Beyond Weird: Why Everything You Thought You Knew about Quantum Physics Is Different
- Downloads：2773
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-06-16 06:51:33
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Philip Ball
- ISBN：022675510X
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
“Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory has not understood it。”
Since Niels Bohr said this many years ago， quantum mechanics has only been getting more shocking。 We now realize that it’s not really telling us that “weird” things happen out of sight， on the tiniest level， in the atomic world: rather， everything is quantum。 But if quantum mechanics is correct， what seems obvious and right in our everyday world is built on foundations that don’t seem obvious or right at all—or even possible。
An exhilarating tour of the contemporary quantum landscape， Beyond Weird is a book about what quantum physics really means—and what it doesn’t。 Science writer Philip Ball offers an up-to-date， accessible account of the quest to come to grips with the most fundamental theory of physical reality， and to explain how its counterintuitive principles underpin the world we experience。 Over the past decade it has become clear that quantum physics is less a theory about particles and waves， uncertainty and fuzziness， than a theory about information and knowledge—about what can be known， and how we can know it。 Discoveries and experiments over the past few decades have called into question the meanings and limits of space and time， cause and effect， and， ultimately， of knowledge itself。 The quantum world Ball shows us isn’t a different world。 It is our world， and if anything deserves to be called “weird，” it’s us。
Since Niels Bohr said this many years ago， quantum mechanics has only been getting more shocking。 We now realize that it’s not really telling us that “weird” things happen out of sight， on the tiniest level， in the atomic world: rather， everything is quantum。 But if quantum mechanics is correct， what seems obvious and right in our everyday world is built on foundations that don’t seem obvious or right at all—or even possible。
An exhilarating tour of the contemporary quantum landscape， Beyond Weird is a book about what quantum physics really means—and what it doesn’t。 Science writer Philip Ball offers an up-to-date， accessible account of the quest to come to grips with the most fundamental theory of physical reality， and to explain how its counterintuitive principles underpin the world we experience。 Over the past decade it has become clear that quantum physics is less a theory about particles and waves， uncertainty and fuzziness， than a theory about information and knowledge—about what can be known， and how we can know it。 Discoveries and experiments over the past few decades have called into question the meanings and limits of space and time， cause and effect， and， ultimately， of knowledge itself。 The quantum world Ball shows us isn’t a different world。 It is our world， and if anything deserves to be called “weird，” it’s us。
Reviews
Sanford Wood
，
This book is a good read， but it's not for the faint-hearted。 It assumes some knowledge of quantum physics – the concepts， if not the math。 It would also be helpful to know a bit about the history of science。Ball is attempting to explain quantum physics by focusing on some of its stranger implications。 He wants to understand what quantum physics tells us about the real world。 His book is as much metaphysics as physics。Toward the end of the book， he quotes a prominent 20th-century physicist who s This book is a good read， but it's not for the faint-hearted。 It assumes some knowledge of quantum physics – the concepts， if not the math。 It would also be helpful to know a bit about the history of science。Ball is attempting to explain quantum physics by focusing on some of its stranger implications。 He wants to understand what quantum physics tells us about the real world。 His book is as much metaphysics as physics。Toward the end of the book， he quotes a prominent 20th-century physicist who said that you don't really understand a subject， no matter how complicated， unless you can explain it to your grandmother。 By that standard， he acknowledges that he doesn't really understand quantum physics， and he doesn't think anyone else does， either。 I know I don't。 。。。more
James
，
If you have a toehold in particle and quantum physics， but could never quite make heads or tails （or upspin or downspin） of it， this is the book for you！Ball is very clear and considerate of the reader in his descriptions of whats really going on in quantum physics， including what we can reasonably claim about the quantum world， and what we can't。 Turns out， the subject of what can even be said is itself a contentious topic in the physics world。 Ball presents each of the leading schools of thoug If you have a toehold in particle and quantum physics， but could never quite make heads or tails （or upspin or downspin） of it， this is the book for you！Ball is very clear and considerate of the reader in his descriptions of whats really going on in quantum physics， including what we can reasonably claim about the quantum world， and what we can't。 Turns out， the subject of what can even be said is itself a contentious topic in the physics world。 Ball presents each of the leading schools of thought and gives each one its due， occasionally sharing his own preferred viewpoint， but carefully flagging it as such。 His goal isn't to persuade you toward his way of thinking but simply to illuminate an obscure subject for a general audience。Hint -- the title has a double meaning: traditionally， quantum physics has been presented in the popular science press as "beyond weird！，" as in kooky， whacko， non-sensical， and virtually impossible to understand。 Ball's goal is to move you beyond the label "weird" and provide you with a better grasp of what is a genuinely fascinating and important topic for understanding the frontiers of science and technology， both today and over much of the 20th Century。 。。。more
