Fabric of Reality (Penguin Science)

by David Deutsch

Paperback, 1998

Status

Available

Call number

530.01

Tags

Publication

Penguin (1998), Paperback, 400 pages

Description

A penetrating exploration of the new physics, including time travel, quantum computers, and the multiverse - as referenced in the film "Avengers: Endgame" For David Deutsch, a young physicist of unusual originality, quantum theory contains our most fundamental knowledge of the physical world. Taken literally, it implies that there are many universes "parallel" to the one we see around us. This multiplicity of universes, according to Deutsch, turns out to be the key to achieving a new worldview, one which synthesizes the theories of evolution, computation, and knowledge with quantum physics. Considered jointly, these four strands of explanation reveal a unified fabric of reality that is both objective and comprehensible, the subject of this daring, challenging book. The Fabric of Reality explains and connects many topics at the leading edge of current research and thinking, such as quantum computers (which work by effectively collaborating with their counterparts in other universes), the physics of time travel, the comprehensibility of nature and the physical limits of virtual reality, the significance of human life, and the ultimate fate of the universe. Here, for scientist and layperson alike, for philosopher, science-fiction reader, biologist, and computer expert, is a startlingly complete and rational synthesis of disciplines, and a new, optimistic message about existence.… (more)

User reviews

LibraryThing member richardderus
I report that The Fabric of Reality by David Deutsch is simply wonderful. Clear, well-turned prose, ample illustrative examples of his points, and a beautifully thought-out explication of the bizarre nature of reality as explained in the far reaches of physics. The fact that Richard Dawkins is
Show More
cited as an inspiration for Mr. Deutsch's work should forewarn the spiritual seekers in the audience to avoid this book at all costs. It takes a very clear stance against there being a supernatural agency in the workings of the Multiverse.

Instead, Deutsch says that the Multiverse is weird enough to contain answers to all questions couched in numinous terms and to explain all phenomena and experiences the species has filed in the "supernatural" bin. His arguments are presented without condescension or hectoring, which is a common failing in the prose that wishes to "debunk" the spiritual experience. He simply explains how the experiences fit into the framework of the Multiverse. From there, he says, it's up to you the reader.

THIS is an attitude I can endorse and enjoy. I dislike the spiritual imperialism that says, "My way is Right and all others are Wrong," and equally dislike the materialist dogma that "There IS no spiritual and those who imagine there is are deluded and foolish." I want the arguments presented and then leave it up to me to decide what to do with the information presented. Please don't do my thinking for me! And that, laddies and gentles all, is what I feel Mr. Deutsch makes an overall successful stab at NOT doing. He favors the material explanation, and makes no bones about it; but he is very reasonable and reasoned in his advocacy, not shrill or hectoring.

A well-done work of enduring value in the cultural conversation about the nature of reality as we find it.
Show Less
LibraryThing member ParseLee
This is a highly stimulating book but, depending on one's expectations, it can be frustrating as well (as can be seen in some previous reviews). Most scientific writing is designed to popularize technical insights &/or make them more accessible. Deutsch may somewhat share that goal but, to a much
Show More
greater extent, he is trying to make a more ambitious case to the scientifically literate public. He isn't trying to popularize known insights, but to weave together a broader and more compelling theoretical framework.

There is an extensive tradition of 'theories of everything' in physics, but they are still theories of physics. They will concern the integration of relativity and quantum mechanics, or the formulation of a more fundamental theory such as chromodynamics or string (M) theory. But Deutsch is trying to articulate a full-fledged theory of scientific convergence. As a quantum computer scientist, he is well aware about how physics provides new insights into computation, and vice versa. But by adding the topics of biological evolution (Darwin/Dawkins) and epistemology (Popper), and exploring how quantum computation helps illuminate those theories, and vice versa, he is pushing the horizon of scientific understanding.

Any one of his theoretical `strands' can be fairly criticized. He tends, for example, to stipulate the existence of a multiverse, rather than weigh the evidence supporting that interpretation (such as, for example, Julian Barbour does in The End of Time). In computer science, he moves too quickly in asserting (again without a full assessment) that the Turing Principle should be regarded as applying primarily to the creation of virtual reality (rather than just computation). Other than highlighting the computational component, he adds little in the discussion of evolution. And, finally, his discussion of epistemology, which is strong and well integrated with the other strands (e.g., a focus on the evolution of knowledge), is made to substitute for a more complete psychological and sociological understanding of the emergence of knowledge. Thus, overall, Deutsch inadvertently gives ample targets to his critics.

