Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality in Science and Inquiry

Nov 22, 2014 David Rubenstein rated it it was ok

Shelves: science, philosophy, mathematics

The first half of this book is a review of modern physics on the macro and micro scales. The second half of this book is a discussion of the author's speculation, that the universe is a mathematical structure. Max Tegmark is quite clear--he is not saying that the universe is described by mathematics, but that the universe is mathematics. He calls this the "Mathematical Universe Hypothesis", or "MUH" for short.

Tegmark asserts that this idea is a testable, falsifiable hypothesis. I did not find th ...more

34 likes · Like · see review

Mar 29, 2015 Charlene rated it it was amazing

Shelves: books-that-made-workouts-go-by-quic, favorites, history, biology, mindgasms, physics, general-science, philosophy, evolution, biography

If Sean Carroll, Vlatko Vedral, and Richard Feynman morphed into one person and wrote a book, I think it might look something like this book. I loved every page. Without question, this was one of my favorite books about the universe.

Lately I have been interested in information theory. Reading multiple books on the same subject, there is always the danger of becoming bored. After reading other books on the subject, I read this book and Island of Knowledge by Gleiser at the same time. Both of thes If Sean Carroll, Vlatko Vedral, and Richard Feynman morphed into one person and wrote a book, I think it might look something like this book. I loved every page. Without question, this was one of my favorite books about the universe.

Lately I have been interested in information theory. Reading multiple books on the same subject, there is always the danger of becoming bored. After reading other books on the subject, I read this book and Island of Knowledge by Gleiser at the same time. Both of these books were excellent. Both books had a good deal of overlap but were markedly different in important ways. Rather than being repetitive, they served more to reinforce important ideas. The time I spent getting familiar with these books (often reading chapters over and over again) was deeply, deeply enjoyable.

Tegmark's sprinkling of biographical information along side his tutorials on basic and complex concepts in physics reminded me a lot of Feynman, if Feynman had been humble. Tegmark's gift for making the complex accessible to non-physicists reminded me of Carroll's gift in relating to all types of audiences. The subject matter in this book reminded me of Vedral's decoding reality, but it delved in a bit more at times and provided a richer over all experience, which felt more satisfying.

Tegmark provides one of the simplest and most beautiful descriptions of how each thing (be it atom, star, person, etc) is merely a compilation of smaller things that can ultimately be thought about ( and indeed do exist) as tiny bits of information. For sure, this argument has been made many times before, but I enjoyed Tegmark's argument to a surprising degree.

This was one of the most satisfying reading experiences I have had in a long time. When Tegmark related his Jekyll and Hyde story and then got into the meat of his argument, my brain was in a constant state of euphoria. Braingasm, braingasm, braingasm! I could feel the dopamine rush as he flooded my brain with idea after idea. While at university, I used to sit and talk with two of my best friends, and intellectual soulmates, about the ultimate nature of the universe. These times are some of my most treasured memories in life. Reading this book was like being back in those conversations. ...more

5 likes · Like · see review

Feb 22, 2014 Don rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: science

I really wanted to like this book more than I did, and I almost gave it three stars. I love the premise, it covers a huge list of topics that are right up my alley, and Max is clearly a brilliant scientist. But I just didn't connect with the presentation of the material like I have with previous science books (like Brian Greene or Sean Carroll).

I get the gist of the book and what he is arguing, but after having gone through it, I'm still not sure I understand the arguments. I'm probably more to ...more

1 like · Like · see review