What do you think?
Rate this book
The First Three Minutes: A Modern View of the Origin of the Universe
A Nobel Prize-winning physicist explains what happened at the very beginning of the universe, and how we know, in this popular science classic.
Our universe has been growing for nearly 14 billion years. But almost everything about it, from the elements that forged stars, planets, and lifeforms, to the fundamental forces of physics, can be traced back to what happened in just the first three minutes of its life.
In this book, Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg describes in wonderful detail what happened in these first three minutes. It is an exhilarating journey that begins with the Planck Epoch - the earliest period of time in the history of the universe - and goes through Einstein's Theory of Relativity, the Hubble Red Shift, and the detection of the Cosmic Microwave Background. These incredible discoveries all form the foundation for what we now understand as the "standard model" of the origin of the universe. The First Three Minutes examines not only what this model looks like, but also tells the exciting story of the bold thinkers who put it together.
Clearly and accessibly written, The First Three Minutes is a modern-day classic, an unsurpassed explanation of where it is we really come from.
Our universe has been growing for nearly 14 billion years. But almost everything about it, from the elements that forged stars, planets, and lifeforms, to the fundamental forces of physics, can be traced back to what happened in just the first three minutes of its life.
In this book, Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg describes in wonderful detail what happened in these first three minutes. It is an exhilarating journey that begins with the Planck Epoch - the earliest period of time in the history of the universe - and goes through Einstein's Theory of Relativity, the Hubble Red Shift, and the detection of the Cosmic Microwave Background. These incredible discoveries all form the foundation for what we now understand as the "standard model" of the origin of the universe. The First Three Minutes examines not only what this model looks like, but also tells the exciting story of the bold thinkers who put it together.
Clearly and accessibly written, The First Three Minutes is a modern-day classic, an unsurpassed explanation of where it is we really come from.
224 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1977
615 people are currently reading
18402 people want to read
About the author
Steven Weinberg
77 books583 followersSteven Weinberg (1933-2021) was an American theoretical physicist and Nobel laureate in Physics for his contributions with Abdus Salam and Sheldon Glashow to the unification of the weak force and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles.
He held the Josey Regental Chair in Science at the University of Texas at Austin, where he was a member of the Physics and Astronomy Departments. His research on elementary particles and physical cosmology was honored with numerous prizes and awards, including in 1979 the Nobel Prize in Physics and in 1991 the National Medal of Science. In 2004 he received the Benjamin Franklin Medal of the American Philosophical Society, with a citation that said he was "considered by many to be the preeminent theoretical physicist alive in the world today." He was elected to the US National Academy of Sciences and Britain's Royal Society, as well as to the American Philosophical Society and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Weinberg's articles on various subjects occasionally appeared in The New York Review of Books and other periodicals. He served as consultant at the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, President of the Philosophical Society of Texas, and member of the Board of Editors of Daedalus magazine, the Council of Scholars of the Library of Congress, the JASON group of defense consultants, and many other boards and committees.
He held the Josey Regental Chair in Science at the University of Texas at Austin, where he was a member of the Physics and Astronomy Departments. His research on elementary particles and physical cosmology was honored with numerous prizes and awards, including in 1979 the Nobel Prize in Physics and in 1991 the National Medal of Science. In 2004 he received the Benjamin Franklin Medal of the American Philosophical Society, with a citation that said he was "considered by many to be the preeminent theoretical physicist alive in the world today." He was elected to the US National Academy of Sciences and Britain's Royal Society, as well as to the American Philosophical Society and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Weinberg's articles on various subjects occasionally appeared in The New York Review of Books and other periodicals. He served as consultant at the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, President of the Philosophical Society of Texas, and member of the Board of Editors of Daedalus magazine, the Council of Scholars of the Library of Congress, the JASON group of defense consultants, and many other boards and committees.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 317 reviews
August 24, 2020
The First Three Minutes is about the first narrative ever to take stage in our universe. The story starts off as a mystery in the void of nothingness when time didn't exist. This enigma (time zero) can be visualized as a single point with infinite density and temperature, but millions of times smaller than this period. Out of this "point" an explosion occurred, or a rapid expansion initiated, that was spread out into the emptiness.
At 0.01 seconds at a temperature of 100 billion degrees kelvins our first characters (particles) of the story appeared: electrons, positrons, neutrinos, and photons. As soon as they appeared, they collided with each other and annihilated, in return to reappear again. It will take a long time before our characters stick around and fully stabilize. I saw the electron (matter) as our protagonist and positron (antimatter) our antagonist. The period between t=0 and t=0.01 is even more fascinating, but I first need to find a more adequate book to read and review this epoch. At this time, the universe was 3.8 billion times the density of water, with a circumference of 4 light years.
At 0.12 seconds the temperature cooled down to 30 billion degrees kelvins and the universe was 30 million times the energy density of water, and the nuclear particle balance was at 38% neutron to 62% proton. This was an intense plot, as we can see, a large part of the story, until now, played out in a blink of an eye.
At 1.32 seconds at 10 billion kelvins the neutrinos are starting to behave like free particles and no longer in thermal equilibrium with the electron, positron, and photon. The total energy density is 380 thousand times the density of water. Now, at our climax of the story, our protagonist and antagonist are annihilating faster than they can be recreated out of radiation, and our proton to neutron balance is at 24% neutron and 76% proton. This was one intense battle.
At 15.14 seconds at 3 billion kelvins the electrons and positrons annihilated quicker than they could be regenerate out of photons and neutrinos and even more rapidly disappeared as the major constituents of the universe. It is cool enough for stable nuclei of like helium to form with the nuclear particle tally: 17% for neutron to 83% for proton.
At 3 minutes 17.14 seconds the temperature cooled down to 70 times hotter than the center of the sun. The electrons and positrons have mostly disappeared and the main components of the universe are photons, neutrinos, and antineutrinos. The collision between neutrons and protons vs. electrons and neutrinos have pretty much halted. Current tally: 13% neutrons, 87% protons. Now it was cool enough for protons and neutrons to form into heavy complex nuclei of heavy hydrogen and helium.
At 37 minutes and 57.14 seconds (this book should be called the first 38 minutes - but that's not an appealing title) at 300 million kelvins the electrons and positrons are completely annihilated except for a small number of electrons (our protagonist) needed to balance the charge of protons. The energy density of the universe is now equivalent to the mass density of about 9.9% of water, but still too hot to form stable atoms.
This expending and cooling will continue for the next 700,000 years! At this time the nuclei and electrons will form stable atoms. Our protagonist (matter) won the battle and will separate from radiation and will go on to form stars, galaxies and 13.7 billion years later...us. This book written in 1976 based on The Standard Model (this theory has been crystallized and refined since then) and does not including cosmological inflation.
At 0.01 seconds at a temperature of 100 billion degrees kelvins our first characters (particles) of the story appeared: electrons, positrons, neutrinos, and photons. As soon as they appeared, they collided with each other and annihilated, in return to reappear again. It will take a long time before our characters stick around and fully stabilize. I saw the electron (matter) as our protagonist and positron (antimatter) our antagonist. The period between t=0 and t=0.01 is even more fascinating, but I first need to find a more adequate book to read and review this epoch. At this time, the universe was 3.8 billion times the density of water, with a circumference of 4 light years.
At 0.12 seconds the temperature cooled down to 30 billion degrees kelvins and the universe was 30 million times the energy density of water, and the nuclear particle balance was at 38% neutron to 62% proton. This was an intense plot, as we can see, a large part of the story, until now, played out in a blink of an eye.
At 1.32 seconds at 10 billion kelvins the neutrinos are starting to behave like free particles and no longer in thermal equilibrium with the electron, positron, and photon. The total energy density is 380 thousand times the density of water. Now, at our climax of the story, our protagonist and antagonist are annihilating faster than they can be recreated out of radiation, and our proton to neutron balance is at 24% neutron and 76% proton. This was one intense battle.
At 15.14 seconds at 3 billion kelvins the electrons and positrons annihilated quicker than they could be regenerate out of photons and neutrinos and even more rapidly disappeared as the major constituents of the universe. It is cool enough for stable nuclei of like helium to form with the nuclear particle tally: 17% for neutron to 83% for proton.
At 3 minutes 17.14 seconds the temperature cooled down to 70 times hotter than the center of the sun. The electrons and positrons have mostly disappeared and the main components of the universe are photons, neutrinos, and antineutrinos. The collision between neutrons and protons vs. electrons and neutrinos have pretty much halted. Current tally: 13% neutrons, 87% protons. Now it was cool enough for protons and neutrons to form into heavy complex nuclei of heavy hydrogen and helium.
At 37 minutes and 57.14 seconds (this book should be called the first 38 minutes - but that's not an appealing title) at 300 million kelvins the electrons and positrons are completely annihilated except for a small number of electrons (our protagonist) needed to balance the charge of protons. The energy density of the universe is now equivalent to the mass density of about 9.9% of water, but still too hot to form stable atoms.
This expending and cooling will continue for the next 700,000 years! At this time the nuclei and electrons will form stable atoms. Our protagonist (matter) won the battle and will separate from radiation and will go on to form stars, galaxies and 13.7 billion years later...us. This book written in 1976 based on The Standard Model (this theory has been crystallized and refined since then) and does not including cosmological inflation.
September 24, 2014
“In the beginning God created the heaven and the Earth...”
“Can we leave out God and just say that, in the beginning, the Universe got created?”
“NO!”
“Oh well, leave it in for now. Let's continue.”
The rest of this review is available elsewhere (the location cannot be given for Goodreads policy reasons)
“Can we leave out God and just say that, in the beginning, the Universe got created?”
“NO!”
“Oh well, leave it in for now. Let's continue.”
The rest of this review is available elsewhere (the location cannot be given for Goodreads policy reasons)
July 14, 2016
المؤلٌّف قديم إلى حد ما, لكنه مازال ذا أهمية رغم إعادة صياغة بعض المعلومات اللي ذكرها فيه الآن
ترجع الأهمية, إلى أن الكتاب يتحدث بتفصيل وبترتيب تاريخي عن الحدث الأعظم المكتشف حديثاً حينها, وهو اكتشاف الأشعة الخلفية الكونية الميكرونية سنة 1965.
كيف تم الاكتشاف, ولماذا تأخر الاكتشاف ؟! وما هي التوقعات عن ما لم يكتشف؟!
ثم يتحدث بتفصيل كبير أيضاً عن تأثير دوبلر وتطبيقه على بدء الكون.
ومعظم الكتاب عن النقطتين السابقتين, وعن الجسيمات الدقيقة الأولية بما انها الاختصاص الأساسي للمؤلف, والذي جعله يستحق جائزة نوبل عن بحثه مع عبد السلام في القوة النووية الضعيفة.
إذا أردت بديل أقل تفصيلاً وأكثر شمولا عن بدء الكون, فأنصح بكتاب البدايات: 14 مليار عام من تطور الكون للكاريزمي "نيل ديجريس تايسون" و"دونالد جولدسميث"
**
ترجمة السوري "محمد وائل بشير الأتاسي" ليست ممتازة, لكن لنقل إنها جيدة.
اختلفت بعض المصطلحات المذكورة عن تلك التي نسمعها عادة في مصر, فمثلا كرر استخدام لفظ "المجربين" بدلا من "التجريبيين" وهي الكلمة المتداولة حاليا, أهو تغيير الزمن حيث الكتاب ترجم 1986 ؟, أم تغيير قاموس المصطلحات من سوريا لمصر؟ لا أعرف
ذكر المترجم لإهماله ترجمة ملحق المراجع لعدم توافرها في بلادنا أثار حنقي, خصوصاً وأن المترجم له معرفة كبيرة جداً بالتخصص المترجم عنه, كما هو واضح من حواشي التوضيح اللي كتبها.
ترجع الأهمية, إلى أن الكتاب يتحدث بتفصيل وبترتيب تاريخي عن الحدث الأعظم المكتشف حديثاً حينها, وهو اكتشاف الأشعة الخلفية الكونية الميكرونية سنة 1965.
كيف تم الاكتشاف, ولماذا تأخر الاكتشاف ؟! وما هي التوقعات عن ما لم يكتشف؟!
ثم يتحدث بتفصيل كبير أيضاً عن تأثير دوبلر وتطبيقه على بدء الكون.
ومعظم الكتاب عن النقطتين السابقتين, وعن الجسيمات الدقيقة الأولية بما انها الاختصاص الأساسي للمؤلف, والذي جعله يستحق جائزة نوبل عن بحثه مع عبد السلام في القوة النووية الضعيفة.
إذا أردت بديل أقل تفصيلاً وأكثر شمولا عن بدء الكون, فأنصح بكتاب البدايات: 14 مليار عام من تطور الكون للكاريزمي "نيل ديجريس تايسون" و"دونالد جولدسميث"
**
ترجمة السوري "محمد وائل بشير الأتاسي" ليست ممتازة, لكن لنقل إنها جيدة.
اختلفت بعض المصطلحات المذكورة عن تلك التي نسمعها عادة في مصر, فمثلا كرر استخدام لفظ "المجربين" بدلا من "التجريبيين" وهي الكلمة المتداولة حاليا, أهو تغيير الزمن حيث الكتاب ترجم 1986 ؟, أم تغيير قاموس المصطلحات من سوريا لمصر؟ لا أعرف
ذكر المترجم لإهماله ترجمة ملحق المراجع لعدم توافرها في بلادنا أثار حنقي, خصوصاً وأن المترجم له معرفة كبيرة جداً بالتخصص المترجم عنه, كما هو واضح من حواشي التوضيح اللي كتبها.
October 22, 2017
Este es uno de los grandes clásicos de la literatura científico-divulgativa, escrito por el premio Nobel en física Steven Weinberg.
Steven es uno de los científicos más brillantes del siglo XX. Además de gran científico, es filósofo, lo cual suele quedar reflejado en sus obras, donde mezcla su conocimiento científico con reflexiones profundas sobre el sentido de la ciencia.
En esta obra hace una revisión al conocimiento que se tenía en 1970 sobre el origen del Universo. Sorprendentemente gran parte del libro mantiene vigencia, aunque hay obviamente partes que requerirían revisión bajo un prisma más moderno (en el grupo Date Un Voltio reviso los conceptos desactualizados del libro).
Es un libro que sorprende porque con unos desarrollos matemáticos muy sencillos (detallados al final de la obra) se pueden sacar conclusiones muy profundas sobre nuestro Universo, a partir de pocos datos y ecuaciones muy simples.
En global es un libro muy completo, con gran profundidad, muy bien escrito y altamente recomendable para aquellos amantes de la física que quieran adentrarse en los misterios del origen del Universo y ya tienen ciertos conocimientos de la materia.
Por cierto, tendrán una reseña más completa en mi canal de Youtube Date Un Vlog.
¡Bravo por Steven! Uno de mis autores favoritos.
Steven es uno de los científicos más brillantes del siglo XX. Además de gran científico, es filósofo, lo cual suele quedar reflejado en sus obras, donde mezcla su conocimiento científico con reflexiones profundas sobre el sentido de la ciencia.
En esta obra hace una revisión al conocimiento que se tenía en 1970 sobre el origen del Universo. Sorprendentemente gran parte del libro mantiene vigencia, aunque hay obviamente partes que requerirían revisión bajo un prisma más moderno (en el grupo Date Un Voltio reviso los conceptos desactualizados del libro).
Es un libro que sorprende porque con unos desarrollos matemáticos muy sencillos (detallados al final de la obra) se pueden sacar conclusiones muy profundas sobre nuestro Universo, a partir de pocos datos y ecuaciones muy simples.
En global es un libro muy completo, con gran profundidad, muy bien escrito y altamente recomendable para aquellos amantes de la física que quieran adentrarse en los misterios del origen del Universo y ya tienen ciertos conocimientos de la materia.
Por cierto, tendrán una reseña más completa en mi canal de Youtube Date Un Vlog.
¡Bravo por Steven! Uno de mis autores favoritos.
March 5, 2018
همانطور که از عنوان کتاب برمیآید سه دقیقه اول" دربارهی عالم آغازین است. زبان علمی این کتاب به گونهای انتخاب شده است که مخاطب عام نیز با چالشی نه چندان جدی، بتواند اطلاعات بسیار ارزشمند راجع به چگونگی شکلگیری این جهان به دست بیاورد.
اگر به کیهان شناسی علاقه مند هستید، اگر به فلسفهی حیات فکر میکنید، اگر احساس میکنید "باید" بدانید چه طور و در کجا امکان زندهگی یافتهاید این کتاب را به خودتان هدیه دهید و زندگیتان را به دو نیمهی پیش از مطالعه این کتاب و پس از آن تقسیم کنید.
پینوشت۱:بسیاری از کتابهای علمی، به خاطر عدم تسلط مترجم(اگرچه متخصص و اندیشمند) به زبان فارسی و عدم ویرایش، سختخوان هستند. اما این کتاب حقیقتا مناسب است.
پینوشت۲: مخاطب عام که از فیزیک و ریاضی و نجوم دور است در بخش هایی از کتاب سرگردان خواهد شد. اما شخصا پیشنهاد میکنم از خودتان مایوس نشوید و این کتاب را بخوانید. پردههایی کنار خواهد رفت که نگاهتان به زندگی را دستخوش تغییر میکند.
اگر به کیهان شناسی علاقه مند هستید، اگر به فلسفهی حیات فکر میکنید، اگر احساس میکنید "باید" بدانید چه طور و در کجا امکان زندهگی یافتهاید این کتاب را به خودتان هدیه دهید و زندگیتان را به دو نیمهی پیش از مطالعه این کتاب و پس از آن تقسیم کنید.
پینوشت۱:بسیاری از کتابهای علمی، به خاطر عدم تسلط مترجم(اگرچه متخصص و اندیشمند) به زبان فارسی و عدم ویرایش، سختخوان هستند. اما این کتاب حقیقتا مناسب است.
پینوشت۲: مخاطب عام که از فیزیک و ریاضی و نجوم دور است در بخش هایی از کتاب سرگردان خواهد شد. اما شخصا پیشنهاد میکنم از خودتان مایوس نشوید و این کتاب را بخوانید. پردههایی کنار خواهد رفت که نگاهتان به زندگی را دستخوش تغییر میکند.
June 5, 2013
Steven Weinberg, winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1979, has made a genuine attempt to explain the Big Bang to a general audience, and while I did come away from this with a better understanding of the narrative of the events, the process remains a mystery. At first I thought that my lack of enjoyment of this was down to my own astonishing poverty of knowledge in matters of physics and cosmology. However, having looked a little further into it, it seems I am not the only one who found this a rather difficult read. Even readers with a solid background in science have admitted that the book is too heavy and too esoteric for a lay reader. Many have also pointed out that physics and cosmology have advanced at such a rate since this was first published that much of the information contained in it is out of date. Many other reviewers agree that his prose style combined and heavy-hand with complicated mathematical and scientific formulae are his downfall.
August 16, 2018
به کسانی که عاشق نجوم و کیهان و فیزیک هستند،پیشنهاد میکنم حتما بخوونید
March 20, 2020
Hinduism: Lord Brahma Created the world
Christianity: (Bible, Genesis 1:1) In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth.
Islam: (Quran 7:54) Allah created the heavens and the earth, and all that is between them, in six days.
OK! let’s fuck that!!
Before you start reading this book, I request you to check the below two discoveries and why they are very important in the field of physics (especially in Cosmology, Astronomy).
1. Discovery of Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1978.
2. Observation of Gravitational waves using LIGO detector by Rainer Weiss, Barry C. Barish and Kip Throne shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2017.
In a way, they are the bedrocks to understand of the early universe and how a theory can be proved with observation, calculations and experiments. Religion which has been/will be in vegetative stage for eternity and convince the world with Creationism/Pseudo-scientific arguments and its humdrum and it never give a rational answer for the hard questions. That’s why Science is much needed for sake of curiosity and questioning attitude.
This book mesmerized me and I would tag it in ‘re-read’ category. Its not a typical pop-science work, so explanations are not in layman terms and it could be hard to comprehend unless you know some basics things in particle physics, cosmology, astrophysics etc. But yes, it is an enjoyable feast for a physics geek.
So, to come with review,
1. Universe is expanding (red-blue shift):
Yes! We know Energy, E= hc/λ (Einstein-Planck equations), i.e. inversely proportional to wavelength.
• If the galaxy is moving away, you will see red color (λ = 700nm) due to longer wavelength (stretched)
• If the galaxy is towards you will see blue color (λ = 450nm) due to shorter wavelength (contracted)
Doppler effect has nothing to do with color of stars. Colour depends on star’s surface temperature. In fact, if you check the spectrum of stars (Fraunhofer lines), every star composed of different chemical elements (but Hydrogen and Helium are in abundance in every start)
We owe to Vera Rubin, brilliant astronomer, contributed her works on Galaxy rotation rates which led to the existence of dark matter. Dark matter and Dark Energy is talk of the town in the present scientific society and there is a competition going on for Nobel prize.
2. Early Universe explained in 5 frames:
Steven Weinberg explained in such a lucid flow with 5 frames about what happened after Big bang:
(Here t= time in sec; T= temperature of the universe in Kelvin)
Frame 1: At t=0s, T= 10^11 deg K,
There were no atoms at all. Neutrons, protons, electrons, positrons are colliding each other at this very high temperature and it is filled with undifferentiated soup of matter and radiation. The Universe is so dense.