Samuel
，
The reviews on the cover are all justified; it is indeed as good an explanation of quantum theory as I think can be made。 For the first third maybe it went through fairly usual motions and explained the basics， which are not so hard to grasp， but by the end it did cover all the meaty stuff。 The author's merit lies in writing it as it is， and deliberately trying to dispel any of the weirdness which can confuse and overcomplicate other explanations， particularly those found in media articles。The o The reviews on the cover are all justified; it is indeed as good an explanation of quantum theory as I think can be made。 For the first third maybe it went through fairly usual motions and explained the basics， which are not so hard to grasp， but by the end it did cover all the meaty stuff。 The author's merit lies in writing it as it is， and deliberately trying to dispel any of the weirdness which can confuse and overcomplicate other explanations， particularly those found in media articles。The other great thing about this book is the fact that it confronts the inextricability of philosophy with quantum， in that the interpretation of what the non-classical behaviours mean （e。g。 the fact that making an quantum state is undefined until observed） has to be the purview of quantum physicist since it is fundamental to providing sense to the theory。Highly recommended， particularly to those， like myself， who have just learnt the basics of quantum theory （been introduced to the Schrödinger wave equation） and know of lots of the other weird stuff in quantum。 This provides the way to think about quantum phenomena， and lays the philosophical grounding to engaging with them。 。。。more
Steffi
，
This was more accessible to me than Quantum Universe because it is more philosophical than equations。 However， that is also what is wrong with this book。 The philosophical thoughts are so winding that I lost interest along the way。 It does show Quantum Physics from a different angle and it took recent developments into account。 Quantum Universe is for understanding the basic math of quantum physics。 Beyond Weird is showing a much more nuanced view where the scholars themselves don’t agree。
Alberto Illán Oviedo
，
Hay que reconocer el esfuerzo del autor por intentar hacer comprensibles los conceptos de la mecánica cuántica y conseguirlo con éxito。 Recorrido de una parte de la física， una muy rara， desde el principio a la actualidad que merece la pena si se está interesado en el tema。 Deje afuera la lógica causal， aconsejo。
Max D'onofrio
，
One of those truly mind-bending books。
Emma
，
What a wonderful book。 Threads together philosophy， physics and language in such an approachable and engaging way！
Gary
，
Phillip Ball's book of the philosophy of quantum science is a tour de force of complex and convoluted reasoning。 No conclusions are included， of course， but vast swathes of problems， terminology， and communication are discussed。 Phillip Ball's book of the philosophy of quantum science is a tour de force of complex and convoluted reasoning。 No conclusions are included， of course， but vast swathes of problems， terminology， and communication are discussed。 。。。more
YB
，
As someone with basically no science background， I understood probably about 20% of this book， but somehow still found it to be fascinating and thought provoking。 If you're mathematically inept like me， Ball somehow manages to keep the math to the minimum and the difficult stuff interesting enough to want to make you figure it out。 A really engaging， if also challenging （albeit pleasantly so） introduction into quantum physics that I'm looking forward to diving in again once I find a better grasp As someone with basically no science background， I understood probably about 20% of this book， but somehow still found it to be fascinating and thought provoking。 If you're mathematically inept like me， Ball somehow manages to keep the math to the minimum and the difficult stuff interesting enough to want to make you figure it out。 A really engaging， if also challenging （albeit pleasantly so） introduction into quantum physics that I'm looking forward to diving in again once I find a better grasp of basic physics。 。。。more
Claudio
，
Un libro imprescindible para despejar la "rareza" de la cuántica y para adónde va。 Un esfuerzo tremendo para hacer asequible una teoría que ni siquiera los científicos dedicados a ella se ponen de acuerdo en qué es。 Un libro imprescindible para despejar la "rareza" de la cuántica y para adónde va。 Un esfuerzo tremendo para hacer asequible una teoría que ni siquiera los científicos dedicados a ella se ponen de acuerdo en qué es。 。。。more
Cat
，
Really solid 4 or 4。5 in explaining quantum mechanics and the physics/philosophy boundary to the average interested layperson。 （There’s very little math and the math that’s there is not crucial for understanding。） I learned the standard “small things are weird and impossible to know exactly， only to guess， and we don’t know why yet” in high school physics and this does a great job of explaining， basicaly， how to ask better questions about what quantum mechanics shows （and also how we do know mor Really solid 4 or 4。5 in explaining quantum mechanics and the physics/philosophy boundary to the average interested layperson。 （There’s very little math and the math that’s there is not crucial for understanding。） I learned the standard “small things are weird and impossible to know exactly， only to guess， and we don’t know why yet” in high school physics and this does a great job of explaining， basicaly， how to ask better questions about what quantum mechanics shows （and also how we do know more about how the macro-scale world and its principles are connected to the subatomic world， though no one agrees on the mysterious what it all means）。 This isn’t a “theory of everything” book （Ball seems skeptical that a “theory of everything” would really mean all that much in the end） but it’s fascinating in understanding better。 。。。more
