar la vida entera de los personajes. Quizá me guste DFW como también me gusta la música minimalista, con la que pienso tiene similitudes. Una composición de Steve Reich, Philip Glass, Wim Mertens o Michael Nyman, tiene la misma estructura que un relato de DFW. Empieza con fuerza, no posee aparentemente melodía y termina abruptamente, pero te mantiene en un estado hipnótico durante unos minutos. La prosa de DFW es igual, con esos párrafos interminables, al estilo de Marcel Proust o Thomas Bernhard, que te mantienen pegado a sus páginas, hasta que de repente se acaban, casi como si fuesen una partitura porque poseen una musicalidad propia.
Estos son los ocho relatos contenidos en 'Extinción':
- Señor Blandito. (***) Un Grupo de Discusión está realizando unos test para el lanzamiento de un nuevo producto, un pastelido de nombre "¡Delitos!" Se trata de una terrible crítica a los medios publicitarios. El relato más duro de leer del libro, con el que hay que armarse de paciencia porque cuando llevas leídas unas páginas, todo encaja.
- El alma no es una forja. (*****) El protagonista nos cuenta el trauma que sufrieron tanto él como sus compañeros en la clase de Educación Cívica cuando eran niños, al mismo tiempo que recuerda las fantasías que se inventaba en clase, y cómo trata de entender la vida que llevó su padre durante esos años. Un relato maravilloso, una obra maestra. Sólo por este cuento merece la pena leer este libro.
- Encarnaciones de niños quemados. (****) En apenas tres páginas, el autor nos muestra un hecho puntual y trascendente en la vida de una familia.
- Otro pionero. (****) El protagonista recuerda una historia que le contó un amigo de un amigo que iba en un vuelo y que escuchó por casualidad. Se trata de una fábula sobre un niño que nació en una tribu paleolítica capaz de responder cualquier pregunta.
- El neón de siempre. (*****) El protagonista nos quiere explicar como todo su vida es un fraude. Otra muestra de la genialidad de DFW.
- La filosofía y el espejo de la naturaleza. (***) La madre del protagonista, el cual acaba de salir de prisión, está en juicios con unos cirujanos plásticos que le destrozaron la cara. Relato de humor negro con muy mala leche.
- Extinción. (****) Historia de un matrimonio, contada desde el punto de vista del marido, que pasa por un mal momento debido a los supuestos ronquidos de él. Gran relato, cuyo final me dejó francamente perturbado.
- El canal del sufrimiento. (***) Skip Atwater anda tras un personaje que podría darle el siguiente artículo en la revista para la que trabaja. Se trata de un "escultor" que "realiza" unas "figuritas" bastante curiosas. Otra crítica feroz, esta vez a la prensa amarillista y de cotilleo, pero también al mundo del arte, porque ¿quién tiene la potestad para decidir lo que es o no es arte? No cabe duda de que el sentido del humor de DFW era un poco especial. show less
La característica más destacable de la escritura de DFW no es su calidad literaria, que la tiene y mucha, ni las historias que cuenta, que son magníficas, todo un prodigio show more de imaginación, agudeza y erudición; lo que destaca por encima de todo es su visión del mundo, su inteligencia a la hora de abrirnos los ojos a la realidad que nos rodea. Su ojo, su mente, es como un bisturí con el cual disecciona todo lo que cae bajo su punto de observación. DFW narra como si tuviera un zoom, está contándote una historia, para a continuación pasar a otro sub-tema, y a continuación a otro sub-sub-tema, todo ello con la máxima minuciosidad. No se trata de historias dentro de historias, como hace Paul Auster. Lo que desea hacer DFW es contarnos la historia abarcando todos los puntos de vista y con todos los detalles posibles, utilizando para ello estadísticas, Historia, matemáticas, física, etc., pero siempre con unas dosis de observación extraordinarias. Creo que DFW sacaría un buen relato hasta del prospecto de un medicamento.
Esta manera de narrar tan singular puede dejarte exhausto en algunos momentos (desde luego, no se trata de una lectura de metro), pero merece la pena no rendirse y seguir leyendo porque al acabar de leer el relato te das cuenta de la profundidad de DFW como escritor y persona. Su prosa puede parecer aséptica hasta cierto punto, sobre todo cuando entra en algunos detalles, pero es sólo una sensación superficial. A un nivel más profundo llegas a conocer tan íntimamente a los personajes que deseas seguir acompañándolos en sus tribulaciones.
