Having a vague idea that there is some connection between aspects of quantum mechanics and fiction, I got hold of this book which makes a serious attempt to really explain quantum physics to people (like myself) who are mathematicaly illiterate. I found I could follow it without really understanding it, which seems, from what the authors say, to be the standard reaction of many qualified physicists. The final chapter, however, which requires a more than basic knowledge of maths, left me feeling inadequate.

Consider: quantum mechanics is one of the three great pillars supporting our understanding of the natural world, the others being Einsteins theories of Special and General Relativity. If Einsteins theories deal with the nature of space and time and the force of gravity, then quantum theory deals with everything else. Bearing all this in mind, you might well be expecting The Quantum Universe to be a bigger book. However, despite their brevity, Brain Cox and Jeff Forshaw do succeed admirably in their ambitious mission to show that everybody can understand the deepest questions of science.Over the course of eleven chapters [theres also an epilogue concerning the death of stars] Cox and Forshaw use The Quantum Universe to provide readers with a fascinating, up-to-date picture of the subatomic world. Taking an historical approach to explaining quantum theory, Cox and Forshaw begin by investigating what exactly is contained within the discipline of quantum physics and how it helps to facilitate understanding of the universe. They consider the work of the great and the good [Newton, Bohr, Heisenberg, Einstein, etc] and how modern understanding of quantum theory has impacted on these classic principles of physics. Once this background has been thoroughly established, Cox and Forshaw go on to explain the core of quantum theory itself, considering issues such as why particles can be in two places at once, why movement is an illusion, how empty space isnt empty and why we dont fall through the floor. Its fascinating and occasionally spooky stuff.While The Quantum Universe might at first appear to be far less popularly accessible than the two astronomy books that Brain Cox has co-authored in the last year or so [those being the excellent Wonders of the Solar System and Wonders of the Universe], it is actually written in a very clear and straightforward, rather conversational in fact, style. There are certainly far less eye-catching pictures [although there are plenty of equations and charts] and The Quantum Universe is really a book that needs to be read from cover to cover in an orderly fashion rather than just dipped into, but it is still a book that engages the layman and explains complex scientific principles in appealingly simple terms. Petty as it may be, the most difficult to appreciate element of The Quantum Universe is the publishers choice of cover material.The Quantum Universe is a carefully thought out and well presented guide to a series of complex yet everyday issues. Brian Cox and Jeff Forshaw are clearly both very passionate about their scientific research and about sharing their knowledge with as wide an audience as possible. With this in mind, it is no surprise that they have succeeded brilliantly at providing a concise and straightforward [yet, importantly, never condescending] explanation of why everything that can happen does happen. This is not to say that it is always an easy book though. While no previous knowledge of complex mathematics or quantum theory is required in order to understand the explanations given by Cox and Forshaw, such knowledge would certainly be a boon and would aid an uninterrupted reading of the text.The Quantum Universe is a safe yet still exciting [detailed] introduction to quantum theory and its impact on our lives and universe. It is not always a fun read but it is certainly a valuable one and is great for those seeking to understand the downright bizarre behaviour of atoms and energy [and the effects that these have on our equally bizarre human experience].

Well this was fun. Three things real quick:1. Not like I came out of this none the wiser, but I'm not exactly Carl Sagan now. 2. I'm down with the approach the authors used to explore quantum physics, but really the clock ansatz did not work for me at all. 3. Will probably hunt for more 'elementary' books next time, if that's possible.

El Universo Cuántico de Brian Cox es una obra de divulgación para usuarios que ya tienen cierto nivel base en mecánica cuántica, así como nociones sobre formulación matemática basica. Muy recomendado para usuarios que llevan tiempo dentro de la temática y estén interesados en repasar conceptos como momento, reloj o pozo de potencial. Hace especial hincapié en las escalas de ordenamiento y incluye perspectivas muy bien expuestas e interesantes acerca del Principio de exclusión de Pauli y el entrelazamiento cuántico.No es una obra de arte que te atrape como lo hace por ejemplo el Gran Diseño de Stephen Hawking, pero si una herramienta excepcional para comprender mejor los fenómenos cuánticos con ingeniosas representaciones mentales que cada vez que regresen a tu mente te recordarán la esencia de ese simpático gatete que define la portada.

