Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Manny's Reviews > Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics

Dancing Wu Li Masters by Gary Zukav
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
1713956
's review

it was ok
bookshelves: science

Yesterday, I read some scathing comments about this book, and the closely related The Tao of Physics, in Woit's Not Even Wrong. Apparently, there used to a be an approach to quantum mechanics called S-matrix theory, which was popular among left-leaning physicists in the early 70s. Woit refers to "The People's Republic of Berkeley". It was something to do with "abolition of the aristocracy of particles", which I must say I didn't completely get, but you can see how this might appeal. As I understand it, the basic idea was not to talk about possibly intangible interactions between particles like quarks, whose existence is hard to demonstrate directly, but only about the objectively measurable scattering matrix.

Anyway, according to Woit, S-matrix theory never quite worked, and when quantum chromodynamics and the Standard Model came in, around 1974, it pretty much disappeared. But Capra, in The Tao of Physics, still clung to the S-matrix ideas, and every time the book was reprinted he would add forewords and afterwords that were more and more out of touch with reality, claiming that history had shown that the S-matrix approach was the one true way, when in fact QCD had knocked it out of the park. Then Zukav followed Capra, and wrote this book.

Woit, evidently tearing his hair out, says that both books are still selling well, and that, although S-matrix theory is now completely discredited, it embarrassingly lives on as "nutty New Age philosophy".

I read Zukav's book in the early 80s, and I wasn't that impressed, though I had no idea that it was this much at odds with mainstream physics. I thought he was just presenting mainstream ideas in a poetic way. A frightening story about how careful you need to be with popular science texts.
46 likes ·  âˆ� flag

Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read Dancing Wu Li Masters.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

Started Reading
January 1, 1983 – Finished Reading
June 15, 2009 – Shelved
June 15, 2009 – Shelved as: science

Comments Showing 1-6 of 6 (6 new)

dateUp arrow    newest »

John awesome review, thanks


message 2: by Rob (new)

Rob I'll save myself the trouble, thanks. Hopefully it doesn't too badly color the rest of my read of The Tao of Physics. (Not that my hopes were high to begin with.)


message 3: by WarpDrive (new)

WarpDrive Thanks for the review, Manny.
Considering the "new-wave bullshit"-sounding title, I would have probably stayed miles away from it anyway, but now there is no chance that I will ever waste my time on it. It sounds too much like the "Da Vinci Code" of Physics.


message 4: by Arvind (new)

Arvind This was a book written by Gary after he was invited to a retreat of sorts by his physics friends and this was his attempt to summarize the entire journey of experiments and there's that evolved until the 80s when he wrote this book. It'd be shame of people are prejudiced by either the title or negatives reviews and stay away from this masterpiece. Especially if they are physics/science lover of any sort. No this book doesn't promote S-matrix of any theory in any particular way. The way he's described the various changing of guards that happened so many times in the past 400 years is just amazing.

And yes. The new agey angle does intersect strongly with physics... That's just the nature of the modern physics that's borne out by so many new experimental results in the last decade (I'm writing this on 2019) that makes his writing even more relevant!


Manny I read this book 35 years ago and do not remember the details well - also, my understanding of quantum mechanics is much better now than it was then. It does not encourage me to draw parallels between new age ideas and modern physics, I think the connections are tenuous and overhyped. We have a couple of friends who are really into new age stuff, and we frequently argue about QM in an amicable way, and they have yet to convince me. It sounds good when you describe it in words, but when you look at the underlying math it's much less reasonable.


Bernie4444 Excellent review - it has been over a decade. any updates to the review?


back to top