Otro detalle a destacar de las historias de DFW es que no tienen ni principio ni final. Al término de sus relatos, da la impresión de que prodría seguir y seguir ad infinitum. DFW quería abarcar la vida entera de los personajes. Quizá me guste DFW como también me gusta la música minimalista, con la que pienso tiene similitudes. Una composición de Steve Reich, Philip Glass, Wim Mertens o Michael Nyman, tiene la misma estructura que un relato de DFW. Empieza con fuerza, no posee aparentemente melodía y termina abruptamente, pero te mantiene en un estado hipnótico durante unos minutos. La prosa de DFW es igual, con esos párrafos interminables, al estilo de Marcel Proust o Thomas Bernhard, que te mantienen pegado a sus páginas, hasta que de repente se acaban, casi como si fuesen una partitura porque poseen una musicalidad propia.
Estos son los ocho relatos contenidos en 'Extinción':
- Señor Blandito. (***) Un Grupo de Discusión está realizando unos test para el lanzamiento de un nuevo producto, un pastelido de nombre "¡Delitos!" Se trata de una terrible crítica a los medios publicitarios. El relato más duro de leer del libro, con el que hay que armarse de paciencia porque cuando llevas leídas unas páginas, todo encaja.
- El alma no es una forja. (*****) El protagonista nos cuenta el trauma que sufrieron tanto él como sus compañeros en la clase de Educación Cívica cuando eran niños, al mismo tiempo que recuerda las fantasías que se inventaba en clase, y cómo trata de entender la vida que llevó su padre durante esos años. Un relato maravilloso, una obra maestra. Sólo por este cuento merece la pena leer este libro.
- Encarnaciones de niños quemados. (****) En apenas tres páginas, el autor nos muestra un hecho puntual y trascendente en la vida de una familia.
- Otro pionero. (****) El protagonista recuerda una historia que le contó un amigo de un amigo que iba en un vuelo y que escuchó por casualidad. Se trata de una fábula sobre un niño que nació en una tribu paleolítica capaz de responder cualquier pregunta.
- El neón de siempre. (*****) El protagonista nos quiere explicar como todo su vida es un fraude. Otra muestra de la genialidad de DFW.
- La filosofía y el espejo de la naturaleza. (***) La madre del protagonista, el cual acaba de salir de prisión, está en juicios con unos cirujanos plásticos que le destrozaron la cara. Relato de humor negro con muy mala leche.
- Extinción. (****) Historia de un matrimonio, contada desde el punto de vista del marido, que pasa por un mal momento debido a los supuestos ronquidos de él. Gran relato, cuyo final me dejó francamente perturbado.
- El canal del sufrimiento. (***) Skip Atwater anda tras un personaje que podría darle el siguiente artículo en la revista para la que trabaja. Se trata de un "escultor" que "realiza" unas "figuritas" bastante curiosas. Otra crítica feroz, esta vez a la prensa amarillista y de cotilleo, pero también al mundo del arte, porque ¿quién tiene la potestad para decidir lo que es o no es arte? No cabe duda de que el sentido del humor de DFW era un poco especial. show less
What is the relationship of the "intangible" mind or consciousness and physical reality, namely, the brain? This is the question that Penrose addresses, and along the way deals with minor matters such as the Big Bang and Big Crunch, the relationship between classical and quantum physics (especially gravitation). All done with very little actual mathematics and in less than 200 pages! Clearly addressed to the general reader, I'm still glad that this is the third time I've been through these show more issues. And the general reader must "trust" Penrose that he got his mathematics right. His primary theses: (1) mathematics describes the physical world in a marvelously precise way, and mathematics resides in a world of ideas, i.e., he is a Platonist; (2) consciousness may be the emergent property of the quantum "entangling" of the thousands of neurons in the brain, specifically in the microtubules. "Action at a distance" is one of those very confusing and difficult to comprehend concepts of quantum mechanics, but Penrose insists the possibility needs to be investigated, with an entirely new approach to physics! I have always admired Penrose as a writer, taking very, very difficult subjects and making them more accessible to the general reader. I have been of the opinion that if someone cannot state things clearly, their own thinking is muddy as well. An excellent read for those interested in how physicists currently (well, as of 12 years ago) view the world around us. show less
Mathematics is the best example we have of the eternal, universal forms suggested by ‘Socrates’ in the dialogues of Plato. Penrose affirms this understanding in his discussions of General Relativity (the Large) and Quantum Mechanics (the Small), then considers some of the obstacles to a Unified Grand Theory, and suggests how science might investigate the connection between the physical and mental realms. The passage from the axiomatic through the problematic to the speculative makes this show more a fascinating read in the philosophy of science.