Frame 2: At t=0.11s, T= 3 X 10^10 deg K
Nothing has changed qualitatively, universe is still dominated with the neutron, proton, electron, positron, neutrino and anti neutrinos and all in thermal equilibrium. With there is fall in temperature, heavier neutrons will turn into protons than vice versa (38% neutron; 62% proton)
Frame 3: At t=1.09s, T= 10^10 deg K
Neutrinos are no longer in equilibrium with neutrons, electrons and positrons, they are free particles now. Its still too hot for neutrons and protons to be bound into atomic nuclei. But decreasing temperature now allows the proton-neutron balance shift to 24% neutrons and 76% protons.
Frame 4: At t=13.82s, T= 3 X 10^9 deg K
Now we are below the threshold temperature for electrons and positrons, they are beginning rapidly to disappear as major constituents of the universe. It is cool enough to form stable nuclei like Helium (He4), but it doesn’t happen immediately. Before Helium forms, it undergoes series of fast two-particle reactions. i.e. a proton and neutron form a nucleus of heavy hydrogen (Deuterium) with extra energy and momentum carried away by photon. This deuterium nucleus then collides with a proton or neutron to form He3 (2 protons and 1 neutron) or Tritium (2 neutrons and 1 proton). Then He3 or Tritium collides with neutron or proton respectively to form Helium (He4). But production of Deuterium is the first step. Now the balance is 17% neutrons and 84% protons. Neutrons are still being converted into protons.
Frame 5: At t=182s, T= 10^9 deg K
Now temperature is about 70 times hotter than center of the sun. Since the first frame, 3 minutes and 2 sec have elapsed. The electrons, positrons have disappeared, and the chief constituents of the universe are now photons, neutrinos and anti-neutrinos.
The universe is now cooled enough for tritium and He3 as well as ordinary helium nuclei to hold together. The proton-neutron balance is now 14% neutrons and 84% protons.
A little later, a dramatic event occurs: The temperature drops to the point at which deuterium nuclei can hold together. As soon as the temperature reaches the point where deuterium can form, almost all the remaining neutrons are immediately cooked into helium nuclei.
So, this is the bottom line of this book. There are many important stuffs can be explained in detail. But I like to highlight few important terms from glossary that may provoke your interest to learn in depth.
1. Stefan - Boltzmann Law
2. Einstein and Cosmological constant
3. Critical density and Critical temperature
4. Feynman diagrams (QED - Quantum Electro dynamics)
5. Gauge theories
6. General theory of Relativity and Gravitational waves
7. Hubble’s Law
8. Pauli’s exclusion principle
9. Nucleosynthesis and Recombination
10. Steady state theory
Christianity: (Bible, Genesis 1:1) In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth.
Islam: (Quran 7:54) Allah created the heavens and the earth, and all that is between them, in six days.
OK! let’s fuck that!!
Before you start reading this book, I request you to check the below two discoveries and why they are very important in the field of physics (especially in Cosmology, Astronomy).
1. Discovery of Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1978.
2. Observation of Gravitational waves using LIGO detector by Rainer Weiss, Barry C. Barish and Kip Throne shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2017.
In a way, they are the bedrocks to understand of the early universe and how a theory can be proved with observation, calculations and experiments. Religion which has been/will be in vegetative stage for eternity and convince the world with Creationism/Pseudo-scientific arguments and its humdrum and it never give a rational answer for the hard questions. That’s why Science is much needed for sake of curiosity and questioning attitude.
This book mesmerized me and I would tag it in ‘re-read’ category. Its not a typical pop-science work, so explanations are not in layman terms and it could be hard to comprehend unless you know some basics things in particle physics, cosmology, astrophysics etc. But yes, it is an enjoyable feast for a physics geek.
So, to come with review,
1. Universe is expanding (red-blue shift):
Yes! We know Energy, E= hc/λ (Einstein-Planck equations), i.e. inversely proportional to wavelength.
• If the galaxy is moving away, you will see red color (λ = 700nm) due to longer wavelength (stretched)
• If the galaxy is towards you will see blue color (λ = 450nm) due to shorter wavelength (contracted)
Doppler effect has nothing to do with color of stars. Colour depends on star’s surface temperature. In fact, if you check the spectrum of stars (Fraunhofer lines), every star composed of different chemical elements (but Hydrogen and Helium are in abundance in every start)
We owe to Vera Rubin, brilliant astronomer, contributed her works on Galaxy rotation rates which led to the existence of dark matter. Dark matter and Dark Energy is talk of the town in the present scientific society and there is a competition going on for Nobel prize.
2. Early Universe explained in 5 frames:
Steven Weinberg explained in such a lucid flow with 5 frames about what happened after Big bang:
(Here t= time in sec; T= temperature of the universe in Kelvin)
Frame 1: At t=0s, T= 10^11 deg K,
There were no atoms at all. Neutrons, protons, electrons, positrons are colliding each other at this very high temperature and it is filled with undifferentiated soup of matter and radiation. The Universe is so dense.
Frame 2: At t=0.11s, T= 3 X 10^10 deg K
Nothing has changed qualitatively, universe is still dominated with the neutron, proton, electron, positron, neutrino and anti neutrinos and all in thermal equilibrium. With there is fall in temperature, heavier neutrons will turn into protons than vice versa (38% neutron; 62% proton)
Frame 3: At t=1.09s, T= 10^10 deg K
Neutrinos are no longer in equilibrium with neutrons, electrons and positrons, they are free particles now. Its still too hot for neutrons and protons to be bound into atomic nuclei. But decreasing temperature now allows the proton-neutron balance shift to 24% neutrons and 76% protons.
Frame 4: At t=13.82s, T= 3 X 10^9 deg K
Now we are below the threshold temperature for electrons and positrons, they are beginning rapidly to disappear as major constituents of the universe. It is cool enough to form stable nuclei like Helium (He4), but it doesn’t happen immediately. Before Helium forms, it undergoes series of fast two-particle reactions. i.e. a proton and neutron form a nucleus of heavy hydrogen (Deuterium) with extra energy and momentum carried away by photon. This deuterium nucleus then collides with a proton or neutron to form He3 (2 protons and 1 neutron) or Tritium (2 neutrons and 1 proton). Then He3 or Tritium collides with neutron or proton respectively to form Helium (He4). But production of Deuterium is the first step. Now the balance is 17% neutrons and 84% protons. Neutrons are still being converted into protons.
Frame 5: At t=182s, T= 10^9 deg K
Now temperature is about 70 times hotter than center of the sun. Since the first frame, 3 minutes and 2 sec have elapsed. The electrons, positrons have disappeared, and the chief constituents of the universe are now photons, neutrinos and anti-neutrinos.
The universe is now cooled enough for tritium and He3 as well as ordinary helium nuclei to hold together. The proton-neutron balance is now 14% neutrons and 84% protons.
A little later, a dramatic event occurs: The temperature drops to the point at which deuterium nuclei can hold together. As soon as the temperature reaches the point where deuterium can form, almost all the remaining neutrons are immediately cooked into helium nuclei.
So, this is the bottom line of this book. There are many important stuffs can be explained in detail. But I like to highlight few important terms from glossary that may provoke your interest to learn in depth.
1. Stefan - Boltzmann Law
2. Einstein and Cosmological constant
3. Critical density and Critical temperature
4. Feynman diagrams (QED - Quantum Electro dynamics)
5. Gauge theories
6. General theory of Relativity and Gravitational waves
7. Hubble’s Law
8. Pauli’s exclusion principle
9. Nucleosynthesis and Recombination
10. Steady state theory
September 17, 2018
A good book, but I wonder how it was written for general readers with these too much details 🤔
September 16, 2015
اكبر دليل ع ان الكتاب جميل هو ان انا قدرت اخلصه ف 5 ايام اتهيالي , انا فاكرة لما قرأت كتاب قبل كده عن فيزياء الفلك خد مني شهرين لحد ما خلصته تقريبا .
المهم ان الكتاب فعلا مفيد جدا , كان فيه حاجات انا اول مرة اعرفها , بس معظمه كان بيشرح النظريات او المصطلحات الي انا عرفاها , ابتدا من اول حاجه ف بداية الكون وخدها بالتدريج لحد اخر ثالث دقيقة وكام ثانية زي ما قال :D
الكلام مش صعب ف فهمه ع قد صعوبته ف التركيز وانك تجمع الكلام مع بعضه وتربطه وتفهمه .
فيه اجزاء فيه مليانه تفاصيل كتير انا ع نفسي مهتمتش بيها .
انصح الي بيحب الفلك انه يقرأه , ومنصحش بالي مش مهتم بالفلك بأنه يقرأه :D
المهم ان الكتاب فعلا مفيد جدا , كان فيه حاجات انا اول مرة اعرفها , بس معظمه كان بيشرح النظريات او المصطلحات الي انا عرفاها , ابتدا من اول حاجه ف بداية الكون وخدها بالتدريج لحد اخر ثالث دقيقة وكام ثانية زي ما قال :D
الكلام مش صعب ف فهمه ع قد صعوبته ف التركيز وانك تجمع الكلام مع بعضه وتربطه وتفهمه .
فيه اجزاء فيه مليانه تفاصيل كتير انا ع نفسي مهتمتش بيها .
انصح الي بيحب الفلك انه يقرأه , ومنصحش بالي مش مهتم بالفلك بأنه يقرأه :D
February 2, 2018
This is my second time reading this. Still magical.
February 9, 2016
A wonderful introduction to the origin of the universe and the Big Bang Theory. Written by Nobel Prize Winner Steven Weinberg, this book is challenging for a significant part, but is not beyond the reach of a general reader. As Weinberg says in his introduction we have to puzzle through the detailed arguments to understand it well and use that to make up our mind. If you don't have the patience for that and want to read it like a regular book, still the book has a lot to offer. One of the things that I loved about the book was that Weinberg, after a particular long chapter in which he describes how things were at the beginning of time, says that this all may or may not be true, but this is what our understanding predicts right now. But he also acknowledges the problems and issues involved. I love scientists who acknowledge the limitations of science while also confidently describing existing theories which are considered valid. As I read the book, I fell in love with Steven Weinberg more and more. And the last two passages of the book were probably its finest. Highly recommended.
March 10, 2016
سمعت عن هذا الكتاب ﻷول مرة من خلال إحدى محاضرات عدنان إبراهيم وبما أن المؤلف من الحائزين على جائزة نوبل في الفيزياء وعنوان كتابه جذاب فقد عزمت على قراءاه منذ ذلك الحين وأخيرًا عثرت على نسخة مسموعة منه فلم أؤخر الاستماع له بالرغم أنه من المفترض بي التركيز على الدراسة هذه الأيام حيث لدي اختبار نهائي في الطب بعد ثلاثة أسابيع تقريبا.