Nader Saeed
，
In 'Beyond Weird' Philip Ball explores quantum mechanics' history and different interpretations under a unique pragmatic lens that is quite unmatched when it comes to the domain of science books trying to tackle quantum mechanics。 Ball is brilliantly rigorous in examining the abstruse ideas related to the field， providing contextual elucidation to pivotal concepts that are mostly overlooked in other books。 "We’re used to the notion of things that in some sense contain information: books， compute In 'Beyond Weird' Philip Ball explores quantum mechanics' history and different interpretations under a unique pragmatic lens that is quite unmatched when it comes to the domain of science books trying to tackle quantum mechanics。 Ball is brilliantly rigorous in examining the abstruse ideas related to the field， providing contextual elucidation to pivotal concepts that are mostly overlooked in other books。 "We’re used to the notion of things that in some sense contain information: books， computer memories， messages left on an answerphone。 And we’re used to the idea that we can possess information: I can know your email address， say。 And these seem distinct: one is potential knowledge， the other actual knowledge， culled from potential knowledge according to our individual capacity。 But quantum mechanics seems to make the interaction two-way: knowledge we possess affects what is knowable （and to others， or just to us？）。 Yes， it’s confusing。 But that is surely the right confusion to embrace， if we want to grapple with what this wonderful theory means。" - Philip Ball， Beyond Weird。 。。。more
Ben Fisk
，
Philip Ball does a great job debunking the bunk descriptions that plague science writer's articles about quantum physics。 I am sure a lot of people are fed up with the same tropes being repeated over and over again about quantum physics without actually putting any work into the explanation of the phenomenon being discussed。 Most use cut-n-paste writing on the subject。 In contrast， Ball works through a number of famous experiments and explains various interpretations with pros and cons of each。 Philip Ball does a great job debunking the bunk descriptions that plague science writer's articles about quantum physics。 I am sure a lot of people are fed up with the same tropes being repeated over and over again about quantum physics without actually putting any work into the explanation of the phenomenon being discussed。 Most use cut-n-paste writing on the subject。 In contrast， Ball works through a number of famous experiments and explains various interpretations with pros and cons of each。 Plus， he develops the background as to why physicists were so perplexed by the discoveries。 The book develops the timeline of the science and changes to how it is viewed that are rarely discussed in science writing。 For example， discoveries on how coherence is lost to decoherence are more important than understanding the early paradoxes as the development of quantum technology will benefit from understanding that。 The book will help the astute reader develop a broader understanding of the field and what to expect in the coming years。 。。。more
Assem
，
The book explores many interesting concepts that are less common in popular science books。 The author analyses them from both science and philosophy point of view。 He also presents each concept with an opposing view。 I genuinely liked the author's take on Many-Worlds interpretation。 I would definitely re-read this book， although it took me some time to get through it。 Reading it first time I wasn't able to grasp all given information， however I enjoyed it a lot。 The book explores many interesting concepts that are less common in popular science books。 The author analyses them from both science and philosophy point of view。 He also presents each concept with an opposing view。 I genuinely liked the author's take on Many-Worlds interpretation。 I would definitely re-read this book， although it took me some time to get through it。 Reading it first time I wasn't able to grasp all given information， however I enjoyed it a lot。 。。。more
Rory
，
Unfortunately quite repetitive in places， with the overarching theme drilled into the reader that quantum behavior isn't weird it just "is"， and we don't really know why， and that all the weirdness （and to be honest， the fun inspiring stuff） comes from our inability to form language to correctly describe the phenomena observed。 Which ok， fair enough， that could be the case， however as a non-physicist it really takes the magic away。 Unfortunately quite repetitive in places， with the overarching theme drilled into the reader that quantum behavior isn't weird it just "is"， and we don't really know why， and that all the weirdness （and to be honest， the fun inspiring stuff） comes from our inability to form language to correctly describe the phenomena observed。 Which ok， fair enough， that could be the case， however as a non-physicist it really takes the magic away。 。。。more
Todd Pinchevsky
，
Very good。 Probably the book I’d recommend to someone who knows nothing about QM and wants to。 Good explanations， and good at discussing alternate theories。 Smart， not dumbed down， but still very readable。
Samuel Lubell
，
It tried very hard to make a very complex subject understandable， but it did not work for me。 Perhaps I needed to read it a couple more times or read a basic science textbook first。
