Anyone read 'Road to Reality'?

  • Other
  • Thread starter etotheipi
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Reality
PIn summary, the conversation revolved around a book called "Road to Reality" by Roger Penrose. Some people described it as a "pop-sci" book, but upon looking at the contents, it was clear that it was not an introductory book. The conversation then turned to who the book was meant for and whether it was worth reading. It was mentioned that the later chapters may be more useful than others. Some people had read the book and enjoyed it, while others found it difficult to understand. Overall, it was agreed that the book was not "pop-sci" and was better suited for those with a strong background in mathematical physics.
  • #1
etotheipi
Someone mentioned this book to me, and when I searched for it I saw some people describing it as a 'pop-sci' sort of book. But looking at the contents would suggest it's definitely not introductory, and in fact, quite the opposite (I don't know of any 'pop-sci books' that decide to launch into fibre bundles or quantum algebra or twistors... 😯)

I wanted to ask, who is this actually for, and is it worth looking at? And, given it's so massive, are some parts of it more useful than others?

Just thought it looked interesting not least since it's written by such a brilliant mind.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Pick a later chapter that you sort of know and read it. If it works for you, read the rest of the book. It didn’t work for me.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and etotheipi
  • #3
In principle that would work, but it would rely upon already having bought it :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, vanhees71 and PhDeezNutz
  • #4
etotheipi said:
In principle that would work, but it would rely upon already having bought it :wink:
Can you get it temporarily via inter-library loan?
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, Klystron and etotheipi
  • #5
Don't think so man, I could if I were in college but since we're stuck at home for a little while longer probably not for a few weeks :frown:
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #6
etotheipi said:
Don't think so man, I could if I were in college but since we're stuck at home for a little while longer probably not for a few weeks :frown:
Hmm, I wonder if your local library could work with your uni library somehow to make it happen. Does your local library have curbside pickup at least?
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and etotheipi
  • #7
I rather enjoyed reading "Road to Reality" while studying Penrose as part of updating my physics knowledge years ago. If memory serves, I read through chapter 15 before having to return the book to the public library.

"Road" remains a fixture in the library's Mathematics-Physics section. I last borrowed a copy and re-read some chapters while following the Differential Geometry forum on PF. Students mentioned being assigned Penrose as a textbook. Better, perhaps, as adjunct reading depending on the utility of twistors. Penrose's ideas mature from edition I to edition VI, the last edition I have read, IMS.

I suspect describing "Road" as pop-sci leads to condescending elitism. I regard Roger Penrose as an accessible but solid STEM writer but science changes. Would critics be more comfortable with impenetrable prose aimed at a miniscule audience?
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #8
Unfortunately Professor Penrose is mixing up with some Russian crackpots and pseudo scientists. Perhaps I should not have posted it here.
 
  • Haha
Likes etotheipi
  • #9
It's definitely not pop-sci. It is solid science for an educated layman audience. Penrose has done some questionable stuff in recent years, but Road to Reality was written in 2004. I think it is an excellent introduction to a broad range of topics in mathematical physics.
 
  • Like
Likes weirdoguy, Klystron and etotheipi
  • #10
I personally hate reading pop sci. This was a bit better, but as someone coming in who didn't know the material that well it was hard to follow along at more than just the level of pop sci, so I gave up on it pretty quick. I can see how it would be useful to some people to read.
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #12
sometimes pop sci implicitly carries an ideology and propaganda
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #13
It's semi-popular. It's for casual reading by professional physicists and mathematicians.
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron, PhDeezNutz, etotheipi and 1 other person
  • #14
Klystron said:
I suspect describing "Road" as pop-sci leads to condescending elitism. I regard Roger Penrose as an accessible but solid STEM writer but science changes. Would critics be more comfortable with impenetrable prose aimed at a miniscule audience?
Speaking of condescending elitism, it's minuscule, surely?
 
  • Haha
Likes berkeman, Klystron and etotheipi
  • #15
I wonder how many people have read the book? Obviously at least one, but who has the time to go through the whole thing. I have read parts from it and I did like it. But i wouldn't think that it is good to learn from it new concepts. It is probably good to have seen those things before. This way you can also read the chapters in the order you like. Anyway it is probably best for you to decide for yourself.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and etotheipi
  • #16
martinbn said:
I wonder how many people have read the book?
I've skipped some parts, but actually read at least about 80%.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #17
martinbn said:
I wonder how many people have read the book? Obviously at least one, but who has the time to go through the whole thing. I have read parts from it and I did like it. But i wouldn't think that it is good to learn from it new concepts. It is probably good to have seen those things before. This way you can also read the chapters in the order you like. Anyway it is probably best for you to decide for yourself.
I would agree with this. I confess I didn't read all of it - probably about 75%. I had seen many of the concepts before, and this book really helped tie things together.
 
  • Like
Likes robphy, vanhees71 and Klystron
  • #18
PeroK said:
Speaking of condescending elitism, it's minuscule, surely?
Sure. Yet here in the high desert, we oft' harken to 19th Centuryhttps://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/miniscule. According to Merriam-Webster:
The adjective minuscule is etymologically related to minus, but associations with mini- have produced the spelling variant miniscule. This variant dates to the end of the 19th century, and it now occurs commonly in published writing, but it continues to be widely regarded as an error.