So, if you want an overview of settled knowledge, you should find another source. However, in a deeper sense, Deutsch is practicing his epistemology. As a Popperian, he believes that scientific progress is achieved through a process of conjecture and refutation. Accordingly, he does not try to ground and justify each assertion. He expects that to be accomplished through the larger scientific process of isolating and testing this overall conceptual framework. Rather, he is trying to sketch the broad outlines of an encompassing theory that can reinforce and strengthen each of its theoretical components.

In addition, and this is vital, he fully recognizes the importance of emergence in nature and history. He gives credit to the achievements of reductionist scientific strategies, but also understands and explains how and why such strategies will never suffice. Rather, they must work with a correlative strategy of identifying and comprehending the process of emergence in all its various forms.

Deutsch's convergence theory as it stands is not complete, and may be weak in spots, but it is certainly the most promising theory of scientific convergence of which I am aware. This contribution would seem to be a sufficient basis for highly recommending The Fabric of Reality.
Show Less
LibraryThing member paradoxosalpha
David Deutsch's Fabric of Reality is woven from what he refers to as "four strands": the multiverse interpretation of quantum physics (credited to Hugh Everett), evolutionary biology grounded in genetic selection (Richard Dawkins), the postulate of a universal computer (Alan Turing), and scientific
Show More
epistemology composed of problems and explanations (Karl Popper). Near the end of the book, physicist Deutsch admits that when first observing similarities and connections among these four, he had taken the latter three to be emergent from, if not reducible to, quantum physics. Ultimately, though, he presents them as equally fundamental and mutually illuminating. According to Deutsch, all four of these theories have arrived at the practical domination of their respective fields, vanquishing competing theories, but all four have failed to be integrated into a widespread worldview. It's his contention that they need each other to fill the explanatory gaps that make them each seem "'naive,' 'narrow,' 'cold,' and so on" (346).

The book is divided into fourteen chapters, each of which ends with a glossary, a thumbnail summary of the chapter's argument, and a tease for the following chapter. This signposting structure would make it easy to cherry-pick chapters of interest to a particular reader. On the other hand, the thesis of the whole book relies on the interdependence of the concepts treated in different chapters. So--other than the philosophy of mathematics in Chapter 10, which the author himself says can be merely skimmed by those without strong prior orientation to that field--it's probably worth reading from cover to cover for full appreciation. I enjoyed doing so, at any rate. Although the concepts may sometimes be on the forbidding side, the prose is lucid. I especially liked the philosophical dialogue in Chapter 7.

This text is now twenty years old, and most of its component ideas were at least that old when it was written. Deutsch insists that his is a "conservative" approach to elaborating the worldview that is a consequence of "taking seriously" the four theoretical perspectives of the book. Considering that, by his lights, the explanations that they afford are the best for their respective fields of inquiry, he says that the worldview that he has assembled from them is the one that needs to be challenged by new ideas in the future. Despite all of the advances in communications technology in the 21st century, though, this contemporary philosophical worldview has yet to be accessed even by many readers who will find it interesting and perhaps compelling.
Show Less
LibraryThing member rcorfield
This is one of the most interesting and thought-provoking science books that I've read for a long, long time.

Deutsch attempts to draw together four strands: quantum physics, knowledge theory, computation and evolution into an over-arching 'Theory of Everything'. This theory is much broader than the
Show More
narrow 'unify-the-four-forces' theory which physicists have been striving to formulate for many years.

The most compelling feature of this book is the way that accepting the reality of the multiverse (parellel universes), as implied by quanutm physics, can explain at a stroke such thorny problems such as the nonsense that is Schrödinger's cat, free will in a deterministic universe, what makes life special (and how to define it). Even the apparently insoluble 'grandfather paradox' of time travel is shown not to exist if time travel takes place in a universe which bifurcates at every 'choice'.

Deutsch has an uncanny way of anticipating his reader's thoughts. On a number of occasions objections or questions which arose in my mind were immediately addressed by him a little further on in the text.

Somewhat alarmingly, halfway through reading this book, I was in a 'heads or tails' competition wth 100 other people. Before the throw of the first coin I joked that somewhere there was a universe in which I would win the competion. 8 throws of the coin later I was astounded to find that I am in that universe, as are you!

Why did I not give it 5 stars then? I have to say that the chapter covering an argument with a crypto-inductivist (a word I now drop into conversation at every opportunity) lost me and I also found the chapter on the foundations of maths hard work (I should have skipped it, as the author advised!).

Highly recommended if you have even a passing interest in any of the topics mentioned.
Show Less
LibraryThing member antao
(Original Review, 1988-05-30)

Perhaps it is worthwhile clearing up a few fundamentals here. Specifically, the concept of something complicated being created as opposed to evolved. Of course, consciousness has evolved and is a characteristic of the complex arrangement of entities whose properties are
Show More
understood by physics. But, going from the basic laws governing the building blocks to the complex is currently way beyond anything dreamt of in systems theory, where biological simulation is hovering around the simple swim patterns of single celled flagellum bacteria. Before attempting to build something we try and understand it. That is, what aspects of the thing to focus on. What are the essentials? For example, the planetary orbits are described by their mass relative orientations and velocities. We don’t bother about their colour, smell or aesthetic properties. This is a canonical example of the great success of predictive science. When we come to other things, broadly termed complexes then we have a completely different situation. This is because of the problem of defining what we want to predict. To progress we have to get at something simple. Like a phase transition, a gross change in behaviour. But, what are we looking for in the human mind? What do we hope to find? This is a perfectly legitimate area of investigation, but we should be cognisant of the relative fruitfulness of different approaches. I’m reminded of Nietzsche’s metaphor where a huntsman sets of in pursuit of this elusive quarry. His dogs get separated each pursuing a different scent and the hunt has to be abandoned, as each dog’s lead is equally valid. We end up knowing more and more about less and less.

I am a little suspicious on the strong statement about the relation of computation to Physics. I am not aware that computation is fundamental to physics itself. The statement that given enough time and space any physical situation can be computed seems overstated. Even at the mundane levels of chaotic systems Nature 'solves' the physics uniquely and in real-time - the problems we have arise from the fact that we cannot in real-time acquire infinitely precise and infinitely covering representations of the physics and we cannot do the fully parallel calculations required (not even with more processors - we do not have analytic methods which solve for all degrees of freedom truly simultaneously). Consider n-body attraction - we have no analytic solution which emulates Nature - we do have approximations of course, which are good enough for everyday use.

Of course Penrose has also looked at this from another angle - specifically whether computation as a formalism can deliver the measurable/observable behaviour of the human mind. This is still controversial but for the moment is quite a strong position. More heuristically, Searle's chinese room poses multiple unresolved issues for the 'mind as computation' camp - precisely because it is a very good analogue to computation and is self-evidently a nonsense.

There are plenty of reasons to doubt the universality of computation and thus our ability to simulate organic and mental processes beyond the little toy models we have currently.

No objection to the possibility of AGI, nor to the author's positing of philosophical questions as central, nor to the history given of AGI attempts so far BUT, Professor Deutsch goes wrong, wrong, wrong with his very first sentence. The human brain has no capabilities at all. The human organism however has all the capabilities of thought ascribed to its brain AND capabilities of movement, action, speech which are in no way optional accessories. The only intelligence we know of has arisen exclusively in the context of beings which act and react in and against the world. You can emulate that in Turing machines all you like; and end up with an simulation.

The computer analogy for the organism, with its implicit partner of the disembodied brain, has been and remains profoundly misleading. Following the evidence we have - ourselves - the best prospect for AGI may be in robotics. There is no reason - other than carbon chauvinism - to suppose that a machine, with the ability to act and react in the world, cannot be conscious and intelligent. There is every reason to suppose that a computer programme cannot.

I suggest looking in to the work of Robert Rosen rather than Deutsch's; Rosen "revealed" the underlying tacit assumptions of a state/phase-based physics and showed that biology requires entailment structures that are not present in this physics. Thus it is that biological organisms are not a mere subset of current physics, but are representative of complexities that require physics to be enlarged.
Show Less
LibraryThing member johnnylogic
Deutsch tries to weave together Popper, evolutionary biology, quantum computing and the many worlds interpretation of quantum phenomena, with mixed results. MW is still hard to swallow
LibraryThing member m.a.harding
challenging to say the least - in testing one's understanding and in readiness to take conclusions all the way. And mean it! very informative and lots of usefull stuff
LibraryThing member stefano
A fantastic book full of passion which explains in non-technical terms some very non-trivial ideas on the many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics and shows how many other highly non-trivial things (from the concept of time to evolution) depend on it. I really, really like Deutsch's
Show More
take-no-prisoner attitude and his willingness to pursue in earnest the many highly counter-intuitive consequences of what he believes to be the true explanation of reality.
Show Less

Awards

LA Times Book Prize (Finalist — Science & Technology — 1997)

Language

Original publication date

1997-10
1998 (Penguin Books edition)

Physical description

400 p.

ISBN

0140146903 / 9780140146905
Page: 0.6527 seconds