An Introduction to HyperspaceThis is an odyssey into the history of development of the concept of hyperspace that includes fourth and higher spatial dimensions to account for the riddles and unsolved problems of unified field theory. Since the postulation of special theory of relativity, Einstein and subsequent physicists until now have struggled to explain the four natural forces; the electromagnetic force (explained by Maxwell's field equations for electricity & magnetism); the strong and weak nuclear forces (explained by Yang - Mills field equations for subatomic forces); and the gravitational force (explained by Einstein's field equations of gravitation and relativity) by one unified field theory (theory of everything: String Theory). In other words, unifying the forces of the big, the cosmos, and the laws of the small, the microcosm (subatomic forces) by one single theory. The first part of the book describes how laws of nature become so simple to understand if higher dimensions are invoked; the author gives us a good historical background to build his case for hyperspace concept. The second part of the book describes the evolution of quantum mechanics and String theory. An introduction to wormholes, black holes and the use of these cosmic bodies for interstellar travel is given in the third part. The fourth part rambles through the future of the universe with irrelevant and some times out of focus narrative. The book is entirely free of physics and mathematics; from the point of understanding the basic concepts this approach is welcome. This book also gives an insight into the poignant story of Riemann (p.42) and Ramanujan (p.174) who sustained enormous personal and family hardships to contribute significantly in the field of mathematics. We also get a glimpse of academic rat race that involves professional rivalry, name & work recognition, and personal ego that is prevalent in academics. This is illustrated when Einstein delays Kaluza's paper for publication for 2 years (p.102). Bohr calling Pauli's lecture crazy (p.137); Sheldon Glashow ridiculing t'Hooft's work (p.121); a superior discouraging Mahahiko Suzuki's publication about Euler's Beta function (p.161); and Pauli being furious about Eisenberg's claim, Einstein - Bohr argument, and Schrodinger frustrated with Bohr's interpretation (p.261). The author rambles about symmetry in arts; what is that got to do with hyperspace? The reader can find this discussion in any art book. Time travel has been described in layman's language in many books in depth; this discussion is unnecessary for this book. Throughout the book, the author refers to standard model and the equations of quantum mechanics as ugly; Equations are not ugly, they are complex or non-symmetrical. The author could have devoted one chapter to describing the field equations in layman's terms; it would have helped a more enthusiastic reader to build a bridge to physics and tensor calculus. The reader should not be discouraged about mathematics in understanding relativity; many physicists themselves are heading to the library to learn about mathematics in String theory (Part 2). More appropriate title of the book could be hyperspace - a historical development of String theory. Despite the minor concerns, this book has strong points as observed above. I encourage the reader to buy this book; if you are not happy with this book, it is less than two-lunch money (page numbers from 1994 edition).
A popular account of higher dimensions (more than three spatial dimensions) in relation to modern physics. Frankly, this is one of the worst popular science books I've read recently. The book is divided into three parts; the first part gives a historical background to the mathematical and physical theories of higher dimensions, the second part is an overview of string theory, and the third part is about wormholes, time travel, parallel universes, and various far future disasters and how super advanced civilizations will deal with them through mastery of hyperspace.The first and third parts are mostly what I call "gosh-wow", exaggerated and inaccurate or at least unqualified statements meant to create an impression. There were many references and analogies to non-scientific areas of culture, which is not necessarily a bad thing except that much of what the author says is just wrong. For example, he says correctly that H.G. Wells was a Fabian socialist, but in the next sentence he calls The Time Machine a "Marxian analysis". Fabianism and Marxism are two very different theories, and The Time Machine is a good example of the difference. He also begins telling a story and then leaves out the details that would make sense of it. Almost all his quotations from historical figures in the first section are also quoted in Martin Gardner's The Ambidextrous Universe, which makes me wonder if he has researched these people himself or just lifted the quotes from Gardner's book (which is not included in his bibliography.) There is a lot of half-baked discussion about God which will not satisfy either believers or nonbelievers, who know anything about the actual questions.The second part, on string theory, has less of the "gosh-wow" and is the principal reason I read the book; I could have forgiven the other parts if this had been a good introduction. However, his alternation between very simplistic popularization and unexplained higher mathematics (which seems intended simply to impress, since anyone who understands his equations without explanations would not be reading this kind of popular book to begin with) and his switching between incompatible metaphors makes it quite difficult to get any idea of what string theory actually is about -- he spends more time telling us how wonderful it is than what it is.The third section was so speculative that it seemed more like a primer for how to write science fiction than a serious discussion -- unlike, for example, Kip Thorne's Black Holes and Time Warps, which I just finished. (In fact, his sensationalist interpretation of Thorne is just the misunderstanding that Thorne complains about on the part of "journalists with no understanding of science".)His other books may be better, but I am not going to waste my time finding out; I've taken them off my TBR list.
