What are the best science books? All I know is that a brief history

>>8171437

What are the best pop science books?*

>>8171463
Yeah, sure dude, whatever you wanna call it. I am looking for books I can actually read, and you know what I mean by that, please go back under your bridge.

>>8171463
Autistic elitist.

I really liked The Drunkards Walk, which has to do with randomness, probability, statistics, etc.

James Gleick's Chaos and The Information are both really good historical treatments of chaos and information theory respectively. I think he's written some other stuff too.

People shit all over Brian Greene, but as a non physicist I think his physics books are alright. I didn't care for his philosophizing or out there theories, but he describes in detail a ton of important experiments in modern physics and goes over the results.

File: the_mathematical_experience_bookcover_scan_r.jpg (1MB, 957x1383px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 957x1383px

>>8171437
This is the only 'pop' book that I think treats mathematics well.

>>8171583
So is this stuff like Godel and how mathematics breaks down to a certain point and becomes paradoxes? Because that's a concept that I have been wanting to understand for some time.

I am also guessing that Ray Kurzweil's The Singularity Is Near isn't necessary to read if you already believe that computers are capable of human intelligence and man can augment himself with technology?

>>8171594
>So is this stuff like Godel and how mathematics breaks down to a certain point and becomes paradoxes? Because that's a concept that I have been wanting to understand for some time.

No I don't think any of those books go in to that. It's long and meandering, but check out the book Godel, Escher, Bach.

I have never read Kurzweil.

>>8171594
Actually I think this book >>8171587 touches on Godel.

File: -1.jpg (20KB, 342x475px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 342x475px

And of course Nagel & Newman

>>8171600
I'm skeptical about reading Godel, Esther, Bach. I have had it in my amazon shopping cart for a while now, but I don't want to buy a book and then just put it down because it's too obtuse.

>>8171604
Looks like an interesting book, I will definitely consider it (or just get it if it's like 3 dollars on amazon with free shipping).

>>8171607
>I'm skeptical about reading Godel, Esther, Bach. I have had it in my amazon shopping cart for a while now, but I don't want to buy a book and then just put it down because it's too obtuse.

It's pretty good, I'd get an old copy cheap and give it a shot. A lot of people talk about growing out of liking it, but few regret having read it. At the very least it has an extensive annotated bibliography.

File: 64582.jpg (59KB, 314x475px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 314x475px

>>8171437
Turing's Cathedral and Chaos are both great science books. The first is more a history of computers and information science, and the second is, well, about Chaos Theory. Surprisingly not pop/sci/ either.

>>8171626
>James Gleick's Chaos and The Information
>>8171583
I've surprisingly not heard of chaos theory, I'll check these books out. I'm surprised because I am aware of so many scientists, I'd think I'd know about something that sounds so conspicuous.

Is there any book that covers theories of consciousness?

>>8171626
This was pretty cheap on amazon, I just ordered a copy. Thanks.

File: image.jpg (24KB, 200x295px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 200x295px

>>8171626
Man I loved this book when I was 17. I was stupid enough to lend it to my gf, whom I broke up with and never got back the book...

>>8171532
faggot

>>8171648
Look at Dan Dennet to start.

Found just about every book in this thread that I can buy together for about 20 dollars. Gonna do it, thanks anons.

>>8171501

>and you know what I mean by that

Yes. It means you are a brainlet that is afraid of actual work. You want entertainment, not science.

>>8172173
I am interested in knowing what you suggest I do if I want to get into actual science.

>>8172182

You train your maths skills up until you master differential equations, linear algebra and power series. For a few topics in physics control theory is important, too. Then you can read actual science books and journals. I can assure you that everything above simple kinematics is derived from mathematical constructs. You can ignore this of course and have fun by taking the "philosophical" approach to physics or maths, but if you truly want to _understand_, the maths are essential.

