The Goldilocks Enigma

[Solanum]

I've got about 2/3rds of the way through this book and I have to say, I'm very disappointed. Frankly I can't be bothered finishing it.

The first 1/3rd to 1/2 is OK, though I have to say it introduced no new concepts to me and was extremely light in the way it covered what was there. From that point on (after the discussion of string theory) it rapidly descended into sophistry and solipsism, not to mention a large amount of repitition. I realise that is trying to give space to a range of theories but the second half of the book is very much akin to listening to two drunken arts students arguing over the origin of the universe in a pub.

Furthermore, I thought his style was poor and (as a gainfully employed research scientist) I disagree wholeheartedly with his slightly snide comments on what is or isn't science. There are also factual errors (albeit minor ones) in places where he is speaking outside of his field.

Considering his reputation I'm sorry to say this is one of the worst popular science books I've read.

So, that is my rant, what did the rest of you who have read it think? Anyone going to argue for the defence?

[AstralTraveller]

Sorry but I hadn't even heard of it and after reading your comments and the Wiki entry on the author I don't feel tempted to read it. Getting drunk and arguing with a couple of arts students sounds like more fun. :whistle:

[bojan]

While I highly respect the author as a scientist and his work in popularization of science, I do not share his approach to those things... he is trying not to offend anyone.
It is either Religion or Science. The principle of observation and experiment repeatability of them in science method defies his views, IMHO
I am on Science side.

[Solanum]

I hadn't read the Wiki entry before (and I do think you have to take stuff on Wikipedia with a very large grain of salt), but if what is on there is true, then I think that the book is also slightly deceptive about his beliefs and aims. It does start to explain why some of the book is so poorly argued though.... perhaps he would have been better off writing a novel to express his personal ramblings on these matters!

[AstralTraveller]

Or spoonful of jam. This was discovered recently http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_for_jam Colin is highly amused.:lol:

[Solanum]

Presumably he is the guy who blew the whistle on full fee paying students being unable to fail at Wollongong? Well, being a bit careful about what I say, the er... impression... I have received is that it isn't much better at universities with a higher reputation than Wollongong even amongst non-foreign students. That is what happens when you make the income a university gets reliant on how many students pass it's courses. Idiotic.

[AstralTraveller]

No, you're barking up the wrong tree. Colin is fond of telling students how easy it is to pass - they just have to do the work. Attend lectures, take notes, hand in assignments, study for exams, that sort of thing.

I can't think of the person to whom you refer. We had one 'whistleblower' a few years ago who was totally in the wrong. He should have been sued for slander. I could go on about the malaise in universities but I don't want to hijack the thread.

[Solanum]

Ah, OK. My mistake. A quick google tells me I was thinking to Ted Steele who, as you say, appears to have been overstating his case somewhat. Still, I've worked in three universities in two countries and I think the effects of changes in the way they are funded are fairly universal.... but, discussion for another time maybe.

[Jen]

:lol::lol::lol: