Surprising reality

It should be immediately admitted that it is easy to sit down, read the thick (542 p.) Scientific and popular book of the famous author, professor of mathematics, Ian Stuart and after that, write a review for me not that non-trivial, but rather unusual ...

And this text, of course, was preceded by many conversations with different specialists-both with mathematicians and with astrophysicists. The topics discussed concerned not only the level of popularity at which the author preferably represent such material, but the question of whether it was worthwhile to dwell on alternative models in detail, not fully reflecting the modern results of high -precision astronomical observations. And in general: can a scientist from another field of science, even accurate, discuss and doubt modern knowledge from the field of astrophysics and cosmology? And, in order not to escalate unnecessary intrigue, I will immediately answer the main question of potential readers: is it worth reading this book? Yes, it is.

Issues related to the content of individual chapters are actually related to several essential points of scientific and scientific and popularizing activities. First: is it really that which is now considered well studied is also clearly represented by specialists from another field? That is, can they see dubious elements not in the data, but in the logic of theoretical reasoning and interpretation of observations? The second: can a mathematician, a well-known popularizer, write about another, albeit natural science region and leave caustic remarks, as Ian Stuart does about some fundamental results of modern astrophysics and cosmology? And the third: how do I need to present important results to society, so that they are, on the one hand, are interesting and understandable, and on the other, so that the author of the popular text is not considered a profane in this area?

Let's start with the author. Who is Ian Stuart? This is a truly outstanding (and not just well -known) popularizer of mathematics, professor of the University of War from the University (Great Britain).

He is the author of dozens of popular science articles, five textbooks in mathematics, including the theory of disasters, which is associated with some chapters of the book under discussion. In addition, Ian Stewart writes in collaboration with Jack Cohen Scientific and fantastic novels. Among the well -known works of Stuart, there are many journalistic articles about mathematical problems in different fields of science.

The curious creation of Ian Stuart, along with Terry Pratchett and Jack Cohen, seems to be the book “The Science of the Flat World”, containing a scientific discussion of events in the utopian universe of the “flat world” of Terry Pratchett described in more than forty works.

The book "Mathematics of Cosmos" continues a series of articles and books of Stuart on the significance of mathematics in different fields of knowledge. The volume of chapters and their orientation, of course, reflect the personal interests of the author - a specialist in dynamic nonlinear systems and chaos theory. A little more than half of the book (ten chapters plus inclusion in other chapters describing, say, the dynamics of galaxies) are devoted to various issues of heavenly mechanics, which can be considered as a field of mathematics. Moreover, an area close to the research of the author himself in the theory of chaos and nonlinear dynamics. The style of presentation in these chapters differs from classical in textbooks on heavenly mechanics, with which we meet in university courses according to general astronomy.

The author indicatively avoids formulas, and when they are required to explain the interaction between the bodies, he describes the processes literally on the fingers. In my opinion, the simplest formulas such as the law of the Newton's worldwide gravity could, of course, be entered into the text of the book. This would not scare away the potential reader, but would show him the beauty of the laws of nature. The chapters devoted to the description of the interactions of celestial bodies allow the reader to deal with the beautiful theory of resonances, explaining the mutual adherence of the planets and their satellites, as well as how some asteroids and comets suddenly change their trajectories. The author shows how chaotic orbits of small planets and satellites are organized. In the continuation of the topic, interested readers will find in these chapters of the links to our compatriots - outstanding scientists A. M. Lyapunov, A. N. Kolomogorov, V. I. Arnold, who developed close areas of mathematics.

Almost all popular modern books about space cannot avoid an exciting story about the properties of space-time, about black holes, dark matter and dark energy, about the origin of life and the subtle “tuning” of the Universe (recall the anthropic principle), about the emergence of our world and reasoning about multivate-settlement.

Naturally, any study in the field of physics includes a mathematical analysis of measurement data and their theoretical interpretation, often presented in the form of analytical formulas. And the author naturally considers research in the field of astrophysics and cosmology as the use of various mathematical methods.

