The Science of Discworld

[Allegra]

Have you read these 3 books and what do you think about them? Their subjects sound really interesting though I haven't got chance to read them.

 

[chrispenycate]

Have read the first two, and enjoyed them considerable (I'll get the third as soon as I find a copy in paperback)
Still, I have a reasonably comprehensive scientific education/curiosity; I'm not sure if they'd appeal to those who're expecting a prolongation of Pratchett.

 

[Joel007]

I like the stories, and there are a fair few amusing parts in the scientology
Good books if you have an interest in both pTerry and general science.
Some of the stuff they come with is hilarious if a world was round, things would drop off the bottom!

 

[Patrick Mahon]

I've not read them yet, but am planning to. Ian Stewart,one of the co-authors, was one of my Maths Professors at University, and he could communicate the most complex of concepts in an intuitive and amusing way. So I expect them to be good fun.

 

[Allegra]

I've got a feeling I'm going to really enjoy them.

 

[Red_Dragon]

they are great. ive read all three and lent them to my physics teacher at school. the twist of science and discworld is just right so it all sticks in your mind. if only all textbooks were like it.

 

[Ysabell1]

I have to ask one question about the first Science of Discworld book.....

In chapter 20 (A giant leap for mankind) it states that in April 1969 'Neil Armstrong stepped down onto the surface of the moon, fluffed his lines and made history'. Well correct me if I'm wrong (I'm old enough to remember this), but surely he took that first step on 20 July 1969.

If this one basic fact in the Science of Discworld books is wrong, how much more 'factual information' contained in it is incorrect too? Maybe its just a typo error.

Don't get me wrong I'm really enjoying reading this book.

Ysabell x

 

[Joel007]

Well, if you really have an interest in what's real from the books, do some research!
Terry's usual strategy is to fill you up with so much satire that you go and find out what the real subjects are like. Inquisive readers are the best kind.

 

[Patrick Mahon]

I have to ask one question about the first Science of Discworld book.....

In chapter 20 (A giant leap for mankind) it states that in April 1969 'Neil Armstrong stepped down onto the surface of the moon, fluffed his lines and made history'. Well correct me if I'm wrong (I'm old enough to remember this), but surely he took that first step on 20 July 1969.

Ysabell x

Ysabell,

Not seen that bit of the book, and I haven't got a copy to hand, but given that the date of the Apollo 11 moon landing is so well known (and, yes, you're right that it was 20 July 1969), my guess would be that this is an attempt at a humorous suggestion that the first moon landing happened on April Fool's Day, perhaps? It seems unlikely that an error this obvious wouldn't have been picked up by the proofreaders and copyeditors...

But I may well be wrong!

Patrick.

 

[Allegra]

That's very likely the case. When it comes to puns pTerry does the best.

 

[Joel007]

On the ever so useful http://www.lspace.org/books/apf/the-science-of-discworld.html

it says this:

+ [p. 152] "In April 1969, Neil Armstrong stepped down on top the surface of the Moon, [...]"
I am not sure if this error has been fixed in later printings of the book (I have been told that it is still present in the 2002 paperback edition), but it definitely needs to be: the first Moon landing was in July 1969.

 

[Allegra]

Ooops

 

[chrispenycate]

Well, I've now obtained (and read, evidently "Darwin's watch", and found same very interesting, particularly their popularisation of Cantorian transfinites (never an easy task)