Hi, I'm interested in some good reading material on science. I have already done a little research and got a few suggestions on science, books I am wondering what your opinion on these books are.
E = MC^2 - David Bodanis
A Brief History of Space and Time - Stephen Hawking
In Search of Schrodinger’s Cat - John Gribbin
The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory - Greene, Brian
Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality - Tegmark, Max
The Singularity is Near - Ray Kurzweil
Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid - Douglas R.Hofstadter
Consciousness Explained - Daniel C. Dennett
The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence - Ray Kurzweil
Chaos: The Making of a New Science - James Gleick
Turing's Cathedral: The Origins of the Digital Universe - Dyson, George
The Information: A History, a Theory, a Flood - Gleick, James
The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives - Mlodinow, Leonard
These all sound interesting to me. I am interested in science that is on the edge of human understanding, that explains things in a way that make you think differently about the world around you. I love opening my mind to new ideas and discovering things that change your perspective on the world. I am also a true blue atheist and not looking for spirituality, but I am very interested in what causes actual consciousness, and what consciousness is as a phenomena, because I think it's an extremely important question for philosophy. I personally believe we don't have free will, and that computer intelligence has the capability to become conscious with AI, but either way I believe there's no free will (an argument for another day, but it's just part of what has been fascinating me lately).
I am also very inspired by Carl Sagan, but I'm not sure which of his books, if any would be right for me to purchase.
>>8228773
Don't bother reading about science. It's a fundamentally flawed concept. Do research on philosophy if you want to search for the truth. Scientism is rampant enough.
>>8228786
dude this is one heavy duty pile of shit comment.
You sound like a fucktard.
>>8228786
Read some of Michio Kakus books (he is a physcist and furturist so it actually holds merit).
Also if you wanna learn physics and actual science don't read novels on it... read textbooks.
>>8228786
Youare right in reading phiosphy will enlighten you more, but these novels on science are a bit philosophical, also science is relevant you wouldn't have computers if it weren't for it, and a whole lot more.
>>8228788
>comment
found the plebbitor
>>8228821
>novels
Kurzweil is trash. Most popsci is trash. People who read popsci and pretend they understand anything about the world are also trash.
Read Hume, Popper and Feyerabend.
>>8228773
Have you considered visiting the webpage of your nearby college and picking up their textbooks?
>>8228773
>popsci
Pick up a textbook or put yourself in the fucking group.
>>8228965
>Popper and Feyerabend.
Why even bother with Popper instead of just reading the one of the who was right?
>>8229097
To get a perspective
>>8228821
>>8229011
>>8229028
>textbooks
jesus i fucking hate you pseuds
like anyone on here has actually read a science textbook
stick to your mystic pretend thinking and leave the actual thinking to other people
as for >>8228773
>I am also very inspired by Carl Sagan, but I'm not sure which of his books, if any would be right for me to purchase.
i suspect this might be b8 but if it isn't then start with Demon Haunted World or Cosmos
and as for you >>8228786 just fucking kill yourself
>>8229145
I don't read science stuff at all because I have no interest in it.
But if I were to get into philosophy I wouldn't read pop philosophy, because it's shit, I read original works and textbooks.
>>8229158
>But if I were to get into philosophy I wouldn't read pop philosophy, because it's shit, I read original works
those things which you think of as "original works" are pop philosophy of their time
that is why they have survived
>>8229164
How is say Monadology pop philosophy exactly?
They've survived because they were good or because people wanted something like them to rationalize their already existing views.
>>8229145
>like anyone on here has actually read a science textbook
I have. It helps. Though OP would need to spend several years reading "science textbooks" to gain any actual knowledge about the subject in question. Compared to it, reading popsci is much less demanding, albeit useless.