تم تأليف هذا الكتاب عام 1977 ولذلك فبعض من العلومات فيه قديمة بعض الشيء والكتاب يحتوي على كثير من الأرقام والأمور التقنية صعبة الفهم على القارئ العادي.
مع ذلك فإن ستيفن واينبيرغ يقوم بعمل رائع من خلال سرده لتاريخ الاكتشافات العلمية وخاصة اشعاع الخلفية الكوني والنموذج القياسي أو المعياري (Standard model) وطبعاً يتطرق لاحداث الثلاث دقائق وأربعين ثانية من تاريخ الكون.
تم تأليف هذا الكتاب عام 1977 ولذلك فبعض من العلومات فيه قديمة بعض الشيء والكتاب يحتوي على كثير من الأرقام والأمور التقنية صعبة الفهم على القارئ العادي.
مع ذلك فإن ستيفن واينبيرغ يقوم بعمل رائع من خلال سرده لتاريخ الاكتشافات العلمية وخاصة اشعاع الخلفية الكوني والنموذج القياسي أو المعياري (Standard model) وطبعاً يتطرق لاحداث الثلاث دقائق وأربعين ثانية من تاريخ الكون.
May 27, 2024
I think this is a fascinating book! That’s the case from three points of view. 1. What science, in this case about the time and circumstances the universe at its extremely young age, has achieved, how much knowledge one has learnt, is utterly remarkable on itself. 2. There is an intimate connection between the smallest and the largest in the universe. 3. The author, an authority in the field of theoretical physics, speaks freely about uncertainties.
1. I will not give you a synopsis of the book, don’t expect me to do that; if you are interested, you are far better off with author Steven Weinberg than me, needless to say.
2. An important part of the story of the universe consists of explaining the elementary particles it consists of, like electrons, protons, neutrons, neutrino’s, their counterparts and so on. Because it appears that the forces that work on their very small scale, are in essence the same forces which form the construction and development of the universe as a whole.
3. As noted in (the Dutch version of) the description of this book, there have been different theories about the beginning and the status quo of the universe: the ‘steady state’ theory and that of the so called ‘big bang’. During Weinberg’s story, the dynamic stream of facts that he delivers also has unknown gaps in the theories and technological impossibilities – at this time – of measuring mathematical findings. A good thing in his description is that he does not speculate, at least he doesn’t draw conclusions from uncertainties. He mentions possibilities, scenario’s, some contradictory elements which cannot be put together smoothly. Yet many physicists, astronomers, cosmologists not only dream of one comprehensive theory or rather model that explains it all, but keep on working like Weinberg himself on the unification of the weak force and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles.
Although much of the subject matter of this book for me approaches the proverbial rocket science, Weinberg has guided me pretty clearly through all of those early three minutes of the universe’s existence and much more. Wow for contence, Wow for the presentation! JM
1. I will not give you a synopsis of the book, don’t expect me to do that; if you are interested, you are far better off with author Steven Weinberg than me, needless to say.
2. An important part of the story of the universe consists of explaining the elementary particles it consists of, like electrons, protons, neutrons, neutrino’s, their counterparts and so on. Because it appears that the forces that work on their very small scale, are in essence the same forces which form the construction and development of the universe as a whole.
3. As noted in (the Dutch version of) the description of this book, there have been different theories about the beginning and the status quo of the universe: the ‘steady state’ theory and that of the so called ‘big bang’. During Weinberg’s story, the dynamic stream of facts that he delivers also has unknown gaps in the theories and technological impossibilities – at this time – of measuring mathematical findings. A good thing in his description is that he does not speculate, at least he doesn’t draw conclusions from uncertainties. He mentions possibilities, scenario’s, some contradictory elements which cannot be put together smoothly. Yet many physicists, astronomers, cosmologists not only dream of one comprehensive theory or rather model that explains it all, but keep on working like Weinberg himself on the unification of the weak force and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles.
Although much of the subject matter of this book for me approaches the proverbial rocket science, Weinberg has guided me pretty clearly through all of those early three minutes of the universe’s existence and much more. Wow for contence, Wow for the presentation! JM
September 26, 2020
نویسنده این کتاب برندهی جایزه نوبل فیزیک در زمینه ذرات بنیادی ،استیون واینبرگ، است.
از نظر علمی کتاب رسالت خود را تمام و کمال انجام میدهد و به خواننده دیدگاهی جامع از جهان هستی و اخترشناسی مدرن ارائه میدهد و با وجود اینکه بعضی از فصل ها به راحتی درک نمیشدند از دید من خواننده ای که کمی به فیزیک علاقه داشته باشد و مختصر اطلاعاتی راجع به آن ،کتاب را زمین نمیگذارد.
بدیهی است که خوانندهای که علاقه و اطلاعاتی راجع به فیزیک نداشته باشد سردرگم میشود ولی در این کتاب جایی برای لذت بردن آن ها نیز در نظر گرفته شده.
در کل بنظرم عالی بود برای کسانی که به دنبال اطلاعات اخترفیزیکی و نجومی هستند و صددرصد پیشنهاد میکنم🪐
از نظر علمی کتاب رسالت خود را تمام و کمال انجام میدهد و به خواننده دیدگاهی جامع از جهان هستی و اخترشناسی مدرن ارائه میدهد و با وجود اینکه بعضی از فصل ها به راحتی درک نمیشدند از دید من خواننده ای که کمی به فیزیک علاقه داشته باشد و مختصر اطلاعاتی راجع به آن ،کتاب را زمین نمیگذارد.
بدیهی است که خوانندهای که علاقه و اطلاعاتی راجع به فیزیک نداشته باشد سردرگم میشود ولی در این کتاب جایی برای لذت بردن آن ها نیز در نظر گرفته شده.
در کل بنظرم عالی بود برای کسانی که به دنبال اطلاعات اخترفیزیکی و نجومی هستند و صددرصد پیشنهاد میکنم🪐
January 11, 2025
After a third read of this book (late 2024), I had a few more observations on this book. I put these at the bottom of this review.
The first run through on this book was hard. Technical, detailed, dry. Second run through was better - started to absorb more, though, as before, the writing was largely over my head. A few highlights, and comments and questions:
From the preface, Weinberg, reflecting on whether or not to write this book, says: "What could be more interesting than the problem of Genesis? Also, it is in the early universe, especially the first hundredth of a second, that the problems of the theory of elementary particles come together with the problems of cosmology." The book spends a good amount of time on this conversion of energy to matter and matter to energy, and I feel I made some headway in understanding this after my second review.
Weinberg writes that "In the beginning there was an explosion. Not an explosion like those familiar on earth, starting from a definite center and spreading out to engulf more and more of the circumambient air, but an explosion which occurred simultaneously everywhere, filling all space from the beginning, with every particle of matter rushing apart from every other particle. "'All space,' in this context may mean either all of an infinite universe, or all of a finite universe which curves back on itself like the surface of a sphere. Neither possibility is easy to comprehend, but this will not get in our way; it matters hardly at all in the early universe whether space is finite or infinite." I am not sure what "all space," "infinite," or "finite" means here. Is it pre-existing (infinite?) or is it created (finite?)? If not a definite center, what then is a singularity (a term Weinberg does not use in this book)?
The first particles of mass/matter "were continually being created out of pure energy," he writes. This age of "pure radiation" began at the end of the "first few minutes," but this was preceded by mass/matter that created energy (the "real beginning" as "a state of infinite temperature and density, which occurred at o.o108 seconds'). But that matter was a "kind very different from that of which our present universe is composed," and when the then universe approached "a moment of infinite density." Was that moment pure energy, pure matter, or pure energy-matter? To these sorts of questions Weinberg says that "this leaves us unsatisfied. We naturally want to know what there was before this moment, before the universe began to expand and cool."
Regarding a "common misconception about the expanding universe," Weinberg says that "the galaxies are not rushing apart because of some mysterious force that is pushing them apart....Rather, the galaxies are moving apart because they were thrown apart by some sort of explosion in the past." What does this statement mean regarding a repelling, repulsive dark energy force? Weinberg also discusses "escape velocities" for galaxies (per Hubble's observation), suggesting the possibility of an infinite universe where galaxies escape the effects of gravitation and continue outward forever (as opposed to a finite universe where gravitational contraction brings these galaxies back into the corral).
Of gravitational waves, Weinberg writes that "if some ill-advised giant were to wiggle the sun back and forth, we on earth would not feel the effect for eight minutes, the time required for a [gravitational] wave to travel at the speed of light from the sun to the earth."
I like Weinberg's definition of "rest energy," which is "the energy that would be released if all the mass of the particle were converted into energy." In his glossary, he writes that "material particles approach the speed of light when their energies are very large compared to the rest energy mc squared in their mass." Particles of zero mass "such as photons, neutrinos, or gravitons, travel at the speed of light."
Weinberg closes with this, a nice bookend complement to his beginning: "The more the universe seems comprehensively, the more it also seems pointless....The effort to understand the universe is one of the very few things that lifts human life a little above the level of farce, and gives it some of the grace of tragedy." I thought this was a solid observation, eloquently written, surprisingly, given how thick the rest of the book was.
Third Review (2024)
Weinberg says that the big bang was not an explosion into space, but was the creator of space. This begs the question of what surrounded the big bang before space was created?
He states that elementary particles (electrons, positrons, neutrons, protons) and light were all created by “pure energy.” What is “pure energy?” He doesn’t say, but this implies that energy is primary as matter originates from “pure energy.”
The big bang hypothesis comes, theoretically, from the reversing of receding galaxies so that time and space collapses to a big bang initiating point. Does the inverse square law play a role here? The closer to the cosmic gravitational center, speed, and time and space, would be less as it would be bound by gravity. Similarly, the further out from the gravitational center, would inertial motion from the big bang be freer of gravitational effects, thus allowing for more speed without gravitational drag? Might this have a role to play in the speed of cosmic phenomena (galaxies, light)? Weinberg says nothing about the inverse square law or inertial motion in this context (and neither is in the glossary).
Surprisingly for cosmology, Weinberg states that Einstein’s theory of general relativity is “less important than was at first thought.” As that theory is about non-Euclidean geometry, it is about curvature, not straight lines in space and straight motion. And isn’t curvature the balance point between the outward (inertial) motion from a big bang (or supernova) event and the movement of energy and matter, backward, toward high density masses (the gravitational center)?
Regarding open and closed scenarios for the universe, Weinberg discusses the role of “critical density” (greater than 1 is open; lesser than 1 is closed). How does one know critical density if cosmologists have no idea of what dark energy or dark matter is - other than an amount that is said to be (theoretically) necessary to explain the missing mass question (dark matter) and the repulsive force (dark energy) that accounts for the fast receding galaxies? Might there not be alternative (non-paradigmatic) explanations, such as the role of the inverse square law (as related to dark matter) and inertial movement per Newton’s first law (as related to dark energy) in which energy-matter’s natural state is straight-line motion?
