Stephen Hawking's Universe: The Cosmos Explained: Amazon.ca: David Filkin: Books

Tag this product

Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items.

Customer Reviews

12 Reviews

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

Average Customer Review

4.0 out of 5 stars (12 customer reviews)

Share your thoughts with other customers:

Create your own review

Most helpful customer reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars Fabulous book, April 24 2002

By

Ahmet Tekelioglu (Istanbul, Turkey) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)

This review is from: Stephen Hawking's Universe: The Cosmos Explained (Paperback)

This book starts with Ptolemy, proceeds to Galileo and eventually to Einstein and Planck. Any one who has ever been interested in science will love this book.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Report abuse

2.0 out of 5 stars A grave disappointment, Aug 10 2001

By

Bill Wiegert (The Belmont Society - Belmont, NC) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Stephen Hawking's Universe: The Cosmos Explained (Paperback)

As a fan of Stephen Hawking, I was anxious to read this work - looking forward once again to his humorous and "banally-esoteric" approach to science. But I was gravely disappointed. My own fault really, for not reading the editorials, the reviews... or even the jacket!

If I'd only glanced at the bottom of the jacket I would have known that Hawking (whose photo and name are the most dominant features on the cover) had only written the forward to this book, and nothing else. Go figure.

But in spite of that, I began to eat from it greedily, expecting that it would at least resemble the familiar and palatable taste of a Hawking work. I was wrong of course. So then I felt sort of cheated. I guess I resent being hoodwinked. But then maybe I'm just too sensitive.

Apparently, David Filkin's approach to literary science is to be condescendingly simple. Which is okay if you promote it that way. But if you fire your intentions from the ramparts of Stephen Hawking's identity, I think it'd be best to run somewhat parallel to his reader's level of awareness, and allow us the dignity of licking the wounds of our own self-esteems as they occur.

The book attempts to be a chronological outline of scientific discovery. At times though, it becomes almost predictable - and as a result, boring. At other times, it wanders (Hawking wanders too, but he does so for good reasons, and usually has me laughing before he's back on track). Further moments are occupied with repetition, contradiction and redundancies - not to mention a maddening penchant for patting my head, and saying, "I know you didn't understand that, so here's a simpler explanation".

I had the nagging feeling that Filkin was being careful not to overburden the reader with science. Or at least the kind of science that requires explaining. Sure, I'm not a whiz at chemistry, and I flunked calculus twice, but at least give me a chance to feel stupid where I fully expect to. Don't tread softly on me if you think I won't understand it, especially if you're representing Stephen Hawking for Pete's sake!

Don't get me wrong - I am not a Stephen Hawking fanatic with a get-even agenda (I've had my moments with portions of Hawking's work a time or two also). My exasperation is purely clinical - I expect to get what I pay for. Or at least what I see on the cover.

Not recommended

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Report abuse

2.0 out of 5 stars Too simple, bad photos, not Hawking., Jan 11 2001

By

Tim E. "madscientist" (Winston Salem, NC USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Stephen Hawking's Universe: The Cosmos Explained (Paperback)

I'm not a cosmologist, but Stephen Hawking's Universe was so simply written it is essentially condescending. The language is akin to the level one would read in a newspaper. Moreover, the pictures are second rate pre-contact lense Hubble knock-offs (despite being published in 1997), and the book has very little to do with Stephen Hawking. Sure, he wrote the foreward and did some editing, but it lacks the wit and wonder of a Hawking work. Naming the book after him and putting his picture on the front is misleading. I AM a chemist, and despite this, Filkin's descriptions of Chemical discoveries left even me guessing because he was attempting to dumb-down ideas that aren't dumb-downable, and didn't include diagrams which would be helpful for anyone trying to understand the concepts (like neutrino capturing or particle acceleration). If you want to learn some cosmology, read "A Brief History of Time" or "A Short History of the Universe". These are simply written but informative works that won't leave you waiting for substance.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

Report abuse

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review

› See all 12 customer reviews on Amazon.ca

Want to see more reviews on this item?

› Go to Amazon.com to see all 28 reviews 4.1 out of 5 stars

Most recent customer reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars significant contribution to the discussion
First, Stephen Hawking did not write this book. A journalist wrote it, as a history of the development of our understanding through the sciences and key players of the respective... Read more

Published on Dec 30 2000 by Duane G. Aubin

3.0 out of 5 stars A Brief Version of "A Brief History"
The title "Stephen Hawking's Universe" may give you the wrong impression about this book, because one would naturally associate Stephen Hawking with more in-depth scientific... Read more

Published on Sep 25 2000 by ultraman_zero