>>8228773
The God Delusion - Richard Dawkins
A Universe from Nothing - Lawrence Krauss
>>8229223
I'm already an atheist. I remember when I was in college (before I dropped out) in the atheist club we read a chapter of this fucking book per week as an assignment for the club, it was kinda enriching in the sense that it gives you more juice to argue with against christians, but other than that I kinda bored reading it. Now, from what I have gathered, the selfish gene is a book that talks about how morality exists without atheism, which is actually an argument I'd like to be able to use against people. I already have a sense that it's uniquitous throughout nature, and I feel altruistism myself without the idea that religion hijacked it and is responsible for all of our society's morality or some bullshit, when the bible itself is obviously a very imperfect idea of what morality should be, proving that literally anyone can try to come up with a moral code the same way the bible did or whatever. Except religious people are so fucking dumb they never listen to any argument you make. I remember watching this debate with Lawrence Krauss on a panel with some religious people on different ends of the crazy spectrum, and he was talking about how homosexuality is present throughout many documented species of animal, so it's ubiquitous in nature, and the fucking religious tards were like "that's a bunch of crazy talk". It was so cringeworthy, I had to just turn it off, there's literally no getting through to the mind of someone who's mental faculties are so poor they actually become religious. Religion is just a reflection of the condition of a human mind that is incapable of nuanced skeptical thinking and a lack of willingness to open one's self up to new ideas. I am always looking for new ideas and questioning the ones I have, and I believe that's why I became an atheist by nature from a very young age.
>>8229529
>without atheism
without religion I mean.
>Ya hafta choose
No, read science AND philosophy. Better yet, DO science AND philosophy.
That's what Nietzsche did, not to mention Goethe and a shitload of other people. Apart from this, remember that Metaphysics is the Queen of Science - and without a Queen, all you have is a reckless and cold-hearted King.
Also, avoid positivism/empiricism at all costs.
>>8229547
Literally the only worthwhile post in this thread.
>>8229547
>positivism
what is this, some christian trying to bullshit me?
>>8229529
>Religion is just a reflection of the condition of a human mind that is incapable of nuanced skeptical thinking and a lack of willingness to open one's self up to new ideas. I am always looking for new ideas and questioning the ones I have, and I believe that's why I became an atheist by nature from a very young age.
*tips fedora*
>>8229547
True enough. But
>Also, avoid positivism/empiricism at all costs.
Why exactly? As a part of the philosophy of science, it works good.
Theoretical physicist that has a superb style for laymen, but with notes to help the more mathematically-inclined. He's also written a lot of other great books
>>8229547
This.
>>8229568
Why the fuck would a Christian quote Nietzsche in favour of his argument?
>>8229572
>string theorist
>2016
lurk /sci/ moar
>>8229571
Positivism is terrible, and empiricism was long ago rebuked.
There's a reason Nietzsche/Wittgenstein/etc poured so much scorn on each.
>>8229577
It's not just string theory, but a huge, comprehensive undertaking in lots of physics and quantum physics, you fkng English major
>>8229586
I said 'theorist' not 'theory'.
>>8229592
Pfft whatevs, it's just theorists tho not theory, so that doesnt make it true tho. Ancient astronauts are theorists too pfffft
>tfw muh evolution ""theory""
>>8229599
You missed the joke. String theoreticians are the jehovah's witnesses of the theoretical physics.
>>8228821
>read Michio Kaku
Michio Kaku stopped being a scientist and became an ancient aliens tier entertainer. And not in the black science man way. Kaku is into too much pseudo-science.
Don't waste your time with his stuff.
>>8228773
>Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality - Tegmark, Max
I'm reading this right now. It's ok. The information is good but the writing isn't. It's like he tried so hard to make it accessible it makes me feel like a retard for reading it. A whole lot of:
>This can't be, I thought to myself
>It's like -every day life based analogy-
>Anecdote involving colleagues
>So it is!
Superintelligence by Nick Bostrom is a great book. It's written with a non-expert audience in mind, but it won't make you feel stupid.