Einstein’s discovery of the principles of General Relativity―not by observation, but through pure mathematical reasoning―indicates the congruence between mathematics and the physical world. Alas. After Einstein, we can describe the structure of space-time with extraordinary accuracy, but we cannot explain how that structure came to be. The cosmological uniformity that we can see now could only have evolved from an absurdly precise initial state, and that precision, says Penrose, must have something to do with the union of quantum mechanics and general relativity―except that quantum mechanics and general relativity are incompatible theories as they currently stand.
Quantum mechanics (also derived from ‘unreasonably effective’ mathematics) can explain the stability of atoms, chemical forces, the reliability of inheritance through DNA, lasers, superconductors, etc, etc, but cannot be magnified to the classical level without changing some fundamental rules (collapse of the wavefunction!!). Penrose reviews the fun bits of quantum theory (wave-particle duality, spin, non-local effects) before alighting on the paradox (‘the measurement problem’) which indicates that the theory is incomplete, wrong, or…something else. Rejecting the conventional ‘many-worlds’ response to Schrödinger’s live/dead Cat, Penrose suggests that the solution may have something to do with our understanding of Perception. Wow.
In the third chapter, “Physics and the Mind,” Penrose takes up the question of mind/matter duality. His position is that the physical action of the brain evokes awareness, but this physical action cannot be simulated computationally. The brain is not a computer. (We understand natural numbers not because we have derived them from some set of computational rules, but because we have been able to make ‘contact’ with the Platonic world of mathematics.) Penrose speculates that the neural networks of the brain may exhibit large-scale quantum coherent activity and thus provide clues to a new theory of quantum gravity, which could serve to bridge the gap between quantum mechanics and general relativity.
In the last section of the book, peers of Penrose offer their critiques of his ideas, reiterating for the reader key concepts and considerations. This is the best kind of book on the pursuit of knowledge, one that recognizes the gaps in our understanding while emphasizing the curiosity and wonder inherent in the endeavor. Bravo. show less
Einstein’s discovery of the principles of General Relativity―not by observation, but through pure mathematical reasoning―indicates the congruence between mathematics and the physical world. Alas. After Einstein, we can describe the structure of space-time with extraordinary accuracy, but we cannot explain how that structure came to be. The cosmological uniformity that we can see now could only have evolved from an absurdly precise initial state, and that precision, says Penrose, must have something to do with the union of quantum mechanics and general relativity―except that quantum mechanics and general relativity are incompatible theories as they currently stand.
Quantum mechanics (also derived from ‘unreasonably effective’ mathematics) can explain the stability of atoms, chemical forces, the reliability of inheritance through DNA, lasers, superconductors, etc, etc, but cannot be magnified to the classical level without changing some fundamental rules (collapse of the wavefunction!!). Penrose reviews the fun bits of quantum theory (wave-particle duality, spin, non-local effects) before alighting on the paradox (‘the measurement problem’) which indicates that the theory is incomplete, wrong, or…something else. Rejecting the conventional ‘many-worlds’ response to Schrödinger’s live/dead Cat, Penrose suggests that the solution may have something to do with our understanding of Perception. Wow.
In the third chapter, “Physics and the Mind,” Penrose takes up the question of mind/matter duality. His position is that the physical action of the brain evokes awareness, but this physical action cannot be simulated computationally. The brain is not a computer. (We understand natural numbers not because we have derived them from some set of computational rules, but because we have been able to make ‘contact’ with the Platonic world of mathematics.) Penrose speculates that the neural networks of the brain may exhibit large-scale quantum coherent activity and thus provide clues to a new theory of quantum gravity, which could serve to bridge the gap between quantum mechanics and general relativity.
In the last section of the book, peers of Penrose offer their critiques of his ideas, reiterating for the reader key concepts and considerations. This is the best kind of book on the pursuit of knowledge, one that recognizes the gaps in our understanding while emphasizing the curiosity and wonder inherent in the endeavor. Bravo. show less
I like to refresh myself on my intuitive understanding of physics every once in a while since I won't ever admit to understanding more than 30%-40% of the math.