Weinberg states that expansion occurs from the big bang (“the effect of velocities left over from “past explosions”), which suggests that it is the big bang that creates inertial motion (per Newton’s first law of motion) that creates the expansion, but he does not connect this to the dark energy mystery (which is said to be repulsive).
Weinberg and others diagram the cosmic expansion from the big bang in a linear way, whereas for an explosion, the outward movement is from a center point into all directions (straight lines emanate from a curvature origin). If this is the case, would that mean that under cosmic curvature, all straight-line inertial motion returns back to its starting point (not go out and back as in a contraction scenario, depicted as linear, straight line motion, but to continue to go around the curvature to its beginning point, i.e. the cosmic gravitational center)?
Weinberg on galactic formation: “The theory of formation of galaxies is one of the great outstanding problems of astrophysics, a problem that seems far from a solution.” Might Einstein be relevant: If matter-energy flows inward toward a gravitational center, are the inward spiraling motions of gas and dust a way of seeing Einstein’s theory in “real time” so to say? Does Hubble's near 100 year old classification scheme hamper attempts to see the various galactic forms as different aspects of Einstein's theory?
The first run through on this book was hard. Technical, detailed, dry. Second run through was better - started to absorb more, though, as before, the writing was largely over my head. A few highlights, and comments and questions:
From the preface, Weinberg, reflecting on whether or not to write this book, says: "What could be more interesting than the problem of Genesis? Also, it is in the early universe, especially the first hundredth of a second, that the problems of the theory of elementary particles come together with the problems of cosmology." The book spends a good amount of time on this conversion of energy to matter and matter to energy, and I feel I made some headway in understanding this after my second review.
Weinberg writes that "In the beginning there was an explosion. Not an explosion like those familiar on earth, starting from a definite center and spreading out to engulf more and more of the circumambient air, but an explosion which occurred simultaneously everywhere, filling all space from the beginning, with every particle of matter rushing apart from every other particle. "'All space,' in this context may mean either all of an infinite universe, or all of a finite universe which curves back on itself like the surface of a sphere. Neither possibility is easy to comprehend, but this will not get in our way; it matters hardly at all in the early universe whether space is finite or infinite." I am not sure what "all space," "infinite," or "finite" means here. Is it pre-existing (infinite?) or is it created (finite?)? If not a definite center, what then is a singularity (a term Weinberg does not use in this book)?
The first particles of mass/matter "were continually being created out of pure energy," he writes. This age of "pure radiation" began at the end of the "first few minutes," but this was preceded by mass/matter that created energy (the "real beginning" as "a state of infinite temperature and density, which occurred at o.o108 seconds'). But that matter was a "kind very different from that of which our present universe is composed," and when the then universe approached "a moment of infinite density." Was that moment pure energy, pure matter, or pure energy-matter? To these sorts of questions Weinberg says that "this leaves us unsatisfied. We naturally want to know what there was before this moment, before the universe began to expand and cool."
Regarding a "common misconception about the expanding universe," Weinberg says that "the galaxies are not rushing apart because of some mysterious force that is pushing them apart....Rather, the galaxies are moving apart because they were thrown apart by some sort of explosion in the past." What does this statement mean regarding a repelling, repulsive dark energy force? Weinberg also discusses "escape velocities" for galaxies (per Hubble's observation), suggesting the possibility of an infinite universe where galaxies escape the effects of gravitation and continue outward forever (as opposed to a finite universe where gravitational contraction brings these galaxies back into the corral).
Of gravitational waves, Weinberg writes that "if some ill-advised giant were to wiggle the sun back and forth, we on earth would not feel the effect for eight minutes, the time required for a [gravitational] wave to travel at the speed of light from the sun to the earth."
I like Weinberg's definition of "rest energy," which is "the energy that would be released if all the mass of the particle were converted into energy." In his glossary, he writes that "material particles approach the speed of light when their energies are very large compared to the rest energy mc squared in their mass." Particles of zero mass "such as photons, neutrinos, or gravitons, travel at the speed of light."
Weinberg closes with this, a nice bookend complement to his beginning: "The more the universe seems comprehensively, the more it also seems pointless....The effort to understand the universe is one of the very few things that lifts human life a little above the level of farce, and gives it some of the grace of tragedy." I thought this was a solid observation, eloquently written, surprisingly, given how thick the rest of the book was.
Third Review (2024)
Weinberg says that the big bang was not an explosion into space, but was the creator of space. This begs the question of what surrounded the big bang before space was created?
He states that elementary particles (electrons, positrons, neutrons, protons) and light were all created by “pure energy.” What is “pure energy?” He doesn’t say, but this implies that energy is primary as matter originates from “pure energy.”
The big bang hypothesis comes, theoretically, from the reversing of receding galaxies so that time and space collapses to a big bang initiating point. Does the inverse square law play a role here? The closer to the cosmic gravitational center, speed, and time and space, would be less as it would be bound by gravity. Similarly, the further out from the gravitational center, would inertial motion from the big bang be freer of gravitational effects, thus allowing for more speed without gravitational drag? Might this have a role to play in the speed of cosmic phenomena (galaxies, light)? Weinberg says nothing about the inverse square law or inertial motion in this context (and neither is in the glossary).
Surprisingly for cosmology, Weinberg states that Einstein’s theory of general relativity is “less important than was at first thought.” As that theory is about non-Euclidean geometry, it is about curvature, not straight lines in space and straight motion. And isn’t curvature the balance point between the outward (inertial) motion from a big bang (or supernova) event and the movement of energy and matter, backward, toward high density masses (the gravitational center)?
Regarding open and closed scenarios for the universe, Weinberg discusses the role of “critical density” (greater than 1 is open; lesser than 1 is closed). How does one know critical density if cosmologists have no idea of what dark energy or dark matter is - other than an amount that is said to be (theoretically) necessary to explain the missing mass question (dark matter) and the repulsive force (dark energy) that accounts for the fast receding galaxies? Might there not be alternative (non-paradigmatic) explanations, such as the role of the inverse square law (as related to dark matter) and inertial movement per Newton’s first law (as related to dark energy) in which energy-matter’s natural state is straight-line motion?
Weinberg states that expansion occurs from the big bang (“the effect of velocities left over from “past explosions”), which suggests that it is the big bang that creates inertial motion (per Newton’s first law of motion) that creates the expansion, but he does not connect this to the dark energy mystery (which is said to be repulsive).
Weinberg and others diagram the cosmic expansion from the big bang in a linear way, whereas for an explosion, the outward movement is from a center point into all directions (straight lines emanate from a curvature origin). If this is the case, would that mean that under cosmic curvature, all straight-line inertial motion returns back to its starting point (not go out and back as in a contraction scenario, depicted as linear, straight line motion, but to continue to go around the curvature to its beginning point, i.e. the cosmic gravitational center)?
Weinberg on galactic formation: “The theory of formation of galaxies is one of the great outstanding problems of astrophysics, a problem that seems far from a solution.” Might Einstein be relevant: If matter-energy flows inward toward a gravitational center, are the inward spiraling motions of gas and dust a way of seeing Einstein’s theory in “real time” so to say? Does Hubble's near 100 year old classification scheme hamper attempts to see the various galactic forms as different aspects of Einstein's theory?
Read
January 19, 2022
".... Boston'a eve gidiş için tam Wyoming eyaleti üzerinde 10.000 metre yükseklikte uçan bir uçakta bulunuyordum.
Aşağıda Dünya, çok yumuşak ve rahat görünüyordu: Orada burada tüy gibi yumuşacık bulutlar, gün batarken pembeye dönen kar örtüsü, bir kasabadan diğerine kırlar boyunca uzanan dümdüz yollar... Tüm bunların karşı çıkılması imkansız düşman bir evrenin sadece ufak bir parçası olduğunun ayırdına varmak çok zordur. İşte bu evrenin, anlatılamaz derecede garip bir ilk durumdan evrimleştiğini ve gelecekte sınırsız ölçüde soğuk ya da dayanılmaz ölçüde sıcak bir yok olmayla yüz yüze geleceğini kavramak daha da zordur." (s.166)
Önce baskıdan başlayalım. 1977'de çıkan bu kitap dilimize ilk defa Zekeriya Aydın ve Zeki Aslan'ın çevirileriyle 1995 yılında Tübitak tarafından kazandırıldı. O zamanlar Tübitak gerçekten bilimsel kitaplar basıyordu ve muazzam eserleri dilimize kazandırıyordu. Bu kitap daha sonra 2013 yılında Kırmızı Kedi Yayınları tarafından yine aynı çevirmenlerin çevirisiyle güncellenerek yeniden basıldı.
1979 Nobel Fizik Ödüllü yazar Weindberg'in evrenin ilk üç dakikasında neler olduğuna odaklanarak yazdığı bu kitap ne yazık ki sıradan, acemi okuru aşacak kadar fazla ön bilgiyle okuma gerektiriyor. Bu nedenle çoğu bölümünü anlayamadığımı, matematiksel ve fiziksel terimlerin karşısında çaresiz kaldığımı itiraf etmeliyim. Lakin kitabı okurken hep aynı şiir vardı zihnimde, paylaşayım sizlerle:
"Bu dünya soğuyacak,
yıldızların arasında bir yıldız,
hem de en ufacıklarından,
mavi kadifede bir yaldız zerresi yani,
yani bu koskocaman dünyamız.
Bu dünya soğuyacak günün birinde,
hatta bir buz yığını
yahut ölü bir bulut gibi de değil,
boş bir ceviz gibi yuvarlanacak
zifiri karanlıkta uçsuz bucaksız.
Şimdiden çekilecek acısı bunun,
duyulacak mahzunluğu şimdiden.
Böylesine sevilecek bu dünya
"Yaşadım" diyebilmen için... " " (Nazım Hikmet - Yaşamaya Dair)
Aşağıda Dünya, çok yumuşak ve rahat görünüyordu: Orada burada tüy gibi yumuşacık bulutlar, gün batarken pembeye dönen kar örtüsü, bir kasabadan diğerine kırlar boyunca uzanan dümdüz yollar... Tüm bunların karşı çıkılması imkansız düşman bir evrenin sadece ufak bir parçası olduğunun ayırdına varmak çok zordur. İşte bu evrenin, anlatılamaz derecede garip bir ilk durumdan evrimleştiğini ve gelecekte sınırsız ölçüde soğuk ya da dayanılmaz ölçüde sıcak bir yok olmayla yüz yüze geleceğini kavramak daha da zordur." (s.166)
Önce baskıdan başlayalım. 1977'de çıkan bu kitap dilimize ilk defa Zekeriya Aydın ve Zeki Aslan'ın çevirileriyle 1995 yılında Tübitak tarafından kazandırıldı. O zamanlar Tübitak gerçekten bilimsel kitaplar basıyordu ve muazzam eserleri dilimize kazandırıyordu. Bu kitap daha sonra 2013 yılında Kırmızı Kedi Yayınları tarafından yine aynı çevirmenlerin çevirisiyle güncellenerek yeniden basıldı.
