Cosmology Weinberg's The First Three Minutes

  • Thread starter Thread starter gmax137
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bigbang Cosmology
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the relevance of the book "The First Three Minutes" by Steven Weinberg, particularly the 1988 updated edition. Participants reflect on the validity of its content in light of advancements in physics and cosmology over the past few decades. There is curiosity about how much of the book's information has been superseded and whether it might introduce outdated concepts to new readers. The experience of reconciling the original text with modern scientific understanding is highlighted as enjoyable, despite the challenges posed by numerous footnotes and endnotes. Overall, the book continues to receive praise within the community, even as its status as a general reader's text is acknowledged.
gmax137
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Messages
3,146
Reaction score
3,677
This book was recently offered (and sold) in the Buy, Sell, Trade, Giveaway Book Marketplace section of the Forum.

That inspired me to pull out my copy (1988 "Updated Edition" from Basic Books). I read this probably 30 years ago. My question is, how much of this story is still considered valid? How much has been superseded over the years? Will reading it fill my head with obsolete notions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I hold an even older edition: "First Three Minutes" revison 1. When I learned -- from PF posts -- that revision 6 included Weinberg's interpretations of CMBr data, I checked the latest edition from our public library. Had a bit of fun reconciling original text with physics and cosmology learned since the 1970's but enjoyed the experience.

If you choose this route, be prepared for reading many footnotes and endnotes in small type, going by the edition I read. Even so, Weinberg always holds my attention.
 
gmax137 said:
This book was recently offered (and sold) in the Buy, Sell, Trade, Giveaway Book Marketplace section of the Forum.

That inspired me to pull out my copy (1988 "Updated Edition" from Basic Books). I read this probably 30 years ago. My question is, how much of this story is still considered valid? How much has been superseded over the years? Will reading it fill my head with obsolete notions?
I think mine disappeared during a move. Pfers always give it praise even though it is still a general readers book.
 
Im currently reading mathematics for physicists by Philippe Dennery and André Krzywicki, and I’m understanding most concepts however I think it would be better for me to get a book on complex analysis or calculus to better understand it so I’m not left looking at an equation for an hour trying to figure out what it means. So here comes the split, do I get a complex analysis book? Or a calculus book? I might be able to Borrow a calculus textbook from my math teacher study that for a bit and...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
35K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
9K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
11K