Science & Math
Physics
![Sabine Hossenfelder - [object Object] author](https://res.cloudinary.com/readsomnia/image/upload/authors/a_a_sabine_hossenfelder.jpg)
Existential Physics: A Scientist's Guide to Life's Biggest Questions
A NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER
"An informed and entertaining guide to what science can and cannot tell us." -The Wall Street Journal
"Stimulating . . . encourage[s] readers to push past well-trod assumptions […] and have fun doing so." -Science Magazine
From renowned physicist and creator of the YouTube series "Science without the Gobbledygook," a book that takes a no-nonsense approach to life's biggest questions, and wrestles with what physics really says about the human condition
Not only can we not currently explain the origin of the universe, it is questionable we will ever be able to explain it. The notion that there are universes within particles, or that particles are conscious, is ascientific, as is the hypothesis that our universe is a computer simulation. On the other hand, the idea that the universe itself is conscious is difficult to rule out entirely.
According to Sabine Hossenfelder, it is not a coincidence that quantum entanglement and vacuum energy have become the go-to explanations of alternative healers, or that people believe their deceased grandmother is still alive because of quantum mechanics. Science and religion have the same roots, and they still tackle some of the same questions: Where do we come from? Where do we go to? How much can we know? The area of science that is closest to answering these questions is physics. Over the last century, physicists have learned a lot about which spiritual ideas are still compatible with the laws of nature. Not always, though, have they stayed on the scientific side of the debate.
In this lively, thought-provoking book, Hossenfelder takes on the biggest questions in physics: Does the past still exist? Do particles think? Was the universe made for us? Has physics ruled out free will? Will we ever have a theory of everything? She lays out how far physicists are on the way to answering these questions, where the current limits are, and what questions might well remain unanswerable forever. Her book offers a no-nonsense yet entertaining take on some of the toughest riddles in existence, and will give the reader a solid grasp on what we know-and what we don't know.
"An informed and entertaining guide to what science can and cannot tell us." -The Wall Street Journal
"Stimulating . . . encourage[s] readers to push past well-trod assumptions […] and have fun doing so." -Science Magazine
From renowned physicist and creator of the YouTube series "Science without the Gobbledygook," a book that takes a no-nonsense approach to life's biggest questions, and wrestles with what physics really says about the human condition
Not only can we not currently explain the origin of the universe, it is questionable we will ever be able to explain it. The notion that there are universes within particles, or that particles are conscious, is ascientific, as is the hypothesis that our universe is a computer simulation. On the other hand, the idea that the universe itself is conscious is difficult to rule out entirely.
According to Sabine Hossenfelder, it is not a coincidence that quantum entanglement and vacuum energy have become the go-to explanations of alternative healers, or that people believe their deceased grandmother is still alive because of quantum mechanics. Science and religion have the same roots, and they still tackle some of the same questions: Where do we come from? Where do we go to? How much can we know? The area of science that is closest to answering these questions is physics. Over the last century, physicists have learned a lot about which spiritual ideas are still compatible with the laws of nature. Not always, though, have they stayed on the scientific side of the debate.
In this lively, thought-provoking book, Hossenfelder takes on the biggest questions in physics: Does the past still exist? Do particles think? Was the universe made for us? Has physics ruled out free will? Will we ever have a theory of everything? She lays out how far physicists are on the way to answering these questions, where the current limits are, and what questions might well remain unanswerable forever. Her book offers a no-nonsense yet entertaining take on some of the toughest riddles in existence, and will give the reader a solid grasp on what we know-and what we don't know.
Editorial Reviews
"The most surprising and interesting feature of the book is the claim that many of her physicist peers are as guilty of bringing speculation and belief into their scientific thinking as theologians and New Age mystics . . . Existential Physics is an informed and entertaining guide to what science can and cannot tell us. If Ms. Hossenfelder is sometimes a little too opinionated, the reader will quickly forgive her. Anyone capable of bridging the concerns of the human world and the baffling complexities of physics has earned the right to be indulged a little."
-The Wall Street Journal
"You may not have expected this month's most entertaining book to be about science. Hossenfelder, an acclaimed physicist, not only explains her subject well; she also engages general readers in connecting science with spirituality . . . Read Hossenfelder along with a basic guide to physics and keep an open mind about her conclusions, but most importantly, enjoy the ride."
-Los Angeles Times
"Stimulating . . . encourage[s] readers to push past well-trod assumptions […] and have fun doing so . . . By demarking ascientific views from scientific ones, she helps delineate science's limits in answering life's big questions."
-Science Magazine
"Hossenfelder elegantly illustrates complex ideas in straightforward, layfriendly language . . . [She] takes readers on a riveting cerebral journey through surprisingly confounding differences between scientific method and storytelling . . . In addition to her own powerful voice, Hossenfelder includes enlightening interviews with [...] luminaries in the field . . . Existential Physics is spectacular, and a must-read for all who ponder the purpose of existence."