1979 Nobel Fizik Ödüllü yazar Weindberg'in evrenin ilk üç dakikasında neler olduğuna odaklanarak yazdığı bu kitap ne yazık ki sıradan, acemi okuru aşacak kadar fazla ön bilgiyle okuma gerektiriyor. Bu nedenle çoğu bölümünü anlayamadığımı, matematiksel ve fiziksel terimlerin karşısında çaresiz kaldığımı itiraf etmeliyim. Lakin kitabı okurken hep aynı şiir vardı zihnimde, paylaşayım sizlerle:
"Bu dünya soğuyacak,
yıldızların arasında bir yıldız,
hem de en ufacıklarından,
mavi kadifede bir yaldız zerresi yani,
yani bu koskocaman dünyamız.
Bu dünya soğuyacak günün birinde,
hatta bir buz yığını
yahut ölü bir bulut gibi de değil,
boş bir ceviz gibi yuvarlanacak
zifiri karanlıkta uçsuz bucaksız.
Şimdiden çekilecek acısı bunun,
duyulacak mahzunluğu şimdiden.
Böylesine sevilecek bu dünya
"Yaşadım" diyebilmen için... " " (Nazım Hikmet - Yaşamaya Dair)
August 8, 2020
written by the Nobel prize winner Steven Weinberg. This book is gold standard for science writing. Accurate and precise descriptions and explanations of astronomical phenomena concerning the early universe, without the hazy (lazy) metaphors, tired facsimiled tropes and stories, personal gossip, and misleading verbal pictures that populate a tiring lot of science writing and imbue them with a spirit of being dismissible entertainment. I think, with this book, the reader will actually learn stuff to the same sterling level of quality that a student will receive from their university lectures; that is how much Dr. Weinberg respects his reader. In fact, he explicitly telegraphs this respect in his preface; he communicates that he writes this ffor an intelligent lawyer, animated by the imagined scenario that he is the intended reader for the lawyer's own book on the legal field that he hopes would reach a curious audience. Thus, a mutual respect is present and the author's desire to enhance the reader's satisfaction and cognition is conspicuously evident. The result is a pedagogical book par excellence on the nature of the early universe, even without equations.
August 14, 2020
" السعي إلى رضا عن فهم الكون هو من الأشياء النادرة التي تسمو بالإنسان فوق مستوى الترهات، وتنعم عليه بشيء من شرف المشاركة في هذه المسرحية المأساوية "
لطالما كانت مسألة خلق الكون تثير فضول العقل البشري الذي ما فتئ يختلق الأساطير عنها في القديم، ليستكمل العقل الحديث بحثه وتقليبه لهذه المسألة على كل جوانبها مع بدايات الثورة العلمية ووجود الأسس النظرية لوضع تاريخ نشوء الكون
يتوجه عالِم الفيزياء الأمريكي ستيفن وينبرغ والحائز على جائزة نوبل للفيزياء عام 1979 في كتابه هذا إلى القارئ الذي يرغب في الدخول في تفاصيل البراهين دون أن يكون رياضياً أو فيزيائياً ، غير أن هذا لا يعني أنه حاول تأليف كتاب سهل فقراءته تحتاج إلى القليل من المعارف السابقة عن الفيزياء و الفلك، مضيفاً معجماً في نهاية عمله هذا يضم تعاريف الكلمات الفيزيائية والفلكية لتشكل قاعدة كافية لمساعدة القارئ
يبدأ وينبرغ الفصل الأول بالحديث عن النظرية القياسية الحديثة والتي تفوق نظرية الانفجار العظيم بالحبكة والوصف الأكثر دقة حول محتوى الكون، مستبدلة لما سبقها من نظريات وخاصة النظرية الاستقرارية الأكثر إغراءً من الناحية الفلسفية والتي تقول " كان الكون دائماً كما هو الآن بالضبط " ، ملخصاً قصة الكون كما تعرضها هذه النظرية في عرض لا يتعدى لمحة قصيرة و شاملة، ليبني باقي فصول الكتاب على دعائم هذه اللمحة
يستكمل في الفصل الثاني حديثه عن تأثير دوبلر في الموجات الصوتية و الضوئية ، هذه التقنية التي تحتفظ بدقتها مهما كان بعد المنبع الضوئي والتي بوساطتها تم اكتشاف عملية توسع الكون الذي يتفق مع أبسط صورة يمكن أن نتخيلها عن حركة المادة في كون هو في حالة انفجار
أمّا من أجل فهم ما حدث في الدقائق الثلاث الأولى بتفصيل أكثر، يلجأ وينبرغ إلى طريقة العرض السينمائي متأملين كقراء توسع الكون وابتراده و تحضيره لكوننا الحالي، متصفحين سويات المشهد واحدة بعد الأخرى، محاولاً بشكل مُجد الاقتراب من عصر ما زال مغلفاً بالغموض
في الفصول الأخيرة يستقرئ وينبرغ تاريخ الكون عائداً القهقهرى في الزمن إلى لحظة كانت الكثافة فيها لانهائية أي قبل أن يبدأ توسع الكون وابتراده، متكلماً في نفس الوقت عن رؤاه المستقبلية للكون .. هل سيتسمر بالتوسع إلى اللانهاية أم سيعاود الانكماش ؟ هل يمكننا تخمين العمر الباقي للكون ؟ والعديد من الأسئلة الأخرى ..
____________
- الدقائق الثلاث الأولى من عمر الكون
- ستيفن وينبرغ
لطالما كانت مسألة خلق الكون تثير فضول العقل البشري الذي ما فتئ يختلق الأساطير عنها في القديم، ليستكمل العقل الحديث بحثه وتقليبه لهذه المسألة على كل جوانبها مع بدايات الثورة العلمية ووجود الأسس النظرية لوضع تاريخ نشوء الكون
يتوجه عالِم الفيزياء الأمريكي ستيفن وينبرغ والحائز على جائزة نوبل للفيزياء عام 1979 في كتابه هذا إلى القارئ الذي يرغب في الدخول في تفاصيل البراهين دون أن يكون رياضياً أو فيزيائياً ، غير أن هذا لا يعني أنه حاول تأليف كتاب سهل فقراءته تحتاج إلى القليل من المعارف السابقة عن الفيزياء و الفلك، مضيفاً معجماً في نهاية عمله هذا يضم تعاريف الكلمات الفيزيائية والفلكية لتشكل قاعدة كافية لمساعدة القارئ
يبدأ وينبرغ الفصل الأول بالحديث عن النظرية القياسية الحديثة والتي تفوق نظرية الانفجار العظيم بالحبكة والوصف الأكثر دقة حول محتوى الكون، مستبدلة لما سبقها من نظريات وخاصة النظرية الاستقرارية الأكثر إغراءً من الناحية الفلسفية والتي تقول " كان الكون دائماً كما هو الآن بالضبط " ، ملخصاً قصة الكون كما تعرضها هذه النظرية في عرض لا يتعدى لمحة قصيرة و شاملة، ليبني باقي فصول الكتاب على دعائم هذه اللمحة
يستكمل في الفصل الثاني حديثه عن تأثير دوبلر في الموجات الصوتية و الضوئية ، هذه التقنية التي تحتفظ بدقتها مهما كان بعد المنبع الضوئي والتي بوساطتها تم اكتشاف عملية توسع الكون الذي يتفق مع أبسط صورة يمكن أن نتخيلها عن حركة المادة في كون هو في حالة انفجار
أمّا من أجل فهم ما حدث في الدقائق الثلاث الأولى بتفصيل أكثر، يلجأ وينبرغ إلى طريقة العرض السينمائي متأملين كقراء توسع الكون وابتراده و تحضيره لكوننا الحالي، متصفحين سويات المشهد واحدة بعد الأخرى، محاولاً بشكل مُجد الاقتراب من عصر ما زال مغلفاً بالغموض
في الفصول الأخيرة يستقرئ وينبرغ تاريخ الكون عائداً القهقهرى في الزمن إلى لحظة كانت الكثافة فيها لانهائية أي قبل أن يبدأ توسع الكون وابتراده، متكلماً في نفس الوقت عن رؤاه المستقبلية للكون .. هل سيتسمر بالتوسع إلى اللانهاية أم سيعاود الانكماش ؟ هل يمكننا تخمين العمر الباقي للكون ؟ والعديد من الأسئلة الأخرى ..
____________
- الدقائق الثلاث الأولى من عمر الكون
- ستيفن وينبرغ
August 31, 2021
This is a masterpiece. A bit dated though.
Reading it has been a very humbling experience, telling me to go and read simpler stuff.
Weinberg is Weinberg and that is what counts.
Reading it has been a very humbling experience, telling me to go and read simpler stuff.
Weinberg is Weinberg and that is what counts.
October 5, 2020
Most of this book is wrong. However, this is perhaps the most wonderful thing about science. It advances so rapidly, that some game-changing discoveries (such as the massivity of the neutrino) can emerge in such short notice.
I've been deferring reading this book for over 5 years now, and I am very glad that I finally found the time for it. The universe is indeed very strange. And it is bizarre, but a jolly wonderful coincidence that Wilson and Penzias discovered the CMB radiation, and that all around them everyone has already presented a theoretical framework that might accommodate for the findings whatever may come; that also is a special and wonderful feature of the human race and of the social academic sphere. In fact, even though Gamow, Zeldovich, and several other groups world-wide presented earlier theoretical frameworks, that it was ultimately Peebles and Dicke's model that described the universe was perhaps the most astounding bit; that some people found out (almost) exactly the missing puzzle. Weinberg has a whole chapter analyzing the errors in scientific communities that ultimately resulted in such delays and wind-fall losses for science and progress in physical knowledge.
I loved this book, because it presents astrophysics in a very simple light, and even the toughest bits about astrophysics and cosmology are briefly, succinctly, and accurately explained: This all goes to show what a masterful physicist (and storyteller) Weinberg is. The book presents also besides historical analysis, a brief walk-through the major physical theories in nuclear physics, particle physics, cosmology, and astrophysics that made discoveries regarding the big bang possible.
I really recommend this book, and I especially recommend it to people who enjoy books with pencil and paper at hand. More than just a history of physics, this is also a morale-boost to any junior physicist and a story of the universe written by a person who is enamored by it. And Weinberg is not stingy with good, fatherly advice for anyone in, or entering, the field.
