Life and Energy

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, davyd wrote:

 >
 >
 > "Morton Klein" <mnrklein RemoveThis @artnet.net> wrote in message
 > news:8978d9fbc13fc83de4d6fc332aae489b@news.teranews.com...
  > > Life and Energy 1962. I find this important book difficult. I seek a study
  > > buddy to help each other with this book. Preferably anyone living in L.A.
  > > where I live. But anyone anywhere will be most appreciated. email me
  > > please mnrklein RemoveThis @artnet.ner Mort
  > >
 >
 > With all due respect to IA and his legacy: 1962 was a loooong time ago in
 > science. "Difficulty" aside, perhaps you should find something that's more
 > recent?

While I don't recall "Life and Energy", Asimov's popular science wears
very well actually. Probably mostly because he tended to at least get the
theory of the time correct (something -many- other authors do -not-.*)
Rarely is he "not even wrong". Plus he usually will note working theory as
such and point out open questions.

It would be very easy to get something newer, almost certainly not as
well written and maybe just plain wrong. Just know it's out of date and
be open to other sources (It would probably be nice to read at couple
other sources at the same time. --This is true when working through
anything!)

Is your main interest bio? Maybe a bio type here could recommend
something?

3ch

*At least popular physics tends to be a load of dingo's kidneys.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Life and Energy 

<colonel_hack DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:20040705141615.F55348-100000@bunrab.ronnet.moc...
 >
 > While I don't recall "Life and Energy", Asimov's popular science wears
 > very well actually. Probably mostly because he tended to at least get
the
 > theory of the time correct (something -many- other authors do -not-.*)
 > Rarely is he "not even wrong". Plus he usually will note working
theory as
 > such and point out open questions.
 >
 > It would be very easy to get something newer, almost certainly not as
 > well written and maybe just plain wrong. Just know it's out of date
and
 > be open to other sources (It would probably be nice to read at couple
 > other sources at the same time. --This is true when working through
 > anything!)
 >
 > Is your main interest bio? Maybe a bio type here could recommend
 > something?

I'm reading some Life-authored books issued in the 60s right now. I had
these books as a kid, lost them, then bought the complete set a few
months ago. They are an overview of science as it was in the 1960s, and
I'm finding it fascinating. Most of the material is still valid, and the
few things they got wrong back then are amusing.

I know, that's not Asimov-related, technically, but I read his science
books with the same purview.

Have a great day!

Ami
_____________________
"I try to take one day at a time, but sometimes, several days attack me
at once."<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Life and Energy