Aldo Manzini
，
Another attempt at describing the quantum world; focuses on the latest science rather than the history; a few insights: （i） transition from quantum to our reality is gradual and is being probed in the latest experiments; （ii） our reality is the result of a “decoherence” that occurs when a particle interacts with other; （iii） “entanglement” may be the key to the riddle of what is our reality。
Max
，
Ask scientists what quantum mechanics tells us and you will get a variety of contradictory explanations。 Where does that leave the rest of us？ Ball tries to help us understand the issues around quantum mechanics。 He provides perspectives I had not read before。 He employs science as well as philosophy。 For language， while inadequate on many occasions， is at a total loss when it comes to the quantum。 In Ball’s words “In quantum theory， words are blunt tools。 We give names to things and processes， Ask scientists what quantum mechanics tells us and you will get a variety of contradictory explanations。 Where does that leave the rest of us？ Ball tries to help us understand the issues around quantum mechanics。 He provides perspectives I had not read before。 He employs science as well as philosophy。 For language， while inadequate on many occasions， is at a total loss when it comes to the quantum。 In Ball’s words “In quantum theory， words are blunt tools。 We give names to things and processes， but those are just labels for concepts that cannot be properly， accurately expressed in any terms but their own。” If words won’t do， what about the math？ Scientists may say “the math makes perfect sense whereas the words don’t quite。 But that would be to make a semantic error: equations about physical reality are， without interpretation， just marks on paper。 We can’t hide behind equations from that ‘not quite’ – not if we truly want to derive meaning。”Take the issue of wave-particle duality。 Ball notes “Quantum objects are not sometimes particles and sometimes waves…we have no reason to suppose that ‘what they are’ changes in any meaningful way depending on how we try to look at them。 So the phrase ‘wave-particle duality’ doesn’t really refer to quantum objects at all， but the interpretation of experiments…” “Einstein expressed it by saying that quantum objects present us with a choice of languages， but it is too easily forgotten that this is precisely what it is: a struggle to formulate the right words， not a description of the reality behind them。”Erwin Schrodinger developed a wave equation for an electron substituting electrical charge for amplitude， which normal wave equations represent。 Ball goes on “It was a natural thing to assume， but it was wrong。 The wave in Schrodinger’s wave isn’t a wave of electron charge density。 In fact， it’s not a wave that corresponds to any concrete physical property。 It is just a mathematical abstraction – for which reason it is not really a wave at all， but is called a wavefunction。” The wavefunction， however， is useful。 It can determine probabilities such as finding a quantum object in a particular position or with a particular momentum or energy， depending on the experiment。 Ball continues “And - here’s the really important thing – this wavefunction contains all the information one can possibly access about the corresponding quantum particle。” But even though you can get a probability of finding an electron in a particular place， the wavefunction “says nothing about where the electron is。” “The wavefunction is not a description of the entity we call an electron。 It is a prescription for what to expect when we make measurements on that entity”。 Many physicists would disagree with that statement， but it represents the thinking of Niels Bohr and those that subscribe to the Copenhagen Interpretation。 While Ball accepts that quantum mechanics does not describe an underlying reality， he doesn’t believe that means there isn’t one。 However， Ball is not a realist。 Most scientists who are realists know that the wavefunction is not a real description of the underlying reality， but believe that it corresponds to an objective reality。 After all， what produces the measurements we make？ This realist view is the ontic view as opposed to the epistemic view of the Copenhagenists。 In the latter view we only get probabilities for the result of our measurements， but can’t even speak of an underlying reality。The idea of superposition， that a quantum object can be in two or more places or two or more states at the same time runs into arguments similar to those for wave-particle duality。 The wavefunction is a solution to Schrodinger’s equation， which like other equations can have multiple solutions which can be combined。 These multiple solutions can be considered separate states but it is a matter of interpretation。 Ball notes “But strictly speaking a superposition should be considered only as an abstract mathematical thing。” In a normal wave equation another solution is just another wave， but because Schrodinger is using wave physics for quantum states it gets confusing。 In Ball’s words “superpositions of quantum states only seem odd because the wavefunctions are used to describe the properties of entities that we can also regard as particles – meaning that such particles seem to be able to have two or more values of their properties at once。” The double-slit experiment not only seems to show that an electron can take two paths at once like a wave， but that it can switch back to particle behavior taking only one path when observed。 There is no explanation for this， but there is no reason to assume that the quantum object actually changes。 For more on the double slit experiment I highly recommend reading Anil Ananthaswamy’s Through Two Doors at Once。 