Flashes of Creation
George Gamow, Fred Hoyle, and the Great Big Bang Debate
-
- ¥2,600
発行者による作品情報
A respected physics professor and author breaks down the great debate over the Big Bang and the continuing quest to understand the fate of the universe. Today, the Big Bang is so entrenched in our understanding of the cosmos that to doubt it would seem crazy. But as Paul Halpern shows in Flashes of Creation, just decades ago its mere mention caused sparks to fly. At the center of the debate were Russian American physicist George Gamow and British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle. Gamow insisted that a fiery explosion explained how the elements of the universe were created. Attacking the idea as half-baked, Hoyle countered that the universe was engaged in a never-ending process of creation. The battle was fierce. In the end, Gamow turned out to be right -- mostly -- and Hoyle, along with his many achievements, is remembered for giving the theory the silliest possible name: "The Big Bang." Halpern captures the brilliance of both thinkers and reminds us that even those proved wrong have much to teach us about boldness, imagination, and the universe itself.
PUBLISHERS WEEKLY
Physics professor Halpern (The Quantum Labyrinth) explores in this uneven survey a mid-century argument about the origin of the universe. In the late 1940s, questions about how the universe began were hotly debated. One side, led by Russian American physicist George Gamow, argued in support of the big bang theory. The other, led by British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle, took the position that portions of the universe are continually created. (Halpern provides an ample grounding in physics, astronomy, and quantum mechanics to allow general readers to grasp the complexities of the competing theories.) But while he shows how each scientist held a crucial missing piece for the other ("In essence, one wrote the beginning of the story of element creation, and the other wrote the ending"), he's less successful in bringing his principle subjects to life, and offers relatively little insight into their personalities or what made them tick. For example, he writes of how Gamow and Hoyle shared two traits, taking "joy in the process of discovery" and engaging in "the search for and dissemination of truth," though the same can be said for many scientists. Those looking for a colorful biography won't find it here, but Halpern's treatment of a critical period in science makes this worthwhile for readers interested in the history of physics.