The title and cover turn me off since the title implies the many-worlds interpretation and the cat implies the Copenhagen interpretation, but luckily that isn't what this book is about. The authors endorse the many-worlds interpretation, but the issue of interpretation occupies only about 2 pages. This is about something else.They also don't spend much time on the double-slit experiment, entanglement, wave-particle duality, or any of the other old chestnuts. The main meat of this book, covering the final half of it, is the Pauli exclusion principle. This is the rule that says, basically, no two electrons in a system can be in the same quantum state. Is there really half a book's worth of stuff to say about that? Absolutely! The most common application is to electron orbitals in an atom or molecule. This simple principle (plus a few other things) gives rise to the differences between atoms of different elements, and thus to all of chemistry. It also explains the difference between conductors, insulators and semiconductors. And the emission/absorption spectra of atoms and molecules. It even explains why white dwarf stars exist, and what their maximum mass is. (An appendix contains a detailed rough sketch of how to calculate that mass. It is the only part of the book with detailed equations.)I studied the exclusion principle in school. In grad school we did the calculations for energy levels in hydrogen atoms. We did part of the calculations for energy levels in helium. We did calculations for energy levels in hydrogen molecules, demonstrating that the lower energy state causes them to form and calculating the mean distance between the nuclei those molecules. (I nearly decided to do my Ph.D. research on related computations for larger systems.) I mention this to point out that when studying this stuff in school, we tended to focus on the calculations ("Shut up and calculate!") and not on the deeper meanings. As the two hydrogen nuclei are moved further and further apart, the influence of them on each other gets smaller and smaller until it becomes negligible for all practical purposes, so we didn't worry about it. But.... if you trust the math, and trust that the formulas are a complete description, the mutual influence, due to the exclusion principle, cannot ever actually go to zero. Even if moved to opposite sides of the galaxy, the exclusion principle still states that the electrons in those two atoms cannot have exactly the same energy levels. In fact, no two electrons in any two atoms in the entire universe can be in exactly the same state! In some sense, every electron in the universe is influenced by every other electron in the universe. That is mind-blowing and hard to believe. I pretty much expect that there is something, somewhere that we don't know yet that makes the interaction go to zero after sufficient distance, maybe due to quantization of space or who-knows-what, but based on the existing math in the existing model, that doesn't happen. Compared to an atom, white dwarf stars are huge, yet the principle clearly still applies to them.As for the subtitle "...anything that can happen, does," that is referring both to the many-worlds interpretation (yuck!) and the principle of least action. It goes something like this. Newton described motion in terms of 3 laws, all of which are stated in terms of local things affecting an object at some point. But it is possible to derive those same laws by inventing (from thin air) some quantity called the action and noting that the path taken by a moving object (under appropriate conditions) can be calculated either by the laws as Newton wrote them, or by considering all possible paths that the object could take, and finding the one where the sum of the "action" along those paths is minimized. It is "as if" the object tried all the possible paths and then picked the one that took least action. In quantum mechanics, a similar action approach can be used to determine the path of a particle. We construct something called the "path integral" which is a pain-in-the-butt to calculate, but basically considers all the possible wave functions generated by considering the photon or electron or whatever taking every possible path to get from A to B, and add all those possibilities together and most of the wave functions cancel each other out except along one path and thus that is the path the photon or electron took. In class we treated this mostly as a computational trick, but some, including these authors treat it as actual fact: the particle really did explore all possible paths. I find that hard to accept. But the universe doesn't care what I accept, and whether real or just a computational trick, the math does generate the right answer.To avoid equations in the book, the authors describe a wave function as little clocks located at points in space, rather than using the notion of complex numbers. Some reviewers here were really turned-off by this. Initially, I was, too. The authors have to explain how to add, and eventually how to multiply, these little clocks by each other, so I thought they might as well just explain complex numbers: they aren't all that hard. But the more I think about it, the more I like the clock idea. They have to talk about these quite a lot. The word "clock" is one syllable, while "complex number" is four and "value of the wave function" is seven, so saying "clock" saves a lot of time as well as removing the need for equations. Eliminating equations helps with the tree vs. forest problem that could otherwise come up. You can focus on the big picture, and not try to deal so much with the equations. (In other words, the opposite of my college experience.)I have no idea which people will or will not get something out of this book, but it was very useful and thought-provoking for me, even though I've read and studied about QM for years.By the way, Brian Cox is apparently known from TV in Britain, but is someone I previously didn't know.Trigger warning: this book contains frequent use of the word "learnt" which is an accepted variant spelling, but annoying to me.