P.S. The book is a remark on the nature of discovery in physics, and how both theory and experiment evolve through time to lead to theoretical findings that need to be tested, and experimental results that verify or negate. And it also tells us how nonlinearly the sciences evolve in time with many errors, deadends, massive time and energy and effort spent pursuing one line of research to reach an end or a dead-end, and even in deadends, the small creations can be used up elsewhere. I loved this book for it is a bastion of classical modern physics; an era we are growing out of now because of the toughness of many of the paths that were created, and perhaps this signals that fresh minds are needed to go over some of the overlooked regions of the world, existing either physically or in constructions of the mind.
I've been deferring reading this book for over 5 years now, and I am very glad that I finally found the time for it. The universe is indeed very strange. And it is bizarre, but a jolly wonderful coincidence that Wilson and Penzias discovered the CMB radiation, and that all around them everyone has already presented a theoretical framework that might accommodate for the findings whatever may come; that also is a special and wonderful feature of the human race and of the social academic sphere. In fact, even though Gamow, Zeldovich, and several other groups world-wide presented earlier theoretical frameworks, that it was ultimately Peebles and Dicke's model that described the universe was perhaps the most astounding bit; that some people found out (almost) exactly the missing puzzle. Weinberg has a whole chapter analyzing the errors in scientific communities that ultimately resulted in such delays and wind-fall losses for science and progress in physical knowledge.
I loved this book, because it presents astrophysics in a very simple light, and even the toughest bits about astrophysics and cosmology are briefly, succinctly, and accurately explained: This all goes to show what a masterful physicist (and storyteller) Weinberg is. The book presents also besides historical analysis, a brief walk-through the major physical theories in nuclear physics, particle physics, cosmology, and astrophysics that made discoveries regarding the big bang possible.
I really recommend this book, and I especially recommend it to people who enjoy books with pencil and paper at hand. More than just a history of physics, this is also a morale-boost to any junior physicist and a story of the universe written by a person who is enamored by it. And Weinberg is not stingy with good, fatherly advice for anyone in, or entering, the field.
P.S. The book is a remark on the nature of discovery in physics, and how both theory and experiment evolve through time to lead to theoretical findings that need to be tested, and experimental results that verify or negate. And it also tells us how nonlinearly the sciences evolve in time with many errors, deadends, massive time and energy and effort spent pursuing one line of research to reach an end or a dead-end, and even in deadends, the small creations can be used up elsewhere. I loved this book for it is a bastion of classical modern physics; an era we are growing out of now because of the toughness of many of the paths that were created, and perhaps this signals that fresh minds are needed to go over some of the overlooked regions of the world, existing either physically or in constructions of the mind.
January 9, 2017
A book for the mind of an inquisitive reader who loves the challenge of discovering beauty inside complexity. The book might seem a little unfriendly with its dull ‘personality’, but it has many insightful reflections powerful enough to stretch our capacity of understanding beyond the rigid web of thought connection imposed to us (more or less) by the world we live in . I would highly recommend it to all those looking for a good source of knowledge or inspiration , and to all those who feel the need of finding explanations for ‘unexplained’ events touching their lives.
(Here is the link for the free book http://www.astrosen.unam.mx/~aceves/C...)
“Thus, our ignorance of microscopic physics stands as a veil, obscuring our view of the very beginning”
“It may be possible to carry the analogy even farther. As everyone knows, when water freezes it does not usually form a perfect crystal of ice, but something much more complicated : a great mess of crystal domains, separated by various types of crystal irregularities. Did the universe also freeze into domains? Do we live in one such domain, in which the symmetry between the weak and electromagnetic interactions has been broken in a particular way, and will we eventually discover other domains?”
“Gravitation has of course played an important role in our story, because it controls the relation between the density of the universe and its rate of expansion. However, gravity has not yet been found to have any effect on the internal properties of any part of the early universe. This is because of the extreme weakness of the gravitational force; for instance, the gravitational force between the electron and the proton in a hydrogen atom is weaker than the electrical force by 39 powers of 10.”
“Gravitational fields are generated not only by particle masses, but by all forms of energy.”
“To me, the most satisfying thing that has come out of these speculations about the very early universe is the possible parallel between the history of the universe and its logical structure. Nature now exhibits a great diversity of types of particles and types of interactions. Yet we have learned to look beneath this diversity, to try to see the various particles and interactions as aspects of a simple unified gauge field theory. The present universe is so cold that the symmetries among the different particles and interactions have been obscured by a kind of freezing; they are not manifest in ordinary phenomena, but have to be expressed mathematically, in our gauge field theories. That which we do now by mathematics was done in the very early universe by heat physical phenomena directly exhibited the essential simplicity of nature. But no one was there to see it.”
(Here is the link for the free book http://www.astrosen.unam.mx/~aceves/C...)
“Thus, our ignorance of microscopic physics stands as a veil, obscuring our view of the very beginning”
“It may be possible to carry the analogy even farther. As everyone knows, when water freezes it does not usually form a perfect crystal of ice, but something much more complicated : a great mess of crystal domains, separated by various types of crystal irregularities. Did the universe also freeze into domains? Do we live in one such domain, in which the symmetry between the weak and electromagnetic interactions has been broken in a particular way, and will we eventually discover other domains?”
“Gravitation has of course played an important role in our story, because it controls the relation between the density of the universe and its rate of expansion. However, gravity has not yet been found to have any effect on the internal properties of any part of the early universe. This is because of the extreme weakness of the gravitational force; for instance, the gravitational force between the electron and the proton in a hydrogen atom is weaker than the electrical force by 39 powers of 10.”
“Gravitational fields are generated not only by particle masses, but by all forms of energy.”
“To me, the most satisfying thing that has come out of these speculations about the very early universe is the possible parallel between the history of the universe and its logical structure. Nature now exhibits a great diversity of types of particles and types of interactions. Yet we have learned to look beneath this diversity, to try to see the various particles and interactions as aspects of a simple unified gauge field theory. The present universe is so cold that the symmetries among the different particles and interactions have been obscured by a kind of freezing; they are not manifest in ordinary phenomena, but have to be expressed mathematically, in our gauge field theories. That which we do now by mathematics was done in the very early universe by heat physical phenomena directly exhibited the essential simplicity of nature. But no one was there to see it.”
November 15, 2017
I read this book last year, at a time when I didn't have as much knowledge about the topics involved (still haven't, absolutely speaking).
Steven Weinberg is a gifted writer, and the first half of the book is excellent. In this part, Weinberg mainly explains the discovieres related to our conception of an 'expanding universe' (chapter 2) and the discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation as a vindication of the big bang theory (chapter 3).
After this, Weinberg plunges into the domain of particle physics and the reader who is unfamiliar (or only superficially familiar) with this domain, will see chapters 5-7 mainly as a summary of strange names and weird relationships between these names.
It is admirable that Weinberg took the time to explain big bang cosmology (more specifically, the first three minutes of our universe) to a popular audience, but I can't shake the feeling that one is simply unable to understand these theories (i.e. particle physics) if one is unfamiliar with the scientific background. In other words, this sort of stuff is not suitable for mass distribution.
Another thing is that Weinberg wrote this book in 1977 (if I'm not mistaken), and that discoveries in the 80's and especially in the 90's have (at least partly) outdated the contents of The First Three minutes. So, for example, in the 90's scientists discovered the nature of space: it is expanding ever faster, due to a repulsive force, called dark energy (a retrograde vindication of Einstein's cosmological constant. And there have been some (minor) new discoveries on the cosmic microwave background radiation as well.
Still, the main story still stands: the hot bang bang/standard model of the universe still stands, meaning that our universe originated 13.7 billion years ago and went from a superhot, dense plasma, through a stage of inflation, to an expanding, cooling stage (which we are observing right now). Nowadays we know that this expansion will probably accelerate ever faster and in a couple of (billions of) years Earthlings will not see anything outside our own galaxy and the Andromeda galaxy - which will have collided and formed an ever bigger 'super-galaxy' by then.
Steven Weinberg is a gifted writer, and the first half of the book is excellent. In this part, Weinberg mainly explains the discovieres related to our conception of an 'expanding universe' (chapter 2) and the discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation as a vindication of the big bang theory (chapter 3).
After this, Weinberg plunges into the domain of particle physics and the reader who is unfamiliar (or only superficially familiar) with this domain, will see chapters 5-7 mainly as a summary of strange names and weird relationships between these names.
It is admirable that Weinberg took the time to explain big bang cosmology (more specifically, the first three minutes of our universe) to a popular audience, but I can't shake the feeling that one is simply unable to understand these theories (i.e. particle physics) if one is unfamiliar with the scientific background. In other words, this sort of stuff is not suitable for mass distribution.
Another thing is that Weinberg wrote this book in 1977 (if I'm not mistaken), and that discoveries in the 80's and especially in the 90's have (at least partly) outdated the contents of The First Three minutes. So, for example, in the 90's scientists discovered the nature of space: it is expanding ever faster, due to a repulsive force, called dark energy (a retrograde vindication of Einstein's cosmological constant. And there have been some (minor) new discoveries on the cosmic microwave background radiation as well.
Still, the main story still stands: the hot bang bang/standard model of the universe still stands, meaning that our universe originated 13.7 billion years ago and went from a superhot, dense plasma, through a stage of inflation, to an expanding, cooling stage (which we are observing right now). Nowadays we know that this expansion will probably accelerate ever faster and in a couple of (billions of) years Earthlings will not see anything outside our own galaxy and the Andromeda galaxy - which will have collided and formed an ever bigger 'super-galaxy' by then.
September 2, 2020
Wonderfully written!
Although it's a popular science book, it's ingrained with subtle equations. There is also a mathematical supplement at the end for easy reference. Although the book is a little outdated( in terms of dark energy and age of the universe), it is a must read book for cosmology enthusiasts.
Although it's a popular science book, it's ingrained with subtle equations. There is also a mathematical supplement at the end for easy reference. Although the book is a little outdated( in terms of dark energy and age of the universe), it is a must read book for cosmology enthusiasts.
November 11, 2021
I decided to re-read this book again after reading a book on dark matter and energy, and wanted to refresh my understanding of the big bang. It is still a very good read, but it is also opening to realize how many things have changed since Weinberg wrote this book less than 30 years ago. It was not known whether the universe will continue to expand indefinitely, or gradually slow down, and therefore there was no notion of dark matter or energy, which we now believe constitutes 96% of the universe. What will the next 30 years bring!
January 23, 2021
- Paperback, Second Edition.
Reading this book reminds me how different it is in terms of the quality of "popular physics writing" compared to the travesties of the likes of Michio Kaku et. al. This is written for the general public but without dumbing down the physics. Mathematical derivations are relegated to the appendix and are not really central to follow the text. This book is pure logic (derived from experimental evidence with a heavy dose of theorizing by the cosmologists) written in words. And it won't bore you because you are too distracted by having your mind blown that universe could potentially even have a beginning or beginnings and that the “big bang” explosion didn’t originate at a point (like a conventional bomb explosion) but occurred everywhere equally! Plus, it is written by one of the most decorated physicists of our times, period.