With descriptions of many types of double slit experiments， he really gets you to appreciate just how strange quantum mechanics is。 He shows that not only does a particle appear to take two paths at the same time but seems to go back in time which Ball also alludes to。 Feynman’s quantum electrodynamics is sometimes used to support a particle taking multiple paths， but does the mathematics actually represent reality。 In the calculations， most paths cancel out。 Ball says it is a flat out wrong assumption， “The electron or photon does not take all possible paths。”Ball thinks Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle would be better called the Unknowable Principle。 We can’t measure multiple quantum properties at the same time “because they can’t exist all at once。 And by gathering some we may scramble the values of others。” The order in which measurements are made makes a difference。 Ball points out that measurements of spin components change based on the order。 Measuring one scrambles the measurement of the other。 Ball gives a very good explanation of “spin”， electron orbits， and quantum numbers that are used to define quantum states。 Some variables can be measured accurately at the same time such as mass and charge but others known as conjugate variables have limited accuracy when measured at the same time - the more precise the measurement of one， the less precise the measurement of the other。 Position and momentum are conjugate variables as are energy and time。 Why these and not others？ Ball cannot think of an intuitive explanation， but he says it’s in the math。 Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics solution is not commutative for these properties。 A times B does not equal B times A。 The difference between the calculations is the difference in accuracy of the Uncertainty Principle。 Regarding momentum and measurement， momentum in waves is measured by wave length， something not conducive to a precise position measurement。 Ball explains this in more detail。 Sean Carroll in Something Deeply Hidden also does a very good job of explaining this。 Then there is the issue of entanglement。 Ball describes this as quantum objects with shared properties represented by a single wavefunction， even though they may be far distant from each other in space。 “As far as quantum mechanics is concerned， entanglement makes them both parts of a single object。” In experiments the spin of entangled electrons isn’t correlated because they communicate with each other， but because the property of spin is non-local in entangled electrons。 Ball notes “The main thing you need to know about entanglement is this: it tells us that a quantum object may have properties that are not entirely located on that object。” Some physicists suspect that entanglement is what ties together spacetime。 In one model “spacetime and gravity in the 3D universe look like a projection of the entanglement existing within its 2D boundary surface。” Entanglement may also be important to developing a theory of quantum gravity。 Carlo Rovelli’s Reality is Not What it Seems gives an accessible description of loop quantum gravity and how spacetime could emerge from the quantum。 Rovelli embraces Heisenberg’s matrix solution to quantum mechanics， but sees Schrodinger’s wave function only as an aid to calculation。Next Ball discusses where the quantum world ends and the classical world begins。 It’s not a matter of size。 Rather it is a loss of coherence or decoherence。 The Schrodinger equation describes quantum objects in terms of abstract waves that determine probabilities。 Ball notes “It is this waviness that gives rise to distinctly quantum phenomena like， interference， superposition and entanglement。 These behaviours become possible when there is a well-defined relationship between the quantum ‘waves’: in effect when they are in step。 This coordination is called coherence。” Without coherence “there can be no regular interference pattern， but just random， featureless variations in the resulting wave amplitude。” When a quantum object encounters another object it becomes entangled with it。 Given the abundance of photons， air molecules， dust grains and such in the environment， this entanglement rapidly spreads。 The quantum object’s individual superposition is lost when it becomes a part of the wavefunction of the larger object。 These classical objects are decoherent and do not display quantum superposition or interference。 The classical world grows out of the quantum world。 It is not separate from it。Ball devotes a couple of chapters to quantum computing。 The increased speed of quantum computers is commonly ascribed to superposition， accessing more than one state of each qubit。 For this the qubits must maintain coherence and not get entangled with their environment。 This is a technological challenge， and so far quantum computers have only been able to maintain a small number of qubits in their quantum state for long enough to perform calculations。 So it may be a while before quantum computers challenge conventional ones。 Ball sees quantum computers as having excellent potential for specific tasks such as factoring large numbers， important to cryptography， and also for large data base searches。 He doubts that they will replace your laptop for everyday tasks。 He also points out that there are skeptics of the idea that quantum computers achieve their speed through parallel processing due to superposition of the qubits。 Rather the increased performance may be due to qubits entangled with each other allowing them to be managed together rather than in separate steps saving time。 There are other theories， but no consensus。 Ball states point blank that “no one fully understands how quantum computers work。”Ball analyzes some of the interpretations。 Copenhagen is his starting point。 