Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site hlexa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!hlexa!hsf
From: hsf@hlexa.UUCP (Henry Friedman)
Newsgroups: net.books,net.physics
Subject: Re: Re: Superforce by Davies(?)?  (reposting)
Message-ID: <4154@hlexa.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 15-Apr-85 13:17:24 EST
Article-I.D.: hlexa.4154
Posted: Mon Apr 15 13:17:24 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 16-Apr-85 01:11:36 EST
References: <129@tardis.UUCP> <10033@tardis.UUCP> <9883@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Short Hills, NJ
Lines: 42
Xref: watmath net.books:1672 net.physics:2444

You guys are not being quite fair to Davies.  Although he does get
(possibly) a bit carried away with philosophical implications in a
few places, SUPERFORCE is basically a solid description of
unification physics.  And as has been mentioned, some very solid
modern elementary particle physics, especially on the theoretical
side (not yet experimentally confirmed), can sound somewhat bizarre
on first exposure.

I recommend SUPERFORCE if you:

1) want a clear exposition of elementary particles and forces,
2) want to understand the progress that has been made in unification
   of the four forces, such as the Grand Unified Theories and
   supersymmetry.
3) want the clearest explanation I've yet seen on the relationship
   between purely geometrical theories of matter and forces, on the
   one hand, and the quantum (boson carrier of forces) approach, on
   the other hand.
4) want to understand the relationship between experimental and
   theoretical physics.

I suspect that some of the previous criticisms posted are not quite
accurate.  For example, although I haven't returned to the text to
check every accusation, I don't recall that Davies meant that
nothingness was full of energy, etc.  I do recall that he said that
space (spacetime) was different from nothingness, i.e., was part of
the physical universe.  And the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle allows
that virtual particles are continuallly popping in and out of existence
in "empty space."

A few of Davies conclusions about the virtual impossibility of proving
the supersymmetry theory seem to be already dated (see April 1985
issue of DISCOVER magazine, describing Carlo Rubbia's latest findings
in the article "The Ultimate Theory of Everything").  But such findings
only make the main discussion in SUPERFORCE that much more relevant and
interesting.

This is not to say you guys don't have some valid gripes about portions
of the book.  But discouraging people from reading it for the reasons
stated would be "throwing out the baby with the bath water."

--Henry Friedman