-Booklist
"Unlike many other science writers, Hossenfelder is less interested in denouncing pseudoscience than revealing that many spiritual ideas are compatible with modern physics . . . Casting her net widely, she investigates God and spirituality, free will, universal consciousness, dualism (whether the mind is separate from the body), the Big Bang theory about the origin of the cosmos, the possible existence of parallel universes, and whether we live in a computer simulation . . . readers who wonder how to tell a good from a bad explanation can now consult [Existential Physics] . . ....
-The Wall Street Journal
"You may not have expected this month's most entertaining book to be about science. Hossenfelder, an acclaimed physicist, not only explains her subject well; she also engages general readers in connecting science with spirituality . . . Read Hossenfelder along with a basic guide to physics and keep an open mind about her conclusions, but most importantly, enjoy the ride."
-Los Angeles Times
"Stimulating . . . encourage[s] readers to push past well-trod assumptions […] and have fun doing so . . . By demarking ascientific views from scientific ones, she helps delineate science's limits in answering life's big questions."
-Science Magazine
"Hossenfelder elegantly illustrates complex ideas in straightforward, layfriendly language . . . [She] takes readers on a riveting cerebral journey through surprisingly confounding differences between scientific method and storytelling . . . In addition to her own powerful voice, Hossenfelder includes enlightening interviews with [...] luminaries in the field . . . Existential Physics is spectacular, and a must-read for all who ponder the purpose of existence."
-Booklist
"Unlike many other science writers, Hossenfelder is less interested in denouncing pseudoscience than revealing that many spiritual ideas are compatible with modern physics . . . Casting her net widely, she investigates God and spirituality, free will, universal consciousness, dualism (whether the mind is separate from the body), the Big Bang theory about the origin of the cosmos, the possible existence of parallel universes, and whether we live in a computer simulation . . . readers who wonder how to tell a good from a bad explanation can now consult [Existential Physics] . . ....
Readers Top Reviews
A. E. Finn
A cracking read. The author takes no prisoners when it comes to explaining physics so you may need to stop to check up your knowledge base. However, she has a great narrative voice and a sly sense of humour.
Rory CokerA. E. F
The author is certainly well-qualified to discuss the topics she chooses here, and some of them have also been covered in her weekly YouTube videos. Let me say to begin with that I am a professional physicist and have done both experimental and theoretical physics, so I am already familiar with quite a bit of the material discussed here. That said, the clarity of the presentation here varies wildly in comprehensibility as based on my mental picture of the average layman reader. The book gets off, for example, to a really bad start with a discussion of the relativity of simultaneity that involves incredibly cluttered and confusing space-time diagrams. There are far simpler ways to illustrate the concept. In choosing "existential" topics, also, the author is well aware that she is skating over some thin ice and that below that ice is a fatally deep ocean of crackpottery and vacuous philosophy. On the whole, I enjoyed the book, but I suspect it is unlikely that the typical, general reader would be able to finish it. Readers who manage to follow the author's well-reasoned and well-founded arguments will learn a lot about how physicists tend to think usefully about contentious issues.
ToddRory CokerA.
I've read a few popular physics books lately and they all tried to make quantum mechanics or the Big Bang relatable in language that lay people would understand. The problem is that the words really don't exist. What does exist is the math behind them. This book was honest in stating that you really can't describe these concepts in words, it's in the math and you need to understand that. I was kind of getting that feeling because the definitions were always different. Everybody had their own translation of the math in words. The author really says it's all about math. On the Big Bang she went further and said much of it is models they chose to make the math work. It could be right but there also could be other models as well. To me (and the author says as well) we may never know the true story of the creation of the universe because there isn't enough evidence to figure it out. (I still also think physicists need to do a better job of explaining what was before the Big Bang. That's just as important.) While I appreciated the above discussions, I felt there were other sections e.g., Free Will and does the Universe Think, that were somewhat esoteric and hard to follow the thought process. Maybe it was me, but I had a hard time with the language and the rationale.
Short Excerpt Teaser
Can I ask you something?" a young man inquired after learning that I am a physicist. "About quantum mechanics," he added, shyly. I was all ready to debate the measurement postulate and the pitfalls of multipartite entanglement, but I was not prepared for the question that followed: "A shaman told me that my grandmother is still alive. Because of quantum mechanics. She is just not alive here and now. Is this right?"
As you can tell, I am still thinking about this. The brief answer is, it's not totally wrong. The long answer will follow in chapter 1, but before I get to the quantum mechanics of deceased grandmothers, I want to tell you why I'm writing this book.
During more than a decade in public outreach, I noticed that phys-icists are really good at answering questions, but really bad at explain-ing why anyone should care about their answers. In some research areas, a study's purpose reveals itself, eventually, in a marketable product. But in the foundations of physics-where I do most of my research-the primary product is knowledge. And all too often, my colleagues and I present this knowledge in ways so abstract that no one understands why we looked for it in the first place.
Not that this is specific to physics. The disconnect between experts and non-experts is so widespread that the sociologist Steve Fuller claims that academics use incomprehensible terminology to keep insights sparse and thereby more valuable. As the American journalist and Pulitzer Prize winner Nicholas Kristof complained, academics encode "insights into turgid prose" and "as a double protection against public consumption, this gobbledygook is then sometimes hidden in obscure journals."