He shows great respect for Bohr and much of what he said， but takes exception to the notion that there will never be a way to find out more about the quantum world。 From there he looks at the de Broglie-Bohm interpretation， the GRW collapse model， the Penrose-Diosi collapse model， QBism and of course the exotic Many Worlds theory。 Again he shows respect for Bohm and the other theorists but doesn’t buy into their theories。 He thinks the theories are important even if they are wrong。 They may help find a better path to understanding the quantum by spawning new ideas。 He devotes a chapter to Many Worlds which he rejects， not because its implications are bizarre， but because he finds it incoherent。A good end to this discussion is a parlor game Ball cites。 It’s a version of the Twenty Questions。 In the normal version the questioner has twenty questions which can only be answered yes or no to discover a word， person or thing the other players have agreed on。 In the modified version the other players don’t have a specific thing to be discovered。 Rather they agree only to answer questions in a manner consistent with all the previous answers in a way that allows the discovery of something。 At the end whatever answer the questioner comes up with is right as long as it is consistent with those answers。 It sounds a lot like our investigation of the quantum world。 The questions you ask determine what you will find。 。。。more
Peter Tillman
，
The great physicist Ernest Rutherford said， around 1915: "If you can’t explain your physics to the barmaid， it is probably not very good physics。"* It's fair to say that Quantum Mechanics/quantum physics （QM） isn't even close to passing the Rutherford Test。 But it's getting closer -- and there's hope， says Philip Ball。Ball has written about as good a popular introduction to QM as anyone could， perhaps because he got his start as a chemist， as did I。 And Ball's book has gotten many， many favorabl The great physicist Ernest Rutherford said， around 1915: "If you can’t explain your physics to the barmaid， it is probably not very good physics。"* It's fair to say that Quantum Mechanics/quantum physics （QM） isn't even close to passing the Rutherford Test。 But it's getting closer -- and there's hope， says Philip Ball。Ball has written about as good a popular introduction to QM as anyone could， perhaps because he got his start as a chemist， as did I。 And Ball's book has gotten many， many favorable reviews。 So， why did it take me 5 months to finish this short book？ Not exactly a gripping read！ But every other pop-science explanation of QM I've tried to read has been worse。 Some a LOT worse。 This is likely the best to date。 It still has problems -- as the author freely admits。 Citing something close to Rutherford's Rule， above。I particularly like Ball's observation that recapitulating the history of the discovery of QM， as is often done in physics classes， is misleading。 And that "quanta" are more a symptom than a cause。 "If we named it today， we'd call it something else。" QM is about quanta about like Newton's gravity was about comets: inspiration， yes， but hardly the climax！ Quanta were "the telltale clue and no more。"And I LOVED Natalie Wolchover's review at Nature， https://www。nature。com/articles/d4158。。。 -- with such gems as that the Copenhagen Interpretation† is “shut up and calculate except without ever shutting up。" Woot！ I just came to "photosynthesis" in my notes， as a good example Ball （and others） cite as an example of QM effects in everyday life。 I wrote: Grass is green。 Nature is grainy。 Leave it at that。 OK， that's a bit cryptic。。。。 Just like this topic！ And photosynthesis is， well， really hard to understand。 I've tried。。。。The heart of Weird QM remains the Double-Slit experiment， https://en。wikipedia。org/wiki/Double-。。。 --that demonstrates wave-particle duality， and has been bedeviling students since 1927！ All particles exhibit a wave nature。 All waves （such as light） exhibit a particulate nature （such as photons）。 Hey， Einstein struggled with this stuff， too！ And it is truly a weird result。 As you may recall from school。 Ball certainly could have made his book more useful as a reference by adding a TOC [！！] and making a more comprehensive index。 Oh， well。 I still plan to reread it sometime -- unless something better comes along。 Especially if it passes the Rutherford Test！----------Notes:*Actually， he said this several different ways。 As did other Famous Physicists， including Einstein！ Who probably got it from Rutherford first: http://www。eoht。info/page/Barmaid%20p。。。† https://en。wikipedia。org/wiki/Copenha。。。The specific review that brought me to read this book was Brian Clegg's at Physics World。 And Ball's book won the "Physics World Book of the Year" award for 2018: https://physicsworld。com/a/beyond-wei。。。 Clegg's review is linked there。 。。。more
Blair Emsick
，
I know next to nothing about quantum mechanics but Ball does an excellent job explaining quantum oddities in layman’s terms。 A fun and challenging read。
Bernardo
，
In Beyond Weird， Philip Ball argues that we are undermining and oversimplifying quantum mechanics by calling it weird。 It’s something that most of us， the media and even scientists have done。 Quantum mechanics is much more than that and it is a disservice to just use such a common and easy way to describe it， for want of better wording。 The problem is that we might not have the right words to describe quantum mechanics。Quantum mechanics is famous for being ambiguous。 As a result， it’s one of the In Beyond Weird， Philip Ball argues that we are undermining and oversimplifying quantum mechanics by calling it weird。 It’s something that most of us， the media and even scientists have done。 Quantum mechanics is much more than that and it is a disservice to just use such a common and easy way to describe it， for want of better wording。 The problem is that we might not have the right words to describe quantum mechanics。Quantum mechanics is famous for being ambiguous。 As a result， it’s one of the areas of science （if not the only one） that is subject to different interpretations。 The act of measurement plays a central role in its interpretation。 Why is quantum theory probabilistic？ What about its lack of causality？ And do quantum objects have real properties， just like the ones we see in our classical world， the so-called hidden variables of quantum mechanics， or is the measurement act just a way of getting more knowledge and does it present a limit to our knowledge， represented by the collapse of the wavefunction？ Is there some underlying meaning or must we just accept that quantum mechanics is different from any other scientific theory and stop questioning its reality？ These and many others were central themes in the arguments that Bohr， Einstein and other physicists had in the past and still have to this day。 These two ways of looking at quantum theory represent the ontic and epistemic views， respectively， which remain a debate to this day among physicists。Philip Ball gives subtle hints of his stance on the meaning of quantum mechanics throughout the book。 In the last chapters this subtlety slowly disappears， as his opinions get more fleshed out。 I got the impression that he is closer to the Copenhagen and maybe even qbism interpretations， while at the same time dismissing the pilot wave and MWI interpretation （which was a relief to be honest， as there are many physicists out there defending it in a rather “fierce” way）。 He seems to be a big fan of the role information （its meaning in physics is described in the book） could play in quantum theory （and also in quantum computing）。 By the end of the book， he argues that we should be able to describe quantum theory in terms of words which have meaning， just like we are able to describe， say， Newton’s laws and Einstein’s relativity， rather than only having an abstract mathematical theory which we don’t really know what it means and gives rise to so much ambiguity and debate。This a remarkable book about the foundations of quantum mechanics。 Anyone from a physicist to a layperson should enjoy it。 Philip Ball is a great science writer。 He doesn’t shy away from technical terms and considers the reader to be able to understand his reasoning， as he explains the most important topics of quantum mechanics and its possible meanings。 Personally， I loved this book with its complete focus on science and would recommend it to anyone interested in knowing why quantum mechanics is indeed beyond weird。 。。。more
Kürşat K。
，
Ne zaman Kuantum Fiziği ile ilgili bir kitap okusam kafam biraz daha karışıyor。 Konu karışık ama bir de şöyle zorluğu var。 Bir türlü "Türkçe Bilim Dili"ni oluşturamadık。 Çeviriler bu kitapta da olduğu gibi iyi olsa da bazı şeyler havada kalıyor。 Dilimizde her alandan bilim insanlarının oturup ortak bir bilim dilinde anlaşsalar ve yapılan çeviriler de bu dil üzerinden yapılsa daha sağlıklı olur diye düşünüyorum。 Çünkü bu tarz popüler bilim kitapları çevirilirken， kitabın danışmanı kimse onun dili Ne zaman Kuantum Fiziği ile ilgili bir kitap okusam kafam biraz daha karışıyor。 Konu karışık ama bir de şöyle zorluğu var。 Bir türlü "Türkçe Bilim Dili"ni oluşturamadık。 Çeviriler bu kitapta da olduğu gibi iyi olsa da bazı şeyler havada kalıyor。 Dilimizde her alandan bilim insanlarının oturup ortak bir bilim dilinde anlaşsalar ve yapılan çeviriler de bu dil üzerinden yapılsa daha sağlıklı olur diye düşünüyorum。 Çünkü bu tarz popüler bilim kitapları çevirilirken， kitabın danışmanı kimse onun diliyle öğreniyoruz ya da öğrenmeye çalışıyoruz。 Böyle olunca da farklı yayınevlerinin çıkardığı kitapların dilinde farklılaşmalar oluyor。 Bu da konuyu anlamayı güçleştiriyor。 Umarım bu konuda bir gelişme sağlanır。 Kitap güzel， muhtemelen yeterli İngilizcem olsaydı， orijinal dilinden daha çok anlardım。 。。。more
Jason
，
It’s a tall task to cover a subject like quantum physics for laypeople， but this book seemed to take just the right approach。 It was aptly challenging， yet manageable thanks to the well organized content and carefully moderated pace。 The author’s commitment to precise wording made it that much more thought provoking and ultimately felt like it paid off。
Pop Bop
，
Are You Team Ontic or Team Epistemic？If you boil it all down， suggests Ball， the distinction between ontic and epistemic viewpoints is the "Big Divide" for interpretations of quantum mechanics。 For him， "[i]t is where you must reveal your true colours"。 Is everything comprised of "real" and "physical" things， （Ontic）， or is everything only ever to be understood， or to even "exist"， solely as an observed or measured "outcome"， （Epistemic）。 The early epistemic approach was summarized by Niels Bohr Are You Team Ontic or Team Epistemic？If you boil it all down， suggests Ball， the distinction between ontic and epistemic viewpoints is the "Big Divide" for interpretations of quantum mechanics。 For him， "[i]t is where you must reveal your true colours"。 Is everything comprised of "real" and "physical" things， （Ontic）， or is everything only ever to be understood， or to even "exist"， solely as an observed or measured "outcome"， （Epistemic）。 The early epistemic approach was summarized by Niels Bohr， "It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how nature is。 Physics concerns what we can say about nature。"Ball falls emphatically on the epistemic side as well， and the balance of this book， in one form or another， from one perspective or another， with one argument or another， is devoted to making his case。 Consequently， this is less of a primer on quantum mechanics and much more a subtle polemic。 That's fine， but one might not want an entire book of that sort of argument， or one might at least prefer a more even-handed approach。 It did seem that every topic and every discussion， was tilted toward the epistemic approach。 The effect was that we touched upon a great number of fascinating and current topics， but always with an undercurrent of spin。In any event， for me， once we got to questions about what is language， what is knowledge， what is reality， what does "is" mean， and can there be such a thing as "causality"， we had pretty much gotten to the outer limits of my interest and， to be fair， understanding。 I admit that toward the end there was some skimming involved。（Please note that I received a free ecopy of this book without a review requirement， or any influence regarding review content should I choose to post a review。 Apart from that I have no connection at all to either the author or the publisher of this book。） 。。。more
