- #1
- 24,775
- 792
Christine has written a very personal take on Smolin's book
http://christinedantas.blogspot.com/2006/10/book-review-smolins-trouble-with.html
In this case her unguarded reaction makes for a good review
the book has unusual depth and honesty, so she has answered it honestly from her own depths---experience and thoughts about being a scientist.
In her review Christine linked to Bee Hossenfelder's review, which is also a good one but in a different way, written less introspectively, and the first comment she got was from Bee (see how well blog works for book reviews)
it turns out, as one sees from these comments, that Bee has considered that she might sometime write a wide-audience science book herself----well everybody can see that she has the style and talent to do this in an interesting way, if she ever wants.
Anyway, I really like Christine's take on TwP, just because it is a personal response does not mean that it is singular---without necessarily trying to, she speaks for more than herselfmore conversation here
http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2006/10/inverse-problem.html
about the coverage in Nature magazine (5 october)
interesting discussion involving recognizable voices as well as B.H. and C.D.
http://christinedantas.blogspot.com/2006/10/book-review-smolins-trouble-with.html
In this case her unguarded reaction makes for a good review
the book has unusual depth and honesty, so she has answered it honestly from her own depths---experience and thoughts about being a scientist.
In her review Christine linked to Bee Hossenfelder's review, which is also a good one but in a different way, written less introspectively, and the first comment she got was from Bee (see how well blog works for book reviews)
it turns out, as one sees from these comments, that Bee has considered that she might sometime write a wide-audience science book herself----well everybody can see that she has the style and talent to do this in an interesting way, if she ever wants.
Anyway, I really like Christine's take on TwP, just because it is a personal response does not mean that it is singular---without necessarily trying to, she speaks for more than herselfmore conversation here
http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2006/10/inverse-problem.html
about the coverage in Nature magazine (5 october)
interesting discussion involving recognizable voices as well as B.H. and C.D.
Last edited by a moderator: