The Emperor's New Mind

Roger Penrose, "one of the world's most knowledgeable and creative mathematical physicists," presents in his 1989 Emperor's New Mind one of the most intriguing and substantive popularizations of mathematical logic and physical theory that has ever been published. As a reader of many books written by scientists, I will say that few compare with this one. Penrose wrestles with what he sees as some of science's most inadequate or poorly developed (although popularly accepted) ideas. As certain physical theories are found wanting, his grapplings extend to some of the deepest questions of metaphysics. Of the deepest questions, Penrose says, "To ask for definitive answers to such grandiose questions would, of course, be a tall order. Such answers I cannot provide; nor can anyone else, though some may try to impress us with their guesses." While he speaks respectfully of individuals with whom he has certain differences of opinion, the "some" in that statement might be taken to be Hawking, Dawkins, Dennett, to suggest a few. The author here tends toward a more humble and questioning approach. Penrose's puzzlings are complex, creative, and speculative, and even his admirers might easily misrepresent certain of his opinions and conjectures. A case in point may be the fact that he finds cosmic inflation theories to have less explanatory power than others claim for them -- this doesn't mean he necessarily rejects inflation, rather he doubts claims that inflation significantly helps explain the specialness of the early universe. Positivists may be disposed to discount the problem but there appears to be good reason for Penrose's skepticism. However this is not treated in this volume. Rigorously building a case against the fundamental arguments for strong AI, Penrose begins with what for him is to ultimately be 'le coup de grâce', considerations and arguments from mathematical logic. If the human mind works non-algorithmically, then we know of no way to digitize/program its processes. The mind does in fact function non-algorithmically, a fact demonstrated without much difficulty. It learns in intuitive, non-linear, and mysteriously creative ways. The idea that some non-algorithmic approach might achieve a program equivalent to the human mind is not supported by any "useful" (or better, see below) physical theory and is not mathematically tenable. Strong AI is thus relegated to a mere ideological preference (and obviously to sci-fi). In his mathematical considerations, Penrose is most interested in the work of Turing and Gödel and in the Platonic essence of mathematics itself. Concluding that the human mind cannot be reduced to an algorithm (or any set of algorithms), Penrose next questions whether the mind might be reducible physically. Here he finds the questions and answers less well defined than he has in mathematics. His tour of classical and quantum physics features interpretations and ideas that many readers may have not encountered (which makes the tex

I can't say enough for this book. Whether or not you agree with Penrose's idea that science will never be enough to grasp human consciousness or not, this book is a fascinating journey into Quantum Physics, Godel's Incompleteness Theorem and a good time to evaluate your own thoughts on human consciousness based on logic and science rather than a spiritual approach regardless of your feelings on Penrose's postulations. I must give a word of caution to a would-be reader, this is not a book for someone not willing to get through some technical stuff. If you only want to be spoon-feed an opinion without understanding HOW the opinion was formed, this is not the book for you. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!

First, what this book is not: It is not "creation science"...it doesn't address evolution...or the existence of God...or existence of the human soul. In other words, it is NOT special pleading against modern science by someone with a religious agenda. What it IS rather, is a solid study of cognition, theories of artificial intelligence, and the enduring problem of the nature of human consciousness by one of the world's top physicists (a professed materialist by the way, not a religious believer), who together with Stephen Hawking developed the astrophysics of "black holes" in the '60's. What Penrose suggests here (a theory he expands on in his subsequent "Shadows of the Mind"), is that science, and specifically physics, is inadequate now, and more importantly will always be inadequate, to describe the nature of human intelligence, cognition, and consciousness--a thesis similar to the showing of Godel's 1931 Theorem that certain fundamental axioms of mathematics were incapable of proof within any mathematical system. In other words, Penrose suggests that there are elemental restrictions within science itself limiting our understanding of our own mental processes, which concomitantly limit the possibilities for development of artificial intelligence. And that obviously doesn't sit well with those for whom naturalistic science is itself a kind of "religion," as some of the dismissive reviews on this page show. My advice: just ignore them and read this book, and well as its successor, "Shadows of the Mind." It's a challenging read and not for intellectual lightweights, but it will richly reward those with the patience to make it through.

Describe Yams to the English - "they're like potatoes", only they're not. You realise that when you first taste them, feel cheated by the description others have offered you, then find yourself using it yourself, for want of a better. So it is with books on modern physics, or modern mathematics. These are subjects in which the inmates are in charge of the asylums. It doesn't have to be so, but looks like being so for the forseeable future, for organisational and economic reasons. Who can exorcise, in six hundred pages, the terror of fifteen years of incompetent teaching, half-baked syllabuses, and horrifying examinations? Most attempts merely repeat that trauma. This book is quite the best account of modern physics and mathematics that I have ever come across. It's written by a visionary who has the deep respect of both physicists and mathematicians, and, to me at least, seems to represent a popularisation of the merging of pure mathematics with the mathematic! s of physics, which has been going on since the time of Dirac and Eddington. Penrose makes you believe that it's reasonable to cross the corridors of academe from Quantum Mechanics to Algebraic Topology, and back via Logic and Machine theory without being conscious of barriers; and, that it's reasonable that the people who pay for these games with their taxes might be initiated into them. A beautiful, brilliant book, by a master mathematician at the height of his powers. How do we relate to a subject? In my view, through inspirational journalism. We all "know" that mathematics is a game for young men; because elderly, elegant, Hardy told us so, despite being an obvious counterexample. Just about every distinguished mathematician is rushing into print with their own impenetrable view of the world. In a situation in which the unreadable "Brief History of Time" is an international best seller, you'd suspect that no-one could come up with an account of mat! hematics which is accurate but which also captures the shee! r joy of being involved in it. If anyone has managed that, it is Penrose, with this incredible book.