Reading this book reminds me how different it is in terms of the quality of "popular physics writing" compared to the travesties of the likes of Michio Kaku et. al. This is written for the general public but without dumbing down the physics. Mathematical derivations are relegated to the appendix and are not really central to follow the text. This book is pure logic (derived from experimental evidence with a heavy dose of theorizing by the cosmologists) written in words. And it won't bore you because you are too distracted by having your mind blown that universe could potentially even have a beginning or beginnings and that the “big bang” explosion didn’t originate at a point (like a conventional bomb explosion) but occurred everywhere equally! Plus, it is written by one of the most decorated physicists of our times, period.
February 3, 2025
I found this book from Susan Fowler's blog post "So You Want to Learn Physics…" (2nd edition). I ended up listening to the Audiobook version of it.
I love space, the cosmos, and the universe. I know a bit about it, definitely more than how a beginner might be, but less than the average person who's educated (in any regard) towards the subject. I enjoyed it for what it was, but even with my passion towards the subject, I sometimes felt a bit lost. I occasionally had to rewind and re-listen to certain parts of the book to make sure I understood. Some say the information is a bit dated, but it's not egregious by any means.
I do think it's a staple for the subject. Steven Weinberg is deemed as "one of the most brilliant physicists of all times", and understanding his view of the universe as he understood it at the time, in a way I could understand, is an honor.
I love space, the cosmos, and the universe. I know a bit about it, definitely more than how a beginner might be, but less than the average person who's educated (in any regard) towards the subject. I enjoyed it for what it was, but even with my passion towards the subject, I sometimes felt a bit lost. I occasionally had to rewind and re-listen to certain parts of the book to make sure I understood. Some say the information is a bit dated, but it's not egregious by any means.
I do think it's a staple for the subject. Steven Weinberg is deemed as "one of the most brilliant physicists of all times", and understanding his view of the universe as he understood it at the time, in a way I could understand, is an honor.
January 31, 2022
**3.5 star**
He sets himself the task to deliver his researches to an “all-public” audience , not just experts physicists, and so i am part of such audience and should judge whether or not, his aim was achieved. And for me, it was well achieved.
but , I would’ve preferred , and especially for the “movie” storytelling of the first 3 minutes, around 60% of the book, to use analogies of the elements he insists of”… drawing parallels with them, with movements of the real world, for us to better, and more vividly to visualize, conceptualize these first 3 minutes. Or at least do it more frequently for other things., since you chose to write this book for a physically/mathematically untrained audience :(
The presentation of the actual three minutes took me less than three minutes to read it. I’ve picked up this book especially for the fascinating storytelling of how it they’d present it (because of such a provocative title), they’ve built up all their explanations to this one moment.. yet it is described so feebly:(
The whole theory is based on the fact that the universe is isotropoc and homogeneous, and I’ve adored following his logical process
In order to write a recipe for the content of the universe, we need to know what it’s meant by the condition of thermal equilibrium. i was beyond grateful for him to explore thoroughly his mental process, and using examples with a glass of water to make us understand in a clear way , how it was possible to deduce the contents and values of properties of chemical reactions in condition of thermal equilibrium
The author emphasized how important it is that the universe has passed through a state of thermal equilibrium ( it’s what allowed him to speak with such confidence about the contents of the universe at any given time; because we already know the properties of matter and radiation in thermal equilibrium)
When a system is brought into thermal equilibrium, the total of energy does not change.
And the remarkable thing is; once we specify the values of the conserved quantities, we are able to determine *all* its properties uniquely.
So for the first 3 minute of the universe ( a complete recipe of its contents in early times ), all we need is to know **what were the physical quantities which were conserved as the universe expanded, and what were the values of these quantities.**
As an example, he used a glass of water.
A-physical quantities conserved:
There are continual reactions in which a water molecule breaks up into :
hydrogen ion and a hydroxyl ion ,
or in which hydrogen and hydroxyl ions rejoin to form water molecules
It’s good to note that, in each of these reactions, the disappearance of a water molecule is accompanied by the appearance of a hydrogen ion, and vice verse, while hydrogen ions and hydroxyl ions always appear or disappear.
THUS, the conserved quantities are the total number of what *we already know can happen”, that is, the total of water molecules plus the number of hydrogen ions, and the number of hydrogen ions minus the number of hydroxyl ions*.
B-/ Values of these quantities
By knowing the temperature is at 300 degree K (room temperature), the property of our glass of water can be completely determined : the density of water molecules + hydrogen ions is 3.3x 10^22 molecules or ions per cubic centimeter (bla bla bla).. they do not have to specify that the ph of water is 7, they can deduce the proportion of hydrogen ions from the rules of thermal equilibrium. But not for everything such as the density of water molecules plus hydrogen.
Similarly, there are just 3 conserved quantities whose densities must be specified for the early universe:
1- electric charge: we can create or destroy pairs of particles with equal and opposite electric charge, but the net electric charge never changes (conform ally to Maxwell Theory)
2- Baryon Number: the nuclear particles (protons and neutrons together). They can be created and destroyed in pairs. The total number of baryons minus the number of anti baryons never changes. Its significance lies wholly in the fact that it is conserved.
3-Lepton number: “seem to be conserved, but not known with certainty”… then why put it ?
Then he continues “in order to determine the lepton number density of the present universe, we have to know something about the population of neutrinos and antineutrinos. Unfortunately this information is extraordinarily difficult to come by”
Again he went on, purely on the basis of analogy- “the baryon number per photon is small, so why should the lepton number per photon not also be small?”
But he re-assured her that , even if it’s erroneous, the change would just be in detail. Not knowing much on the topic, I believe him !
And with these 3 elements up there, in order to constitute the present universe, you need to:
Take the temperature at any given time to be greater than the temperature 3 degree K of the present radiation background by the ratio of the present size at that time.
Stir well, so that the detailed distributions of particles of various types are determined by the requirements of thermal equilibrium.
Place in an expanding universe, with a rate of expansion governed by the gravitational field produced by this medium.
After a long enough wait, this concoction should turn into our present universe.
This was brilliant
-The First Three Minutes by Steven Weinberg: 7.5/10
He sets himself the task to deliver his researches to an “all-public” audience , not just experts physicists, and so i am part of such audience and should judge whether or not, his aim was achieved. And for me, it was well achieved.
but , I would’ve preferred , and especially for the “movie” storytelling of the first 3 minutes, around 60% of the book, to use analogies of the elements he insists of”… drawing parallels with them, with movements of the real world, for us to better, and more vividly to visualize, conceptualize these first 3 minutes. Or at least do it more frequently for other things., since you chose to write this book for a physically/mathematically untrained audience :(
The presentation of the actual three minutes took me less than three minutes to read it. I’ve picked up this book especially for the fascinating storytelling of how it they’d present it (because of such a provocative title), they’ve built up all their explanations to this one moment.. yet it is described so feebly:(
The whole theory is based on the fact that the universe is isotropoc and homogeneous, and I’ve adored following his logical process
In order to write a recipe for the content of the universe, we need to know what it’s meant by the condition of thermal equilibrium. i was beyond grateful for him to explore thoroughly his mental process, and using examples with a glass of water to make us understand in a clear way , how it was possible to deduce the contents and values of properties of chemical reactions in condition of thermal equilibrium
The author emphasized how important it is that the universe has passed through a state of thermal equilibrium ( it’s what allowed him to speak with such confidence about the contents of the universe at any given time; because we already know the properties of matter and radiation in thermal equilibrium)
When a system is brought into thermal equilibrium, the total of energy does not change.
And the remarkable thing is; once we specify the values of the conserved quantities, we are able to determine *all* its properties uniquely.
So for the first 3 minute of the universe ( a complete recipe of its contents in early times ), all we need is to know **what were the physical quantities which were conserved as the universe expanded, and what were the values of these quantities.**
As an example, he used a glass of water.
A-physical quantities conserved:
There are continual reactions in which a water molecule breaks up into :
hydrogen ion and a hydroxyl ion ,
or in which hydrogen and hydroxyl ions rejoin to form water molecules
It’s good to note that, in each of these reactions, the disappearance of a water molecule is accompanied by the appearance of a hydrogen ion, and vice verse, while hydrogen ions and hydroxyl ions always appear or disappear.
THUS, the conserved quantities are the total number of what *we already know can happen”, that is, the total of water molecules plus the number of hydrogen ions, and the number of hydrogen ions minus the number of hydroxyl ions*.
B-/ Values of these quantities
By knowing the temperature is at 300 degree K (room temperature), the property of our glass of water can be completely determined : the density of water molecules + hydrogen ions is 3.3x 10^22 molecules or ions per cubic centimeter (bla bla bla).. they do not have to specify that the ph of water is 7, they can deduce the proportion of hydrogen ions from the rules of thermal equilibrium. But not for everything such as the density of water molecules plus hydrogen.
Similarly, there are just 3 conserved quantities whose densities must be specified for the early universe:
1- electric charge: we can create or destroy pairs of particles with equal and opposite electric charge, but the net electric charge never changes (conform ally to Maxwell Theory)
2- Baryon Number: the nuclear particles (protons and neutrons together). They can be created and destroyed in pairs. The total number of baryons minus the number of anti baryons never changes. Its significance lies wholly in the fact that it is conserved.
3-Lepton number: “seem to be conserved, but not known with certainty”… then why put it ?
Then he continues “in order to determine the lepton number density of the present universe, we have to know something about the population of neutrinos and antineutrinos. Unfortunately this information is extraordinarily difficult to come by”
Again he went on, purely on the basis of analogy- “the baryon number per photon is small, so why should the lepton number per photon not also be small?”
But he re-assured her that , even if it’s erroneous, the change would just be in detail. Not knowing much on the topic, I believe him !
And with these 3 elements up there, in order to constitute the present universe, you need to:
Take the temperature at any given time to be greater than the temperature 3 degree K of the present radiation background by the ratio of the present size at that time.
Stir well, so that the detailed distributions of particles of various types are determined by the requirements of thermal equilibrium.
Place in an expanding universe, with a rate of expansion governed by the gravitational field produced by this medium.
After a long enough wait, this concoction should turn into our present universe.
This was brilliant
-The First Three Minutes by Steven Weinberg: 7.5/10
December 22, 2021
Weinberg won the 1979 Nobel Prize for physics (it says so on the cover). This was pretty easy for me to understand and short (the unabridged audiobook is five and a half hours), but I love this stuff. I would recommend this for any astronomy/physics buff.
November 18, 2021
The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems point-less.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 317 reviews