What Books Are You Currently Reading?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Infinitum
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reading
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
Sign up Log in
404 replies · 77K views
JorisL said:
I'm with Engiman, the fanfiction is awesome (I recently read it).
A sequel by another writer is "S1gn1f1cant D1g1t5", it's good so far (read arc 1, waiting for arc 2 to finish and grab the pdf)
There are two other sequels of note- Harry Potter and the Memories of a Sociopath, and Draco Malfoy and the Practice of Rationality. Both however pale against HPMOR.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey everyone :) I'm currently reading the second book of the Hunger Games series, Catching Fire. I think almost everyone has read the series apart from me. haha. (I'm VERY hooked on this series at the moment)
 
I just finished reading all of Asimov's books in the Robot/Empire/Foundation series, in Asimov's prescribed order. (found here). 15 books in all. Quite a journey. It was kind of strange reading them in this order. The books weren't originally all written as a series. Later books were written into create a psuedo-consistent universe. The written order is therefore not the same as the chronological universe order. So it was kind of jarring to go from Asimov's 1950s prose to 1990s.
Nonetheless, Asimov is just so important, IMO, and it was a great trip.

I am not sure what to do next. I am back to Analog magazine for awhile, which I've been away from for a good year.

Also reading some math history stuff. Autobiography of Andre Wiles (of Bourbaki fame) and "Euler's Gem," a book about the history of Topology.

-DaveK
 
Life and Fate by Vasily Grossman. Fantatically written, pretty heavy at times.
 
zoobyshoe said:
I'm going to recommend the novels of C.J. Box to anyone looking for entertaining reading. He's written about 20.
C.J. Box... My wife just informed me, she has read all, or, almost all of them (she's not absolutely sure), she reads a great deal, honest!

She also informed me that "Joe" is a Wyoming game warden... I believe she is correct... (really think I couldn't ?) ... lol

I'm going to recommend the novels of C.J. Box to anyone looking for entertaining reading.

On that, she agrees...
 
Last edited:
Pythagorean said:
The last intellectually stimulating thing I read that wasn't a textbook, exam, or homework assignment was probably the lyrics to Britney Spears, I Wanna Go.

Without your guidance I never would have encountered this literature

I picked up twelve old New Yorker magazines for free. I enjoyed perhaps one tenth of the text. They take jejune art such as punk rock seriously. I liked an article about Alexander Humboldt.
 
OCR said:
C.J. Box... My wife just informed me, she has read all, or, almost all of them (she's not absolutely sure), she reads a great deal, honest!

She also informed me that "Joe" is a Wyoming game warden... I believe she is correct... (really think I couldn't ?) ... lol
Yes, Joe Pickett is based in Wyoming, not Montana! His other characters, Cody Hoyt and Cassie Dewell are the ones from Montana.
 
I'm currently reading "The Greatest Knight: The Remarkable Life of William Marshal, the Power Behind Five English Thrones" by Thomas Asbridge, Harper Collins Publishers, 2014.

It is a compelling story about William Marshal, who at the age of 5 faced execution by King Stephen when William's father broke his word to the king. Stephen did not execute the young lad. Marshal went on to become a successful knight in service to Henry II and his on Henry the Younger. Henry the younger died at a young age while rebelling against his father. Upon Henry II's death, Richard the Lionheart became king, and upon his death (from a gangrenous wound from a crossbow bolt in his left shoulder) John became King. King John's reign was problematic, and he eventually died from dysentery in October 1216 while facing an invasion Prince Louis of France and a rebellion of may barons.

There is an interesting discussion of the Magna Carta, which was more or less ignored by John in the latter half of 1215. Overall, it provides an interesting perspective on the history of England and Angevin France, also parts of Wales and Ireland, and the various political and religious conflicts of the times.

Marshal lived to the age of 72, which was remarkable given his military experience.

Some background:
https://www.royal.gov.uk/historyofthemonarchy/kingsandqueensofengland/theangevins/theangevins.aspx
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Marshal,_1st_Earl_of_Pembroke (1146–1219)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_II_of_England
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_I_of_England , http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/richard_i_king.shtml
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chepstow_Castle
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Sophia
A Briefer History of Time by Leonard Mlodinow and Stephen Hawking yo
 
How is the book 'What is life ' by Schrödinger in 1944 ?
 
Currently reading: The Fall of Giants by Ken Follett. This is the first book in the Century Trilogy and I have to say it is an extremely well researched and written novel.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1oldman2
Astrophysics for Physicists. Though I don't know if I'll ever have time to read the whole thing.
 
Sorry for a sort of "meta" question:
I have become kind of obsessive about getting the most out of a book. Anyone else feel the need to re-read books?
It seems hard at times to fully get the content and ideas from a first read alone. The first read gives you an overview of the structure of the book. Once you know the structure/layout, you can, upon a second reading more easily absorb the actual content, form issues being out of the way.

