Is this book worth reading? It's on a list of books that I have to choose from and it looks like one of the few interesting ones. Is it mostly pop-sci stuff, or does it actually give good insights into the relevant topics?
No.
No. Please, post the list, OP.
No.
>>8081500
It's for summer reading, and the rest are non-science books. Also, I have no formal physics training. Is it worth reading for getting a basic intuitive understanding of physics concepts, or should I just read an actual novel?
Don't listen to these guys. Yes, it is popsci, but if you have no formal training in physics I can guarantee that you will learn something useful.
>>8081513
I recently picked up this book for summer reading as well, and from what I can gather if you are interested in physics at all you will find it interesting. He covers topics from the structure of the universe and how we have percieved it in the past to wormholes and time travel / dimensions.
>>8081484
If you want to read it, read it.
Just don't think you know anything substantial about, or have a "valid" opinion on, the field.
Also, don't ask retarded as fuck questions about what you read in the book on /sci/.
If you want to know if the question is retarded, try to legitimately delve into the topic, and put at least 5 hours of concentrated work into it; not a bullshit "I googled it whilst watching tv and checking facebook for 10 minutes but there were big words.
I wanted to understand general relativity, even though I'm not a physics major (britfag here).
I downloaded textbooks on calc, lagrangian mechanics, and general relativity intro texts, so I could learn.
TL;DR, there are people on /sci/ who hate dumb popsci posters, and will discourage you from reading that. You should read the book, since Hawking wrote it, but don't post dumb shit here about what you read in it.
>>8081484
No. Post the list.
It's a good book if you aren't educated on the subject, but it's a bit dated now so some of the facts are probably wrong. But it's very well written and is a great way to get a basic understanding of modern cosmology and physics. I would recommend it at a starting point, but you should also follow it up with something more recent to get your facts straight.
>>8081513
Read an actual novel and get well rounded.
>Is it worth reading for getting a basic intuitive understanding of physics concepts
Not really. It mixes highly speculative stuff with actual physics with no distinction and lacks explanations in favor of just name dropping advanced buzzwords.
It's a fun book. I read it when I was 14/15 and I enjoyed it enough to read it again soon after.
Is it worth reading? No. It's just a bunch of random facts about physics but that's it. It's just pop-sci, mainly useful to wow laymen. If you want to actually learn some useful stuff just read a physics textbook, or math even.
I'd say just stick to novels if you want to read something for pleasure. If you're going to read stuff like this just don't trick yourself into thinking you're actually learning anything.
>>8081642
>I downloaded textbooks on calc, lagrangian mechanics, and general relativity intro texts, so I could learn.
That makes you such an awesome person.
Go fuck yourself.
>>8082010
>Go fuck yourself.
:^)
Stay mad friend.
Kill yourself :)
>>8081484
More like "A brief history of lies, from this lie to that lie, so I can be relevant."
