On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 03:57:35PM +0700, Tracy R Reed wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > The book is a little history with a lot of fantasy. In it Newton is not > only the smartest "Natural Philosopher" (their name for physicist) but > also an alchemist. He had a very open mond. My biggest complaint about > this book is that the whole concept of the story makes it very easy to > confuse fact with fiction. A real historian who knew all about Newton > and old England etc. could probably point out the differences but I find > it difficult to see where Stephenson crosses the line. A very good but > long and complicated read. Some of the reviews said it was hilarious. I > didn't find it funny at all. I think maybe I laughed once during the > whole book. Unless it becomes a real knee-slapper in the last 10 pages > which I find unlikely. It provides a very interesting depiction of the > conflicts between the competing scientific ideas of the age through the > conflict between Leibitz and Newton over the invention of calculus, the > scientific theory vs alchemy, the idea that the planets move around the > sun etc.
Now that you mention it, I believe I have read that Newton was interested in alchemy. However, in those days alchemy and chemistry were the same thing. I think one can actually make more money turning crude oil into nylon than lead into gold. Same basic idea -- cheap components, highly desirable product. -- Lan Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Guy, SCM Specialist 858-354-0616 -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