>>8172207
I always hated math, I don't think I even finished algebra in high school, I remember paying someone 20 dollars in gamestop gift cards so they could do all my math homework for me online in the last week of the semester so I wouldn't fail the class in high school, then I never too math again. I mean, yeah I could probably learn some math if I wanted to, it's never been a strong subject for me, but I doubt that I could reach the level of math that would actually be helpful to me in understanding scientific theory if I were to try to get into math now. Not without monstrous amounts of effort.

>>8172235
>doesn't do his math homework
>says he's no good at math
>"it's just never been a strong subject for me"
>gets told to learn math that would take 1-2 semesters of moderate work.
>"Not without monstrous amounts of effort."

Truly, you are a philistine.

>>8172241
I just don't get it, what the hell is the point of learning math unless you want to build things?

>>8172244
Here's a book suggestion for you GH Hardy's A Mathematician's Apology.

Read it before the others, you can find it free online.

>>8172248
>GH Hardy's A Mathematician's Apology
Looks short enough. I'll put it on my kindle. Thanks.

>>8172235

Ah well, an honest answer. In that case, go and read what we call here pop-science books. Just know that things will very quickly become counter-intuitive if you don't know the mathematical foundations.

A little bit old but I liked it:
Shadows of forgotten ancestors

GEB is definitely worth a read.

Also, The End of Time by Barbour.

>>8172256
What kind of math was used in Einsteins theory of relativity? Is that physics? I was watching a lawrence krauss lecture today and he briefly explained one of einsteins theories, I was very bewildered by the idea of these equations, because I realized that I was staring at something that takes people years to come to an understanding of. I do wish that I had that sort of understanding of equations so I could better understand these theories of the universe.

>>8172890
Mostly tensor calculus, which in some sense extends linear algebra (don't shoot me mathematicians). There's a lot more to it, especially in modern terms, but you take it one step at a time. I'm not there myself but I would suggest something along the lines of calculus -> linear algebra -> differential geometry. Differential geometry seems to have books and courses available focusing on a physics perspective and giving you just enough information about related subjects such as multilinear algebra/tensor calculus.

>>8172900
>Mostly tensor calculus, which in some sense extends linear algebra (don't shoot me mathematicians).

This is a perfectly fine way to describe it. "Tensors" come from universal properties of multilinear maps.

>>8171437
>a brief history of time
>Sam Harris

>>>/reddit/ is that way

>>8172235
You definitely could if you are really interested in science. Low IQ or laziness are excuses, not true obstacles.

>>8174413
I scored above 110 in all categories of IQ besides math, actually. That one specific area I scored below 100, but I hadn't been in a math class for years or even done a math problem so idk how they could rate me on that.

File: happyguyinlabcoat.gif (20KB, 187x155px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 187x155px

>>8173299

Feynman

>>8171648
Dan Dennett "Consciousness explained" is a good start.

>>8172890
Differential Geometry and Multilinear algebra. The hardest part is getting used to the abstract index notation.

>>8171437
>brief history of time
>science book
dumbass

its very situational and I dont know the vast majority of scientific literature. feynman are pretty reknown so they might be a good starting point

Any recommendations on celestial/orbital mechanics?

File: 43932177.jpg (79KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 500x375px

How about getting a real science book, like a college level textbook; please don't fall victims to the cancer that is popular science.

Pick up a used college physics textbook and actually learn about real physics, not "mind blowing science facts" bullshit.

>>8176143
literally show me some examples of books and I will get them if they're cheap.

File: Kuhn_Black-Body_Theory.jpg (7KB, 161x252px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 161x252px

Just checked this out from the library and it looks neat, anybody read it?

>>8176537
read the god damn sticky

>>8171587
Thanks. Just downloaded an online chapter to read from the library.

>>8171587
Actually I >>8176695 just downloaded the entire book and jumped straight to the section on group theory. Good reading, thanks!

Does anyone know any books on machine learning?

>>8176721
I hope you enjoy the whole thing!

>>8176537
https://openstax.org/subjects
They're free, fag