Even so, what I do understand is still more than enough to endlessly fascinate and make me sit around fantasizing and ruminating and dreaming up new ways to describe what I know and how to apply it in interesting ways.
It's the curse of reading a ton of SF, too, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this weird little habit of mind games show more and flights of attempted non-entropic fancy.
That being said, I did understand everything in this book, at least in the broad strokes, because Mr. Penrose almost never deviated from common ground.
You know, background radiation proving the Big Bang, gravitational lensing effects to prove or disprove dark matter and/or dark energy, and a few other common steps along the way to build a standard case for our current understanding of the cosmology.
No problem. He's a good writer and his analogies are interesting even if they're ones I've heard a hundred times. You know, like the one about Einstein on a Train. Raindrops on a tarmac for mass distributions of black holes and the eventual release of their captured radiation over a grand long time until entropy has its final way.
Where the good stuff is, (in my opinion,) lies in the idea of time and its reversibility in the grand 10 to the 124 schema, or if we eventually throw this whole universe down a gravitational funnel, the 10 to the 125 manifold. Is this the reversal, the homogenous transformation of matter back into straight energy that preceded the original big bang? Is this an ongoing cycle that repeats?
Well, that was what *I* wanted to know, anyway. Let me let you in on a big spoiler:We still don't know.
Honestly, this is good, even with all the talk about the lambda, Einstein's cosmological constant, and how it still maintains a strong presence in the grand discussion, but really? I truly have a much better time trying to wrap my puny little brain around the string theories more. Holographic universes also float my boat. Still, for all that this text tried to convince me of an old theory that may or may not be quite up to date, it's still a fun read.
Maybe one of these days I'll do more than just nod my head at some of the more complex equations. :) Truly, enough exposure to these, book after book, IS doing me a lot of good. Maybe if I collect enough great analogies and get a spinal shunt with a couple hundred external parallel processors to hang my brain on, I'll be just about ready to transform a few tensors. :) show less
Even so, what I do understand is still more than enough to endlessly fascinate and make me sit around fantasizing and ruminating and dreaming up new ways to describe what I know and how to apply it in interesting ways.
It's the curse of reading a ton of SF, too, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this weird little habit of mind games show more and flights of attempted non-entropic fancy.
That being said, I did understand everything in this book, at least in the broad strokes, because Mr. Penrose almost never deviated from common ground.
You know, background radiation proving the Big Bang, gravitational lensing effects to prove or disprove dark matter and/or dark energy, and a few other common steps along the way to build a standard case for our current understanding of the cosmology.
No problem. He's a good writer and his analogies are interesting even if they're ones I've heard a hundred times. You know, like the one about Einstein on a Train. Raindrops on a tarmac for mass distributions of black holes and the eventual release of their captured radiation over a grand long time until entropy has its final way.
Where the good stuff is, (in my opinion,) lies in the idea of time and its reversibility in the grand 10 to the 124 schema, or if we eventually throw this whole universe down a gravitational funnel, the 10 to the 125 manifold. Is this the reversal, the homogenous transformation of matter back into straight energy that preceded the original big bang? Is this an ongoing cycle that repeats?
Well, that was what *I* wanted to know, anyway. Let me let you in on a big spoiler:
Honestly, this is good, even with all the talk about the lambda, Einstein's cosmological constant, and how it still maintains a strong presence in the grand discussion, but really? I truly have a much better time trying to wrap my puny little brain around the string theories more. Holographic universes also float my boat. Still, for all that this text tried to convince me of an old theory that may or may not be quite up to date, it's still a fun read.
Maybe one of these days I'll do more than just nod my head at some of the more complex equations. :) Truly, enough exposure to these, book after book, IS doing me a lot of good. Maybe if I collect enough great analogies and get a spinal shunt with a couple hundred external parallel processors to hang my brain on, I'll be just about ready to transform a few tensors. :) show less
Lists
Physics (1)
Awards
You May Also Like
Associated Authors
Statistics
- Works
- 42
- Also by
- 12
- Members
- 9,800
- Popularity
- #2,436
- Rating
- 3.8
- Reviews
- 103
- ISBNs
- 220
- Languages
- 17
- Favorited
- 16
