John D. Barrow (1952–2020)

Extremely erudite consideration of relations, ancient and current, between humans in the universe and the arts. It would have been welcome to have an advanced degree in mathematics to completely comprehend and appreciate all the distinctions.

Science uncovers an objective quest to uncover the laws of nature.
John Barrow attempts to visualize the arts - music, painting, literature, and more - with a creative scientist's perspective, given that art and science "...spring from a shared source show more -
the careful observation of things...."

The book curiously jumps around, from Kant to computers, often with humor, as in the chapter headings.

Though he does not agree, he allows that:

"Carl Sagan foresees the attractive possibility of receiving a message that 'may be detailed prescriptions for the avoidance of technological disaster.'
Since we are most likely to hear from the longest-lived societies,
these are the ones that are most likely to have passed through crises like
the proliferation of weapons of destruction,
to have avoided lethal environmental pollution from technological expansion,
withstood astronomical catastrophes, and overcome debilitating genetic maladies or social malaise."

Wishes: that Mr. Barrow had also used a Plate to represent Oriental painting,
recognized that Bonzai is cruel and painful to plants, and
added examples of "...statements that are true in one logical system, but false in another."

Barrow does not consider that, though maybe science is, that art is not the exclusive domain of human animals, that our closest cousins, chimpanzees and gorillas, can both paint and communicate in sign language. Also, it may well be that the easiest cave art did try to match reality with the image. show less

Is it possible, even in principle, to know everything? Is there a limit to the places science can take us, not because there are mystical realms accessible only by mystical means, but because complete comprehensibility just isn't built into the nature of things? Barrow discusses some of the more obvious, scientifically-established limits to what we can know, such as Heinsenberg's Uncertainty Principle (although that actually gets surprisingly little coverage), the fact that the unbreakable show more speed of light limits how much of the universe we can ever see, and the way Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem tells us there are some mathematical truths that cannot be arrived at mathematically. But much of the book deals with more abstract, even philosophical questions. Is it possible that the universe, despite what physicists like to believe, is so infinitely complicated that the closer we look, the more we'll see, forever? Is the human brain, which, after all, evolved to help us survive and reproduce and has only produced our ability to do math and science as a sort of side effect, even capable of truly understanding the universe? Will human knowledge continue increasing forever, or is the absolute best we can hope for a future in which it takes more and more effort to discover less and less? And so on.

It makes for a somewhat rambling trip through a wide variety of subjects, some of which seem more relevant to the main thrust of the book than others. Some sections are clear and fascinating. Others, I think, are just a bit too dense, while still others feel oddly lacking in substance. Ultimately much of what Barrow has to say is, by its very nature, unsatisfying, because on many of these subjects, all one can really do is pose the question, stare at it for a while, and then shrug and walk away. Far too often we don't even know what it is we don't know. But it is certainly a wide-ranging and thought-provoking journey that Barrow takes us on in the course of contemplating all these unknowns. show less

"...ma, lungo la nostra linea d'universo, nella nostra parte d'universo, alla fine ci sarà uniformità, senza stelle e senza vita, per sempre, a quanto pare. Noi non ci saremo. E forse è un bene, dopotutto.", un finale piuttosto inquietante per un saggio, vero? Non vi preoccupate, non si tratta di uno di quei testi apocalittici sul 2012, ma di un serissimo saggio che analizza il concetto di nulla dalle origini fino alle sue più estreme conseguenze.
E' sorprendente come un concetto a noi show more così familiare abbia tardato così tanto ad affermarsi nelle menti degli uomini, ma è sorprendente soprattutto il fatto che, per quanto mentalmente il nulla ci sia chiaro, siamo ancora lontani dal capire la sua realtà fisica e l'influsso che esercita sull'esistenza.
Il saggio è una lunga cavalcata attraverso i concetti di zero, di vuoto e di nulla attraverso i vari filtri dello scibile umano, da quello filosofico, passando per quello matematico, fino a quello fisico e cosmologico (ambito d'elezione dell'autore), e ci mostrerà come il nulla può essere tantissime cose fuorché "niente". show less

This book far exceeded expectations. The author uses a lucid style, but one that delves easily into complex areas. He addresses meanings and implications of infinity not only in mathematics, but also in metaphysics, and most interesting to me, cosmology. In doing the latter he clears up many concerns that have been troubling me, especially concerning the multiverse and the question of whether we're living in a simulation. The author, a Cambridge don, has written five or six other explanatory show more books on math and science which I plan to look into. His prose strongly conveys a commitment to explain complexities clearly to a wide lay readership, but without cutting corners. You feel he's ranging over everything he knows on the subject at hand, but somehow avoiding obfuscation or condescension. show less