Talk:The Tao of Physics

message: The Tao of Physics was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP.  14 votes to keep, 1 vote to delete.  Postdlf 05:18, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion proposal (not active)

message: Nikola Tesla is also noted as having embraced the similarities between science and Vedanta.  Please don't delete the Tao of Physics. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JadeBuddha (talk • contribs) 19:19, April 4, 2007  (UTC)
:No worries.  It is an old discussion.  --Blainster 18:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tesla

message: There isn't any summary/synopsis of the actual book.  This article isn't very useful
72.177.115.251 08:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Summary

message: The Tao of Physics is criticized (along with The Dancing Wu Li Masters) in Peter Woit's 2006 book, Not Even WrongPeter Woit (2006), Not Even Wrong, p139-145, in the section on S-Matrix approaches to Grand unification theory.
The foreword to the second edition of 1983 claims, "It has been very gratifying for me that none of these recent developments has invalidated anything I wrote seven years ago. In fact, most of them were anticipated in the original edition," a statement far from any relation to the reality that in 1983 the standard model was nearly universally accepted in the physics community, and the bootstrap theory was a dead idea. The afterword includes truly bizarre and counterfactual statements such as, "QCD has not been very successful at describing the processes involving strongly interacting particles."
:The text above was in the article, and I removed it. The reason is that the quote is now very dated--- the standard model is not incompatible with the bootstrap ideas (nowadays synonymous with string theory), it is a complementary approach. Perturbative QCD describes high energy scattering where quarks are visible, while the bootstrap/string theory describes low energy confinement phenomenon. In principle, QCD could describe everything, but that would require heroic calculation.Likebox (talk) 17:59, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the quote is dated, the book does discuss the fact that the S-matrix approach is used in string theory so Woit was obviously aware of it. But more important, I think it's essential to Capra's philosophical ideas that the bootstrap idea actually be fundamental, the "explanation" for why particles have the masses they do and other properties, rather than just a tool for making calculations that works as an approximation to some more precise high-energy theory. Hypnosifl (talk) 16:10, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed quote 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on The Tao of Physics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101009034952/http://www.shambhala.com:80/html/catalog/items/isbn/978-1-57062-519-0.cfm to http://www.shambhala.com/html/catalog/items/isbn/978-1-57062-519-0.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified