Essential radio astronomy, by James J. Condon and Scott M. Ransom
Essential radio astronomy, by James J. Condon and Scott M. Ransom
复制标题
射电天文学基础，作者：James J. Condon 和 Scott M. Ransom
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2017
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Chih
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chih
他解释说：“正如任何研究过历史的人都可以证明的那样，人类的历史可以被呈现为一系列发生在不同日期和地点的事件。对本·纳伊姆来说，这就是历史的全部。他似乎没有意识到，已经选择了哪些事件来呈现（这是任何历史学家必须做的一部分），需要有条不紊的反思，这本身就构成了任何历史的一部分，就像提供对历史原因的洞察一样，这对本·奈姆来说只是历史的一种“装饰”。随着他对历史的概念和对“时间的历史”一词的有效（和明显）隐喻用法的否认，他所有的冗长论点都反对“简报”中90%的文本和“简报”中100%的文本的不相关性，这些论点都陷入了毫无意义的唠叨。总之，这本书提出了有效的论点，反对熵的误解，反对包括霍金在内的许多作者从中得出的关于宇宙历史的论点。这有助于教育非专业读者批判性地阅读科普书籍，符合本·纳伊姆明确提出的目标。然而，在我看来，这本《时间简史》应该更简短，也就是说，没有关于历史的50%，这与本书的目的无关，也分散了本书的注意力。
occurred at some particular points in Time (or a period of Time) and at some particular points in space (or a region in space)’ and he explains: ‘As anyone who has studied History can attest, the history of humankind could be presented as a list of events occurring at different dates and locations.’ For Ben Naim this is all there is to history. He does not seem to realise that already selecting which events to present (which is part of what any historian necessarily has to do) requires methodical reflection, which itself forms part of any History of anything, as does providing insights into historical causes, which for Ben Naim is just an ‘embellishment’ of history. With his notion of history and the denial of a valid (and obvious) metaphoric use of the phrase ‘history of time’, all his lengthy arguments against the irrelevance of 90% of text in ‘Brief ’ and 100% in ‘Briefer’ collapse into pointless nagging. In conclusion, the book presents valid arguments against a misconception of entropy and against arguments concerning the history of the universe that are derived from it by many authors, including Hawking. This helps in educating lay readers to read popular science books critically, in accordance with Ben Naim’s explicitly stated goals. However, in my opinion this ‘Briefest History of Time’ should have been much briefer, viz. without the 50% on History, which are irrelevant to and distracting from the purpose of the book.