EDIT: I mean that understanding the context consumes a good chunk of attention/focus away from the actual content, ideas in the book. Anyone else see it this way?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PWiz and OCR
WWGD said:
Anyone else see it this way?
Yup... I sure do.

It's basically like watching a movie more than once... :oldwink:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WWGD
WWGD said:
Sorry for a sort of "meta" question:
I have become kind of obsessive about getting the most out of a book. Anyone else feel the need to re-read books?
It seems hard at times to fully get the content and ideas from a first read alone. The first read gives you an overview of the structure of the book. Once you know the structure/layout, you can, upon a second reading more easily absorb the actual content, form issues being out of the way.

EDIT: I mean that understanding the context consumes a good chunk of attention/focus away from the actual content, ideas in the book. Anyone else see it this way?
It depends on the book. If it's popular science, if it's almost always good to read it a couple of times. But when I re - read 'normal' books, I tend to like them less than the first time. I may be completely charmed by a book, totally loving it. But than I re-read it some time again and I ask myself wtf? Is this the same book I liked so much or has someone telepathically rewritten it while it was lying on the shelf?
So I now I always read a book only once.
 
WWGD said:
Anyone else see it this way?
This is quite common ,lot of people do it ,not all books can be understood in one go.
 
Monsterboy said:
not all books can be understood in one go.

There are books that can't be understood no matter how many times you try.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42, Monsterboy and PWiz
WWGD said:
Sorry for a sort of "meta" question:
I have become kind of obsessive about getting the most out of a book. Anyone else feel the need to re-read books?
It seems hard at times to fully get the content and ideas from a first read alone. The first read gives you an overview of the structure of the book. Once you know the structure/layout, you can, upon a second reading more easily absorb the actual content, form issues being out of the way.

EDIT: I mean that understanding the context consumes a good chunk of attention/focus away from the actual content, ideas in the book. Anyone else see it this way?

Depends on the book of course. I'm not going to re-read any of the star trek novels I picked up for a dollar and read on the beach during vacation. But certainly many books merit one or many re-reads.

I think it's partly about the things you said, but there's also the experience of re-reading a book *many* years later. There were many books I read as a teenager and I really doubt I would even recognize them or see them the same way now. There are some books I plan to read every n years or so.
-Dave K
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Monsterboy
dkotschessaa said:
I think it's partly about the things you said, but there's also the experience of re-reading a book *many* years later. There were many books I read as a teenager and I really doubt I would even recognize them or see them the same way now.
I just had this experience. I re-read Gorky Park and found I felt like I had never read it before. It had been, like, 35 years.
 
I've re-read several books. Here's the ones that I recall re-reading, and are all certainly worth reading multiple times.

A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole
Cannery Row by John Steinbeck
Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy[/URL] by Douglas Adams (I don't recall re-reading the entire "trilogy" though.)
The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald
Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
Angela's Ashes[/URL] by Frank McCourt*
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0894805959/?tag=pfamazon01-20 by George H. Scherr (not technically a novel, but incredible never-the-less).

*(If you want to "read" or "re-read" Angela's Ashes, I suggest checking out the audio-book version of this one. I'm not really into audio books, but Angela's Ashes is read/narrated by Frank McCourt himself. This book contains copious amounts of Irish humor that are totally lost if your only experience is watching the movie).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I got a kindle, and I have ADD, so I am currently reading about 900 books.

But mostly, aside from my current issue of "Analog" I am reading "La Mort d'Arthur." I have been on a medieval history bent, so wanted to read some of the associated literature. I had always heard about King Arthur, Merlin, etc. as kids stories but I did not know where they actually came from. It is extremely fun to read.

(I don't know why I'm posting this now. I still haven't had coffee.)
 
Borek said:
There are books that can't be understood no matter how many times you try.
Can you name a few ? i will try to read them.
 
Monsterboy said:
Can you name a few ? i will try to read them.
Finnegans Wake by James Joyce
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Hornbein
Monsterboy said:
Can you name a few ? i will try to read them.

Sorry, we don't talk about crackpottery here.
 
WWGD said:
Sorry for a sort of "meta" question:
I have become kind of obsessive about getting the most out of a book. Anyone else feel the need to re-read books?
It seems hard at times to fully get the content and ideas from a first read alone. The first read gives you an overview of the structure of the book. Once you know the structure/layout, you can, upon a second reading more easily absorb the actual content, form issues being out of the way.

EDIT: I mean that understanding the context consumes a good chunk of attention/focus away from the actual content, ideas in the book. Anyone else see it this way?

I only reread books if it has been so long that I've forgotten the contents.

I tried writing a book. I couldn't do it because re-reading it bored me too much.

Right now I'm reading the Feynman lectures on electromagnetism.
 
Borek said:
Sorry, we don't talk about crackpottery here.
I don't what book you are talking about but the fact the you understood that the book is crackpottery means , you did understand the book.
 
Re-reading Symmetry and the Monster but skipping the off topic bio stuff so not to break the flow of ideas.