Professor Longair's book, Theoretical Concepts in Physics, is a wonderful introduction to, and resource of, basic physics concepts. The book is organized roughly in accord with the chronological development of ideas in physics. This way of organizing the topics makes the book, on one level, a kind of intellectual history, as well as an introduction to important concepts in physics.

The mathematical and physics explanations are accessible. In discussing the original ideas of physicists, the author updates and simplifies their notation and logical steps, making the ideas and their logical progression easier to follow, without in any way undermining the core ideas. That is a big help; some texts make few concessions to the reader with respect to mathematical sophistication, and impede understanding of what should be understandable concepts. One can use Longair's text alongside the original articles (noted in each chapter's bibliography) to assist in reviewing them, a great help. Longair's book is, in this way, a kind of conceptual bridge, that allows the reader to gain enough confidence with the concepts it discusses to tackle more mathematically demanding presentations of them.

Altogether, a joy.

Two valuable features of this book are that error messages and warnings are catalogued and explained at the back of the book. For identifying and repairing errors and warnings this feature alone is extremely helpful. This book is not a beginner's introduction to LaTeX. For that, Antoni Diller's book is a good recommendation. But once you actually start coding a document in LaTeX, the Companion will help in trying to resolve a lot of issues. LaTeX has many features and many if not most are covered in sufficient detail that most questions will be answered using the Companion. However, I found that for some specialized problems, sometimes the explanations in the Companion are terse to the point that they are difficult to decipher without an expert feel for how LaTeX programming works. In particular, if the text you are preparing involves mathematics, Gratzer's More Math into Latex is helpful. Between the Companion and Gratzer's book, and their different examples, most LaTeX coding problems should be resolvable. Using the Companion will likely save you hours of time if you encounter a problem. It is indispendable as a manual of information.

Garner's book is helpful because:
1) It is written in an easy to understand accessible way.
2) It segregates and categorizes what he characterizes as tips. That allows the reader to weigh and evaluate the merit of Garner's judgment on a tip individually. It also allows the reader to conceptually focus on a narrow writing issue.
3) The advantage of each "tip" is supported by a brief observation or argument.
4) Garner uses examples to support the validity of his arguments in favour of a tip, often with before and after pieces of writing.
5) Because of the organization into 100 tips, the book also can be a helpful reference.

While the advice to avoid clutter, in words, ideas, and layout sounds commonsensical, applying that advice is not always so obvious. I think Garner does a terrific job.

Even though, in an effort to avoid clutter, I have been using many of these "tips", I had not engaged in the kind of analysis that Garner has. Even it you already observe these tips, there is some comfort in having validation--that you are on the right track.

An earlier reviewer refers favourably to Judge Aldisert's book from NITA about appeal briefs in the course of reviewing Garner's book. I am reading that book now. I do not think Judge Aldisert's book is a superior alternative to Garner's book. I think the books are complementary. Justice Aldisert's book has a number of points that are specific to certain areas of American appellate practice. Garner's book is more about getting your ideas across well through writing, and has a strong emphasis on some important components in putting sentences and paragraphs together, grammatical, structural, choice of vocabulary.

Overall, Garner's book is a tremendous resource. Lucky lawyers reading it; lucky judges when they get the benefit of better written briefs because of Garner's book.

This is a classic for a number of reasons. It is a one source book of mini biographies of great mathematicians. It has been continously in print and popular since it was published about 1937. It has a vigourous prose and is amusingly, engagingly and memorably opinionated in assessing how these mathematical personalities dealt with life's vicissitudes. It probably has provided an inspiration to delve further into mathematics for many teenagers, by dramatizing the life and intellectual sojourns of mathematicians. Drama, adventure, amusement, suspense, tragedy, conflict, amazing discoveries and achievements, and writing that pulls you in. What more could you ask for? If you know a teenager interested in maths or sciences, this is a good bet.

The book is such an enduring icon in popular mathematical books, who was E T Bell? He was an Englishman transplanted to California who was a professor of mathematics, and wrote, under a pseudonym, some successful science fiction. In 1993, a biography of E T Bell written by Constance Reid, called The search for E.T. Bell :also known as John Taine, was published. Constance Reid is famous as the biographer of the great mathematicians David Hilbert, and Hilbert's student, Richard Courant. Interesting guy.

What I particularly liked about Popper's book was its accessibility. He does not entirely avoid jargon (historicism), but he explains whatever philosophical jargon he does use in a straightforward and understandable way. Because he writes so clearly, the reader can really feel he is participating, by reading, in a meaningful way, in an important debate.

Some philosophers seem to revel in the obscurity of their expressed thoughts. Popper on the other hand seems to express his ideas in a clear and direct fashion. Refreshingly, he skewers pomposity, pretence and philosophical obfuscation (on this last, he is highly critical of Hegel).

The accessibility of the ideas in the book makes one think that this is the way philosophy should be written, sets a standard of clarity, and is a good invitation to further reading and reflection. His systematic logical development of ideas, by making historical or literary observations, and working out the logical consequences, demonstrates the possibilities of analytical reasoning applied to philosophical issues.

This is a book about political philosophy. What was particularly striking was the contrast in point of view he paints between Plato's desire, as Popper describes it, to avoid change, and the measures that Plato was prepared to advocate in order to avoid change on the one hand, and on the other hand the perspectives of an open society. How valid all of his criticisms are I am unsure; I subsequently read that some Platonists have taken issue with Popper's analysis and conclusions. Even if Popper is wrong in some respects about Plato's intentions, none the less, Popper's points on the division between those who seek to avoid change for society, and those who wish to create an institutional structure that permits constructive change have great currency. What is interesting is that elements of resistance to change also occur in open societies

What is intriguing about this book is that it was written in 1943 or so. It was Popper's war effort. His real strength is supposed to be in the philosophy of scientific investigation. Next on my list.

A great and thoughtful read.

There are mainly two reasons why Montequieu's book is important. One is for his ideas, which still have relevance for current political issues, such as separation of church and state. The second is that it represents an important historical milestone in political thought. The real bonus is that, in the translation, his work reads in a way that is both intellectually engaging, by which I mean he gets you thinking about the issues, and also engaging (if entertaining is not quite the right word) as a series of philosophical perspectives delivered in a direct way generally free of jargon.
The most interesting part of his book for me was at the outset, in his comparison of despotism, republics and democracy.
The really important aspect of his book is that so many of the threshold policitical issues that he discusses are still live issues. How much should the state intervene? What constitutes good laws? What parts of life in a political society are the business of the state?