Case in point: People don't care much whether quantum mechanics is predictable; they want to know whether their own behavior is predictable. They don't care much whether black holes destroy information; they want to know what will happen to the collected infor- mation of human civilization. They don't care much whether galactic filaments resemble neuronal networks; they want to know if the universe can think. People are people. Who'd have thought?
Of course, I want to know these things too. But somewhere along my path through academia I learned to avoid asking such questions, not to mention answering them. After all, I'm just a physicist. I'm not competent to speak about consciousness and human behavior and such.
Nevertheless, the young man's question drove home to me that physicists do know some things, if not about consciousness itself, then about the physical laws that everything in the universe-including you and I and your grandmother-must respect. Not all ideas about life and death and the origin of human existence are compatible with the foundations of physics. That's knowledge we should not hide in obscure journals using incomprehensible prose.
It's not just that this knowledge is worth sharing; keeping it to ourselves has consequences. If physicists don't step forward and explain what physics says about the human condition, others will jump at the opportunity and abuse our cryptic terminology for the promotion of pseudoscience. It's not a coincidence that quantum entanglement and vacuum energy are go-to explanations of alternative healers, spiritual media, and snake oil sellers. Unless you have a PhD in physics, it'shard to tell our gobbledygook from any other.
However, my aim here is not merely to expose pseudoscience forwhat it is. I also want to convey that some spiritual ideas are perfectlycompatible with modern physics, and others are, indeed, supportedby it. And why not? That physics has something to say about our connectionto the universe is not so surprising. Science and religion havethe same roots, and still today they tackle some of the same questions:Where do we come from? Where do we go to? How much can we know?
When it comes to these questions, physicists have learned a lot in the past century. Their progress makes clear that the limits of scienceare not fixed; they move as we learn more about the world. Correspondingly, some belief-based explanations that once aided sensemaking and gave comfort we now know to be just wrong. The idea, for example, that certain objects are alive because they are endowed with a special substance (Henri Bergson's "élan vital") was entirely compatible with scientific fact two hundred years ago. But it no longer is.
In the foundations of physics today, we deal with the laws of nature...
As you can tell, I am still thinking about this. The brief answer is, it's not totally wrong. The long answer will follow in chapter 1, but before I get to the quantum mechanics of deceased grandmothers, I want to tell you why I'm writing this book.
During more than a decade in public outreach, I noticed that phys-icists are really good at answering questions, but really bad at explain-ing why anyone should care about their answers. In some research areas, a study's purpose reveals itself, eventually, in a marketable product. But in the foundations of physics-where I do most of my research-the primary product is knowledge. And all too often, my colleagues and I present this knowledge in ways so abstract that no one understands why we looked for it in the first place.
Not that this is specific to physics. The disconnect between experts and non-experts is so widespread that the sociologist Steve Fuller claims that academics use incomprehensible terminology to keep insights sparse and thereby more valuable. As the American journalist and Pulitzer Prize winner Nicholas Kristof complained, academics encode "insights into turgid prose" and "as a double protection against public consumption, this gobbledygook is then sometimes hidden in obscure journals."
Case in point: People don't care much whether quantum mechanics is predictable; they want to know whether their own behavior is predictable. They don't care much whether black holes destroy information; they want to know what will happen to the collected infor- mation of human civilization. They don't care much whether galactic filaments resemble neuronal networks; they want to know if the universe can think. People are people. Who'd have thought?
Of course, I want to know these things too. But somewhere along my path through academia I learned to avoid asking such questions, not to mention answering them. After all, I'm just a physicist. I'm not competent to speak about consciousness and human behavior and such.
Nevertheless, the young man's question drove home to me that physicists do know some things, if not about consciousness itself, then about the physical laws that everything in the universe-including you and I and your grandmother-must respect. Not all ideas about life and death and the origin of human existence are compatible with the foundations of physics. That's knowledge we should not hide in obscure journals using incomprehensible prose.
It's not just that this knowledge is worth sharing; keeping it to ourselves has consequences. If physicists don't step forward and explain what physics says about the human condition, others will jump at the opportunity and abuse our cryptic terminology for the promotion of pseudoscience. It's not a coincidence that quantum entanglement and vacuum energy are go-to explanations of alternative healers, spiritual media, and snake oil sellers. Unless you have a PhD in physics, it'shard to tell our gobbledygook from any other.
However, my aim here is not merely to expose pseudoscience forwhat it is. I also want to convey that some spiritual ideas are perfectlycompatible with modern physics, and others are, indeed, supportedby it. And why not? That physics has something to say about our connectionto the universe is not so surprising. Science and religion havethe same roots, and still today they tackle some of the same questions:Where do we come from? Where do we go to? How much can we know?
When it comes to these questions, physicists have learned a lot in the past century. Their progress makes clear that the limits of scienceare not fixed; they move as we learn more about the world. Correspondingly, some belief-based explanations that once aided sensemaking and gave comfort we now know to be just wrong. The idea, for example, that certain objects are alive because they are endowed with a special substance (Henri Bergson's "élan vital") was entirely compatible with scientific fact two hundred years ago. But it no longer is.
In the foundations of physics today, we deal with the laws of nature...
