Comments on: In Which We Learn There’s Still A Chance For Gravity’s Rainbow

By: Ken

Ken — Mon, 19 Sep 2005 20:32:50 +0000

Actually, my neighbor Leonard is the co-author of the new Hawking book. I’ll have to find out what bits changed and then I can read just those. That should save me another twenty-five minutes.

And you’re not alone on the Gravity’s Rainbow thing. It took me many tries to get through the first 150 pages, but after that I couldn’t read it fast enough. So when I went back a couple of years ago to re-read it, I expected to power right through, only to get stuck in the same place again. Perhaps one of the reasons that the book has the talismanic power that it does is that it requires a realignment of your thought process to really get into it, and that realignment is perversely impermanent.

By: jim

jim — Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:32:56 +0000

This all kinda reminds me of the way they come out every few years with Bibles that are translated for the “hip” “younger” generation.

And with the first season fof Slings and Arrows (a show that Booksquare really needs to get on board with) fresh in my mind, I’m still waiting for the update of Hamlet’s third soliloquy that goes:

“To be, or not to be, whatever.”

By: Jill Monroe

Jill Monroe — Fri, 16 Sep 2005 11:46:01 +0000

Well, what would the words “Super String Thoery” do to you? The String Theory was the only NOVA episode I ever tried to order. The other being on art forgeries.

By: Booksquare

Booksquare — Fri, 16 Sep 2005 03:52:28 +0000

Jill, the thought that you wrote the words “String Theory” scares me. Also, I need help….please send lifeboat!

By: Jill Monroe

Jill Monroe — Thu, 15 Sep 2005 14:36:05 +0000

I’m looking forward to the updating of theories – there’s been some changes in the String Theory.

Brenda – I’ll head over to your blog right now!

By: Booksquare

Booksquare — Wed, 14 Sep 2005 19:17:30 +0000

Measly 182 with math. And I do care, just not enough to have run out to the garage (it was cold!) and count pages. Also, that would have required heavy lifting and heaving and such. I am chiming in my own, slow, pathetic, no time to read anything but the RSS feeds sort of way.

It’s physics — sure, it’s ostensibly physics for the masses, but it’s not something that everyone can understand. I understand it, but I don’t understand baking. Different brains for different folks.

I am reminded of Einstein’s introduction to either his book on general or special relativity (I believe general as I found that one harder) where he stated that he was going to describe the theory in terms that anyone could understand. Yeah, anyone who understands the time-space continuum and related stuff (that’s a technical term).

By: Brenda Coulter

Brenda Coulter — Wed, 14 Sep 2005 18:58:17 +0000

For cryin' out loud, the book was only a measly 182 pages to begin with. But when I blogged about this on Monday, nobody chimed in to echo my disgust. Blast it all, I want somebody to care!