General Relativistic Dynamics by Fred I. Cooperstock

I fear that the scientifically literate layman will feel that Fred I. Cooperstock's General Relativistic Dynamics is too difficult a read; and the professional physicist and astronomer will feel that this is another specialized book outside of his area of professional specialization. Both will be wrong; General Relativistic Dynamics (Extending Einstein's Legacy Throughout the Universe) is an exceptionally readable book whose topic is importantly necessary for literate laymen and professional physicists and astronomers to understand. Physics in the last century has become a rabbit warren of subspecialties understandable and seriously discussed only by physicists within each subspecialty. This has lead to a generation of physicists whose knowledge of the whole of physics is quite limited. To the point of Cooperstock's remarkable book, general relativity is not understood by most working physicists and astronomers. To be sure general relativity is revered; but it is often viewed as too difficult to apply or deemed unnecessary for a particular astronomical problem. Fred I. Cooperstock patiently explains that flat Newtonian gravitational theory is an inappropraite assumption for many astronomical calculations. That the curved spacetime of general relativity is necessary for many astronomical calculations comes as no surprise to the laymen; but working astronomers have long assumed that Newtonian gravitational theory is sufficient for most problems involving galaxies and clusters of galaxies. As one important particular, Cooperstock asserts, "Einstein's general theory of relativity, could account for the observed flat galactic rotation curves without the requirement for vast stores of mysterious dark matter." In other words, the entire idea that vast quantities of invisible "dark matter" are the dominant form of matter in our visible universe is flawed from its first conception; because it is based upon the incorrect assumption that Newtonian gravity is a sufficient gravitational theory at the galactic level. Cooperstock "wonders how different physics might have evolved had the early astronomers made themselves more knowledgeable about general relativity and made the kinds of calculations for galactic velocities that we have described in this book." To the layman and professional physicists, I must emphasize that Cooperstock describes the results of these difficult calculations. You and I, the reader, do not need to be able to follow them; but I advise as far as we are able that we read and understand the arguments which he presents. If physics is truely to become a theory of everything; then physicists must become fluent in the important discusions of theories across all of physics. As long as physicists defer to the peer reviewed views of the specialist physicists in every subspecialty of physics; they will be doing a scientific disservice to physics. The logic, the sound reasoning and discussion of physics theories has to be returned to physicists, astronomers and literate laymen; else the subspecialties of physics will become the domain of alchemists and astrologers. Cooperstock does not focus upon all of physics; he focuses upon what he knows best - General Relativistic Dynamics (Extending Einstein's Legacy Throughout the Universe). He builds a strong case that general relativity has to become the working knowledge of profesional physicists and astronomers. His book gives us a way to achieve literacy about 21st century extensions to Einstein's legacy. This is not just another book about general relativity, it must be read and reread by experts and yet is "readily accessible to the non-experts." Fred I. Cooperstock is a master teacher.

Here is a link also to the Scientific American book club's book review.

A Different Universe by Robert B. Laughlin

A Different Universe by Robert B. Laughlin describes the meaning and importance of emergence (versus reductionism) better than any other physics book. Laughlin meanders through many interesting tales; but he keeps returning to revolutionary physics ideas. No scientific dogma is too sacred to challenge. "Space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness... The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo." If these words do not seem controversial enough, then consider Laughlin's words about quantum gravity, "I myself have come to suspect that all important outstanding problems in physics are emergent in nature, including particularly quantum gravity."  Unfortunately, few readable physics books are written with both Laughlin's charm and his brutal honesty. Laughlin powerfully criticizes the mathematical fetish of theoretical physics when he asserts that "the myth of the absolute power of mathematics... is still entrenched in our culture." Laughlin suggests that too much physics is mathematical but without sufficient physical basis in idea, metaphor, insight or even potentially observable phenomenon. He poetically asserts that, "The physical idea precedes the mathematics, and the act of writing it down as a simple equation is like capturing a song or a poem." Robert B. Laughlin's ideas are grounded in experiment; "careful quantitative study of microscopic parts has revealed that at the primitive level at least, collective principles of organization are not just a quaint side show but everything--the true source of physical law." His assertion that  "all physical law we know about has collective origins, not just some of it" is grounded in physical experiment. His prediction that "One of the things emergent phenomenon can do is create new particles" which are physically indistinguishable from "real particles is grounded in experiment. And his skepticism that  "A large portion of the accepted knowledge base of modern science is untrue than was true in the Age of Reductionism, obliging us to look at it more skeptically than we did before and to value consensus less" is grounded in experiment. A Different Universe should be carefully read by every student of science and professional physicists. His assertions and conclusions can not be ignored, not because he is a Nobel Prize winning physicist; but because they are well reasoned and well supported by experimental evidence.