Mike Lisanke
，
Its yet another history book on a modern science topic using all the assumptions of the modern theory to tells its story。。。 IMO， Philip Ball didn't go beyond weird in his informed but prosaic description of Quantum Theory from everyone's repeated amazing descriptions of quantum theory that we should all remain amazed with。。。 Amazing。 Seriously， there are so many who are looking for the reasons that Quantum Theory does not make sense that I would have very much liked to hear these alternatives 。。 Its yet another history book on a modern science topic using all the assumptions of the modern theory to tells its story。。。 IMO， Philip Ball didn't go beyond weird in his informed but prosaic description of Quantum Theory from everyone's repeated amazing descriptions of quantum theory that we should all remain amazed with。。。 Amazing。 Seriously， there are so many who are looking for the reasons that Quantum Theory does not make sense that I would have very much liked to hear these alternatives 。。。 but none were presented。 。。。more
Alex
，
Finally。 This is the real face of quantum mechanics， beyond the easy but misleading metaphors and wonky generalisations， to the real philosophical and physical challenges of the theory and the cutting-edge work that is currently pinning down what QM really means。 If you've often wondered whether an quantum mechanical "observer" means a person or whether there are ways to distinguish between "interpretations" of the theory， this is the book for you。 It's a challenging read， but purely out of nece Finally。 This is the real face of quantum mechanics， beyond the easy but misleading metaphors and wonky generalisations， to the real philosophical and physical challenges of the theory and the cutting-edge work that is currently pinning down what QM really means。 If you've often wondered whether an quantum mechanical "observer" means a person or whether there are ways to distinguish between "interpretations" of the theory， this is the book for you。 It's a challenging read， but purely out of necessity。 There are paragraphs that you'll need to re-read to really grasp their implications， and the way ideas build upon each other means you'll want to get through the book in a week， lest you forget some important principle， but the rigour and clarity of the writing mean that if you stick with it， you'll really get to understand why QM is so important。My one qualm is about the chapter on the "many worlds interpretation"。 I don't think that Ball is wrong here， or that his arguments are misplaced， but unlike the rest of the book this chapter places a lot more stock in the apparent absurdity of certain conclusions about consciousness and the sense of self， rather than the strict philosophical or physical problems those conclusions cause。 It's also the only chapter that really seems to be coming directly out of Ball himself， rather than Ball presenting the conclusions of the experts in the field。 That said it's a thought provoking section towards the tail end and I think the book would've been weaker and less interesting without it。 。。。more
Greg Hovanesian
，
LOVE LOVE LOVE this book。 Quantum Physics isn't just a science: it's a philosophy of the world。 Philip Ball is Greatest Science Writer I've Ever Read。 LOVE LOVE LOVE this book。 Quantum Physics isn't just a science: it's a philosophy of the world。 Philip Ball is Greatest Science Writer I've Ever Read。 。。。more
Hamid
，
This is a book that tries to describe the weirdness of quantum mechanics。 And I think it does a great job。 Although it is written primarily for the general audience， I don't recommend it if you're not familiar with the ABC of QM。 There are much simpler books out there。 Quantum mechanics doesn’t tell us how a thing is， but what （with calculable probability） it could be， along with – and this is crucial – a logic of the relationships between those ‘coulds’。 If this， then that。What this means is th This is a book that tries to describe the weirdness of quantum mechanics。 And I think it does a great job。 Although it is written primarily for the general audience， I don't recommend it if you're not familiar with the ABC of QM。 There are much simpler books out there。 Quantum mechanics doesn’t tell us how a thing is， but what （with calculable probability） it could be， along with – and this is crucial – a logic of the relationships between those ‘coulds’。 If this， then that。What this means is that， to truly describe the features of quantum mechanics， as far as that is currently possible， we should replace all the conventional ‘isms’ with ‘ifms’。 For example:Not‘here it is a particle， there it is a wave’but‘if we measure things like this， the quantum object behaves in a manner we associate with particles; but if we measure it like that， it behaves as if it’s a wave’Not‘the particle is in two states at once’but‘if we measure it， we will detect this state with probability X， and that state with probability Y’ 。。。more
Misneach
，