Top critical review
17 people found this helpful
Not even wrong!
on 15 August 2012
This book makes some thought provoking claims and contains a number of well written explanations of physical concepts and their history and is therefore reasonable value for money. However these intervals of clarity are overwhelmed by a lot of loosely constructed and diffuse discussion, with no clear path between founding 'in plain sight' principles (the universe is 'one' and there is only 'one universe') and the conclusion (linking/unification of QM and Relativity).
The author's stated foundational principles are not new and have been (still are) seriously considered and applied by a number of theoretical physicists to better quantitative effect. (L.Smolin for example, as the author himself notes. e.g. see [arXiv:1104.2822v1] )
The author's remark that the book "... contains no equations, or new, testable predictions" is apt. He claims that this is because it is a unification "in principle, in much the same way that several unifications ... are described by a principle rather than an equation". However, every true unification principle in the history of physics was expressed in, or gave rise to, a mathematical form that gives it objective and testable meaning!!
Galilean Equivalence, for example, requires mathematical equations for the Galilean transformation of space-time coordinates, allowing one to prove explicitly that (e.g.) Newton's laws are, in fact, invariant under such transformations between inertial systems (and Einstein to see that Maxwell's equations are not so; ergo the Lorentz transformation, Relativity and the overthrow of Newton's absolute Space and absolute Time).
Founding principles in the absence of mathematical form, connected to physical observables, are ultimately useless I'm afraid. In the immortal words of W.Pauli, this work is "not even wrong"!