<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Don&#8217;t know much about (a brief) history&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/2005/09/10/dont-know-much-about-a-brief-history/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/2005/09/10/dont-know-much-about-a-brief-history/</link>
	<description>Because all the other domain names were taken</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:53:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Richard McKinley</title>
		<link>http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/2005/09/10/dont-know-much-about-a-brief-history/comment-page-1/#comment-1382</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard McKinley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2005 10:33:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/blog/?p=763#comment-1382</guid>
		<description>As someone who read far too many popular science books as a spoddy teenager, I feel able to comment with some authority.  It&#039;s worth reading, and not as tough as the notorious &quot;Humanities Graduates&quot; that Bad Science love to hate would have you believe.  In fact, a year of a physics degree might make it a bit dull for you.

My favourite popsci book ever was &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1857994027/qid=1127298726/sr=8-6/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i6_xgl/202-0690945-5792607&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&quot;Schrodinger&#039;s Kittens&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, which goes much deeper into the strangeness of quantum mechanics than most accounts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As someone who read far too many popular science books as a spoddy teenager, I feel able to comment with some authority.  It&#8217;s worth reading, and not as tough as the notorious &#8220;Humanities Graduates&#8221; that Bad Science love to hate would have you believe.  In fact, a year of a physics degree might make it a bit dull for you.</p>
<p>My favourite popsci book ever was <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1857994027/qid=1127298726/sr=8-6/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i6_xgl/202-0690945-5792607" rel="nofollow">&#8220;Schrodinger&#8217;s Kittens&#8221;</a>, which goes much deeper into the strangeness of quantum mechanics than most accounts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Catherine</title>
		<link>http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/2005/09/10/dont-know-much-about-a-brief-history/comment-page-1/#comment-1358</link>
		<dc:creator>Catherine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Sep 2005 22:32:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/blog/?p=763#comment-1358</guid>
		<description>I found it an interesting read.  It is written for non-scientists, and a year of physics should be plenty of grounding -- all I had was my just-for-the-science-credit &quot;Physics for Poets&quot; class, and a bit of other layperson&#039;s reading over the years.  I find that I understand it beautifully /while/ I&#039;m reading it, but I have difficulty trying to explain the concepts to others, or even recounting them to myself after I&#039;ve put the book down.  (Of course, I&#039;m one of those holistic non-verbal right-brain types, so that may not mean anything.)

I agree that LOTS of people keep it on their bookshelves just to impress others, but as someone who actually enjoys unraveling physical and logical puzzles, I think that it&#039;s worth reading.

Other science books I&#039;ve enjoyed:

&quot;The Quark and the Jaguar&quot; by Murray Gell-Mann (not as succinct as Hawking)

&quot;Longitude&quot; by Dava Sobel (brief but fascinating)

&quot;Artificial Life&quot; by Steven Levy (outdated but fun to read, and scary when you apply the concepts to things like the future of computer viruses -- I&#039;d love to know if there&#039;s an equivalent modern a-life book for the layperson)

&quot;The Time Before History&quot; by Colin Tudge (an attempt to comprehend the massive number of things that happened before we started telling stories 6000 years ago)

and of course anything by Douglas Hofstadter or Stephen Jay Gould.

Happy reading!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I found it an interesting read.  It is written for non-scientists, and a year of physics should be plenty of grounding &#8212; all I had was my just-for-the-science-credit &#8220;Physics for Poets&#8221; class, and a bit of other layperson&#8217;s reading over the years.  I find that I understand it beautifully /while/ I&#8217;m reading it, but I have difficulty trying to explain the concepts to others, or even recounting them to myself after I&#8217;ve put the book down.  (Of course, I&#8217;m one of those holistic non-verbal right-brain types, so that may not mean anything.)</p>
<p>I agree that LOTS of people keep it on their bookshelves just to impress others, but as someone who actually enjoys unraveling physical and logical puzzles, I think that it&#8217;s worth reading.</p>
<p>Other science books I&#8217;ve enjoyed:</p>
<p>&#8220;The Quark and the Jaguar&#8221; by Murray Gell-Mann (not as succinct as Hawking)</p>
<p>&#8220;Longitude&#8221; by Dava Sobel (brief but fascinating)</p>
<p>&#8220;Artificial Life&#8221; by Steven Levy (outdated but fun to read, and scary when you apply the concepts to things like the future of computer viruses &#8212; I&#8217;d love to know if there&#8217;s an equivalent modern a-life book for the layperson)</p>
<p>&#8220;The Time Before History&#8221; by Colin Tudge (an attempt to comprehend the massive number of things that happened before we started telling stories 6000 years ago)</p>
<p>and of course anything by Douglas Hofstadter or Stephen Jay Gould.</p>
<p>Happy reading!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