Either that, else I am a persistent fan of Austin Powers.
1615124026584.png
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes hutchphd, PhDeezNutz and PeroK
  • #19
martinbn said:
I wonder how many people have read the book?

Well, I've read it (fully) in 2012 while I was writing my bachelor thesis on some topological invariants of 3-manifolds connected with quantum gravity. Penrose wrote a short chapter about spin networks and since I needed to learn something about this topic I thought it would be a good idea to read whole book o0) I want to read it again in the near future, my knowledge increased drasticly since 2012 so I guess it will be easier this time. But nevertheless, I liked it even then.
 
  • Like
Likes Kolmo, vanhees71, Klystron and 1 other person
  • #20
I read it back in my undergrad days. It started quite nicely, but I quickly hit a huge mathematical wall. I don't know if nowadays I would understand it better, but it was certainly not an easy read and more than surely it was not aimed to laymen.

I recommend just to keep reading and learning from standard textbooks.
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #21
etotheipi said:
Someone mentioned this book to me, and when I searched for it I saw some people describing it as a 'pop-sci' sort of book. But looking at the contents would suggest it's definitely not introductory, and in fact, quite the opposite (I don't know of any 'pop-sci books' that decide to launch into fibre bundles or quantum algebra or twistors... 😯)

I wanted to ask, who is this actually for, and is it worth looking at? And, given it's so massive, are some parts of it more useful than others?

Just thought it looked interesting not least since it's written by such a brilliant mind.
Get the book and give it a go.

I have read pop science books and for me as layman RTR is not that.
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #22
andresB said:
I quickly hit a huge mathematical wall.
Me too. I remember flipping back and forth, trying to remember what "diffeomorphism" was, compared to "isomorphism" or "homeomorphism." One night I put it down, about 200 pages in, and never picked it back up.
 
  • #23
gmax137 said:
One night I put it down, about 200 pages in, and never picked it back up.
Maybe @etotheipi would pay shipping for you to send it to him... :smile:
 
  • #24
berkeman said:
Maybe @etotheipi would pay shipping for you to send it to him... :smile:
I had the same thought.

@etotheipi -- Let me know. I can't ship it for a couple weeks, my books are packed in boxes while some renovations are going on.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
  • #25
Awww that's kind of you! It's okay though, I have access to it now :smile:

A few comments, just having read a little bit of chapter 13; I didn't expect it to have so many words in it, haha. Quite dense and a little bit difficult to read.

Also I hadn't realized until now, but the title "road to reality" makes it sound like some sort of spiritual handbook or guide to recreational marijuana... I'm not sure that was the intended interpretation?
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, Klystron and berkeman
  • #26
etotheipi said:
Awww that's kind of you! It's okay though, I have access to it now :smile:

A few comments, just having read a little bit of chapter 13; I didn't expect it to have so many words in it, haha. Quite dense and a little bit difficult to read.

Also I hadn't realized until now, but the title "road to reality" makes it sound like some sort of spiritual handbook or guide to recreational marijuana... I'm not sure that was the intended interpretation?
Well some might need marijuana to read this book in its entirety...

The colours... (disclaimer: I never used illegal drugs, only legal drugs!).
 
  • Informative
Likes etotheipi
  • #27
I've looked at it, and it's kind of odd. You could describe it as pop sci, in the sense that you don't have to know much about physics to read it, although you do need some basic background. Basically if you're out of high school and remember the stuff you learned there, you can read it. I guess it is kind of similar to the Theoretical Minimum books in terms of difficulty but more unusual in the choice of subject.

In order to be as approachable as it is, it treats mathematics "descriptively". It doesn't show you how to solve exercises or show you many proofs etc, it just shows you the mathematical concepts and it says "here's what this means, here's where we use it".

I guess it is kind of between a pop sci text and a textbook, except it goes well beyond undergrad physics in subject matter.

Also, there's a little secret for previewing books you can't access, but I don't think I can say it here ;)
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron, vanhees71 and Demystifier

1. What is "Road to Reality" about?

"Road to Reality" is a book written by physicist Roger Penrose that provides a comprehensive overview of modern physics and its mathematical foundations. It covers a wide range of topics including quantum mechanics, relativity, cosmology, and more.

2. Is "Road to Reality" suitable for non-scientists?

While "Road to Reality" is a highly technical and mathematical book, it is written in a way that is accessible to non-scientists. However, some prior knowledge of mathematics and physics may be helpful in fully understanding the concepts presented in the book.

3. How does "Road to Reality" differ from other popular science books?

"Road to Reality" stands out from other popular science books due to its depth and breadth of coverage. It goes into great detail and uses advanced mathematics to explain complex concepts, making it a valuable resource for those looking to deepen their understanding of physics.

4. Can "Road to Reality" be used as a textbook?

Yes, "Road to Reality" can be used as a textbook for advanced undergraduate or graduate courses in physics. It covers many topics that are typically taught in university-level physics courses and includes exercises and problems for further practice and understanding.

5. Is "Road to Reality" still relevant and up-to-date?

Although "Road to Reality" was first published in 2004, it is still considered a highly relevant and up-to-date resource in the field of physics. While some areas of research may have advanced since its publication, the fundamental concepts and theories presented in the book are still widely accepted and used in current research.

Similar threads

  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
25
Views
7K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
13
Views
8K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
1
Views
753
  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
8
Views
924
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top