What do You think about Hyperspace (1998)?
tThe book “Hyperspace” by Michio Kaku, a professor of Theoretical Physics at the City College of New York is another guide to dimensions( How to tell that this book is about higher dimensions at first glance: Hyperspace. Hypercube. Simple) that we can not really imagine, (the same way Mr.Square could not imagine the third dimension in the book “Flatland”).tMost people would think “just another science textbook disguised as a small book.” However, this book gives all of the information that could be provided by a book its size, but the reading experience is not as boring as if you were reading the lesson for your homework. Professor Kaku’s analogies and stories add an interesting (unless the topic is already interesting element that you would most likely not find in a regular textbook (even though there are not many textbooks that talk about how the ten dimensions shrunk down to three dimensions of space and one of time, making total of four dimensions.)tAlso woven into this book are some related subjects such as string theory, supergravity, hyperspace (as can be seen by looking at the title off of the title) non-Euclidian Geometry, and Kaluza-Klein theory, all of them not really something that someone would find in a regular class in regular school at this point. Not only are these topic addressed and thoroughly explained, but there are also many connections being made amongst these topics and a few others.tFrom the Big Bang to the end of time as we know it (and, as some believe, the beginning of time for some other life form whose composition would be considered completely absurd to us), this book will leave almost no questions hanging (that is, at the appropriate level).tMichio Kaku really knows this topic very well, and for that, he gets a book with a five-star rating.
—Harikleia
Ayer no pude parar de leer hasta terminar. Este libro es realmente bueno. Kaku tiene una didáctica bastante agradable y el libro está plagado de explicaciones meditadas para ser lo más sencillas posibles (a pesar de la complejidad de los temas tratados). Es un excelente libro de referencia y descubres datos curiosos que jamás te habrías imaginado.El único contra es que ahora se encuentra desactualizado porque es pre-higgs y pre-colisionador franco-suizo de hadrones. Así que hay algunas anécdotas, planteamientos y conjeturas que ya perdieron sentido o que ahora son hechos irrefutables. De cualquier forma sigue siendo una gran obra que recomiendo a aquellos curiosos que no se han decidido a navegar en las aguas de la física cuántica. :)
—Amet Alvirde
Hyperspace by Michio Kaku,a non - fiction that takes on the bold, controversial world of theoretical physics, in which the astounding physicist Kaku, discusses the key moments of physics in the twentieth century (Einstein's theory of relativity and Quantum Theory) and then makes the bold statement (the overall reason for the book) that we live in a world of ten and twenty six dimensions (the complications as to why will go well past the character limit of goodreads) instead of the regular three we all know and visually see.This book was advised to me by a friend, in which he described it as a book for deep thinkers, which indeed it is, but such a book brought me into a depth of thinking and mind boggling questions that my brain hurt. The book was lovely do not get me wrong, the way in which Kaku wrote it, for the simple minded per say was genius, but it was still quite confusing and left me pondering for days. The controversy behind this books "multiple-dimension" theory is that of the usual Science issues, it's take on religion (usually negative) brings about a lot of rejects, and this being a sensitive topic as it is, while I read the book I attempted to limit myself to trying to understand the science and concepts rather than my personal views on the matter. To conclude, Hyperspace is truly a book I would recommend to anyone, but at the reader's own risk of confusion, eye strain, and headaches (sounds like reading the side effects to a prescription drug). Jokes aside, the writer's credibility, cunning wits, talent at writing, and ability to simplify the topic really got me hooked on a book I would never thought to be interested in, and for that I thank you, Kaku.
—Jacob B