Already in the 12th chapter, where the formation of the structure of spiral galaxies is discussed, several options for their formation are examined, including alternative, for example, based on density jumps in the interstellar environment. In fact, Ian Stuart with pleasure considers alternative models of various objects and in general the universe, enjoying precisely mathematical constructions. Here, of course, there is a minus. Indeed, we can have a beautiful mathematical description and solving the cosmological problem, but it may not have to do with new data, more precisely, reflecting reality. In this regard, Stuart is close to another mathematician who, by the way, made a great contribution to the theory of black holes - Roger Penrose. Stewart refers to him repeatedly. It is curious that when reading the description of alternative models of astrophysical objects and systems that are doubtful from the point of view of modern data, the reader does not fully understand whether the author is teasing to him or is it really his serious doubts about the results of observations. For example, on different pages of the 14th chapter, Stuart speaks of the existence of black holes, and that they may not be at all. And on several pages, a description of an alternative model - gravastar. You can, of course, ask: where did the scientific editor look? And here I will express gratitude to the scientific editor of the translation, which in many places is neatly (in order not to hurt the author), but accurately (for the reader) inserts comments into the text, allowing me to be aware of the real state of affairs. And this should be said separately below.

The number of alternative models under consideration increases significantly in chapters devoted to cosmological problems - the formation of a large -scale structure of the universe, the theory of inflation, dark matter and dark energy. The author, of course, also gives a description of the standard modern cosmological model. But we approach this (together with the author) through the block of descriptions, which are fundamentally contrary to the last observations. We see that Stuart is in the course of modern details, but it should be interesting (in his opinion) mathematical calculations that are not quite corresponding (we note this after the scientific editor of the translation) of observations. The author’s doubts concern the age of the universe, and its size, and the ratio of its main components, as well as the very theory of the Big Bang and even-in some ways-the theory of gravity.

Of course, the author refers to certain works, but their selection is ambiguous and not at all full. When I read the book, I always had the impression that Stuart understands the significance of the latest dimensions and constructing a coordinated model, otherwise I would not have given alternative models of the universe for different special cases of observations, which together with each other are absolutely not consistent.

Sometimes the bothering is clearly observed when Stuart introduces a new imperfect model, preserving the intrigue, describing it in detail and enjoying mathematical calculations, and then suddenly gives the results of new measurements that refute it.

If the reader is familiar with the results and data of the latest astrophysical experiments, then at the beginning of the presentation he cannot help but have a thought: “How so?! This is already closed in the last century! " And if the reader is not familiar with all this, then he will experience the destruction of beautiful mathematical constructions with the author. A lot of things can be said about the physical imperfection of most of the models of the universe described in the book. But the question is not this, but in that (as at the beginning of this note), is it necessary to read about all this? In my opinion, yes, it is necessary.

A thoughtful or doubtful reader will be able to deal with this and even begin to ask the same caustic questions both in astronomical and physical forums, and in popular lectures. And the answers to these questions will be a continuation of this book.

My university professor, when reading a course of physics of stars, said that “Viktor Amazapovich Ambartsumyan [by the way, the founder of our university department of astrophysics] may say that the stars are burning thanks to the collapse of D-Tel. But you must know the physics of the stars. " Ian Stuart can consider the alternative models of the life of the Universe (and, by the way, modern standard too) as a well -known mathematician who enjoys building them and sharing this pleasure with the reader. But the reader should be aware of what is really happening. And here the multiple comments of the scientific editor helps. I note with a smile that when considering a large number of cosmological models of our Universe, only one commentary that describes the real situation would be needed.

I recommend reading a book with a pencil, noting curious moments and dubious places. And independently or using the answers of professionals in the future, to deal with them. This is also the path of understanding our world. For myself, I noted several. And from funny he appreciated the mathematical approach to building a possible alternative life. This moment from the 13th chapter concerns the consideration of the possibility of the appearance of life based on a fundamentally different system for transmitting information different from our DNA. An example of hypothetical organisms called nimbus is given, which could transmit hereditary infologics as it is done when copying microcircuits. And these creatures could be, simplifiedly, three -paved. Similarly, errors in copying can lead to useful mutations that give new copies competitive advantages.

Mathematics is a beautiful science. Undoubtedly, the one who loves her will enjoy reading the book. And all readers will see not only the complexity of our world, but also different attempts to explain reality.

Oleg Verkhodanov,
doct. physical. Sciences, Vedas. scientific. sore. Laboratory of radio -astrophysics SAO RAS