GARY ZUKAV DANCING WU LI MASTERS PDF
Gary Zukav’s timeless, humorous, New York Times bestselling masterpiece, The Dancing Wu Li Masters, is arguably the most widely acclaimed. The Dancing. Wu Li Masters. An Overview of the New Physics. Gary Zukav. A BANTAM NEW AGE BOOK. BANTAM BOOKS. NEW YORK • TORONTO • LONDON. The most exciting intellectual adventure I’ve been on since reading Robert Pirsig’s Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.”—.
|Published (Last):||7 May 2010|
|PDF File Size:||18.36 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.32 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Fary in physics and this is as true at this writing in as it was when Zukav’s book was originally published in there is no consensus view on the philosophy of quantum mechanics. Sure, I was expecting a discussion of physics and its tie into the everything-ness philosophies of the world.
Recommendations I found for follow-up reading: As a teenager, I was so absorbed and completely fascinated by Neils Bohr’s postulates, Max Planck’s Theory that Physics was the air i breathed! The second group prefers explorations which involve the intellect in a less logically rigorous manner.
The Dancing Wu Li Masters – Wikipedia
This problem [of not having found a truly inertial coordinate system] is related to relativity, which is the problem of determining absolute nonmotion, in an intimate way.
It is possible that this is not Zukav’s fault–that he does believe that the philosophy he expounds is necessitated by the findings of quantum mechanics. In a footnote a little later on he states that “the state of a system containing n particles is represented at each time by a wave function in a 3 n dimensional space. Gary Zukav in several places reiterates that mathematics is not needed to read and understand his book, du, it is not for the ordinary non-mathematics reader either.
Zukav participated as a uw in a physics conference of eastern and western scientists at Esalen InstituteCalifornia ; and he used the occasion as material for his book. gagy
Zukav’s apparent belief that quantum logic replacing classical logic is the right way to make progress in quantum physics seems to me to be rather like a belief that giving a heavier screwdriver to a person with a screwdriver is the right way to make progress in driving in nails. But the more important point is that, whether you think of the dimension of the wave function space or the number of degrees of freedom, it doesn’t change when the wave function collapses.
Only when Zukav makes large leaps into philosophy, full of holes and assumptions and “logical” ruling-out of other possible explanations despite a whole chapter praising Einstein for approaching physics with a beginner’s mind not bothered with traditional conclusions of what is and is not possibledoes he stumble.
Shuttling from religion and philosophy I arrived at the door steps of Physics.
This summer, apparently, will be the summer of physics. The Wu Li Master always begins at the center, the heart of the matter Apparently, there used to a be an approach to quantum mechanics called S-matrix theory, which was popular among left-leaning physicists in the early 70s.
Certainly some physicists do skimp on such things–but as far as I can see from reading what many physicists have written for lay people about what they do, most of them do quite clearly distinguish the facts from their speculations.
Etymology aside, Bohm’s physical theory about nonlocality has nothing to do with the appearance-reality distinction in philosophy the rancing of whether we can directly perceive or think about “that-which-is” ; it has nothing to do with how perception or thinking or knowing works in the brain; and it has nothing to do with any scientific concept of “information” such as is studied by information theory.
It is interesting that here, as almost nowhere else in the book, Zukav actually does talk about various different philosophical positions that can be taken about the results of experiments based on Bell’s discoveries.
I understood dancjng concepts and the theories explained. His views are also shared, at least to an extent, by some contemporary physicists and philosophers, many of whom are named in the Acknowledgments to the book, and who read over it at Zukav’s request–some only parts, but at least four read the entire manuscript and offered extensive comments. If he is ingenious he may form some picture of a mechanism which could be responsible for all of the things he observes, but he may never be quite sure his picture is the only one which could explain his observations.
First there was Big Bang, by Simon Singh which told me if I comprehend one small part of physics called ‘Relativity’ by some guy called ggary it would come in handy understanding the creation of our world.
Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics (Perennial Classics)
Its dry and demanding in places, necessarily so. Sometimes books like this one capture us because we think they will be fairly easy primers, sexed up with lots of provocative speculation. First, it portrays as questionable or speculative theories that may have been so in the ‘s and early ‘s, but which were well established by By itself this is not necessarily a fatal error; after all, these abstract spaces can’t be visualized directly anyway, so we have to have some sort of crutch to make mental pictures of what we think might be going on.
What he ends up laying out, however, is often what he would like the new physics to say, and what he and a few others, including some physicists, believe the new physics says–but which many other physicists, whom Zukav did not bother asking about the matter, do not believe the new physics says, and which is not by any means required by either the phenomena or the basic theory of the new physics. According to quantum mechanics there is no such thing as objectivity.
What a wonderful lucid style of explaining modern physics! Mar 20, Robert rated it liked it.
Thorne’s book was written inwell after Zukav’s original publication of this book, but the historical events leading il to the “golden age” of black hole studies in the ‘s and ‘s were well known when Zukav first published not to mention that he could have done some checking up for the new edition.
I couldn’t stop thinking about updates and what recent theories have added to dxncing discussion. Throwing around vague terms, or terms that can have several significantly different meanings, without defining them precisely may be a common practice in certain types of philosophy, but it isn’t science.