>>8229626
You missed my point in the beginning, and got fixated on one chapter in string theory to discredit the whole bunk. Read the fucking synopsis or something man. Or just stay in the dark and go back to dialetical studies or whatever tf it is you do, that works
>>8228773
learn some actual maths and physics, try taking online courses or something, don't waste your time with popularizatios
>>8229644
>on one chapter
I was talking about the author.
>>8229677
Yep. Many years of teaching theoretical physics written off because of his beliefs
>"Good evening, I came to your door to see if you wanted to let 'infinity possibilities in the finite' into your heart"
>tfw this guy hasnt even read Zizek and doesnt know what ideology is, heh
>>8229690
>caring this much about a joke on 4chan
impressive really
>>8229709
I'm from the Bearenstein Bears/Chic Fil A universe man. Cant help it till all of ya let us interdimensional refugees in
>>8228821
Have to disagree about Kaku. The fact that he's a futurist makes his stuff more science fantasy than anything else. He has some interesting ideas, but who gives a shit.
You are, however, right about textbooks. OP, you should pick up 'Modern Physics' by Serway, Moses, and Moyer. It's pretty low-level. Physics undergrads will usually study it their second or third year, so with a little bit of effort you can understand everything in it. It is a historical approach that will walk you through relativity and baby quantum deep enough to give you a base understanding without plunging into all the technical detail that make advanced physics classes so difficutl. 5/5, one of my favorite books. Too bad most people don't care enough to put in the effort. There's so much beauty in the structure of the universe, and this book really brings it out.
>>8229223
The God Delusion is neither good nor is it a science text. If you want to read something good by Dawkins that coincidentally is also about science, then you should read 'The Greatest Show on Earth.' His description of the Lenski bacteria experiments are beautiful.
>>8229820
Great post
>>8229547
>Metaphysics is the Queen of Science
>Also, avoid positivism/empiricism at all costs.
yeah evidence don't mean shit in the real world, it's just something men invented so they could be right all the time. feelings are much more important
>>8229670
Is there a way to get free college classes or something? There's so many fields that I want to study, if the courses were available for free online. It would be even more awesome if you could take the classes for free but they also included some actual college credits.
>>8230122
There is Khan Academy, which, combined with wikipedia and other internet resources, can give you a pretty thorough understanding of science. There are lectures from various universities on youtube, Feynman's lectures, etc. Most famous textbooks are also available online. It's all there senpai, you just have to put enough effort to learn it.
>>8230122
yale/mit have online classes, itunes u etc
>>8229820
I would need to start off pretty basic, like high school level physics before I am ready to graduate to college level physics. I would also need to start at algebra, because I don't know what I remembered of math when I was in high school, I guarantee you it's all been forgotten by now.
>>8228773
Would recommend the singularity is near. Fuck the elegant universe because string theory is weak and you can't really understand anything about it without the math anyway. I am interested in a brief history of time but have not read it.
>>8228786
Fuck off, Aristotle. You're dead
>>8230024
Confirmed for not knowing what metaphysics is.
>>8229529
>Atheist club
That sounds fucking painful
>>8232048
Yeah it was fucking stupid, I stopped going to it and I still feel embarrassed to think about it.
Does anyone know any books on machine learning?
A universe from nothing by Lawrence Krauss is also a great book.
Although the author is.. lamentable in other areas :)
>>8229547
Thank you for making me feel better about doing a physics bachelors and a phil postgrad.
>>8228821
>kaku
topbaitmate
>>8228773
> doesn't believe in free will
> believes in consciousness
>>8228821
>Michio Kaku
no thanks
literal reddit post
>ctrl-f "Jackson"
>no results
>>8228773
pop science will leave you blind on both ends - Not only will you not understand the science you've read about, but you will also think that you do. it's a disaster.
Take an actual physics course on coursera, or (hardmode) buy The Feynman Lectures on Physics.
>>8229145
>implying no one on lit has a scientific degree
