What are some books similar to this? I never really liked STEM before reading this book but now I want more

I think I meant to quote OP...or just complain about dougie

You could check out "Logical Dilemmas: the life and work of Kurt Gödel", OP. The author isn't a fantastic writer, but he's the official cataloguer of Gödel's notes and manuscripts, and he gives a good amount of detail on the math.

Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahnman
Superintelligence by Nick Bostrom

>Textbooks are boring.
Pleb
>learning a thing or two in the process.
You aren't learning anything
>family
You fucked up, not my fault.

>Trying to justify being a loner

>no family = loner
Pleb

Yeah you fucked up non-contributing user. My sons ain't giving up their seat in the senate to your neet ass when you're old & living off society built by others.

>contributing
lmfao

>Just pick up math

There is nothing I loathe more than a dilletante.

There is no point in wasting time dabbling in math just to live up to some capricious standard of "really understanding". I have other things I need to be good at, to devote my efforts to. So when it comes to math, and genetics, and other topics I defer myself to "pop-sci". I'm not narcissistic enough to believe I can be good at everything, but I still have broad interests I'd like to learn more about.

>There is nothing I loathe more than a dilletante.
Then don't pick up pop-sci books that teach you nothing.
>I'm not narcissistic enough to believe I can be good at everything
That's why you're a pleb

>You must be over 18 to visit this website

Yes, then why are you still here?

The thing is, almost all literature about math and science in general that is not actual math and science is garbage. Mathematicians are too busy to write fun stories about math, they have real work to do, that is, do math Now occasionally a good book shows up. But most of the time they are terrible. They have to be, being written not by mathematicians themselves but people who know very little about it. I don't know how it is in the Anglosphere but here in Germany it seems as if you can't be in humanities if you aren't a giant douche about how bad you were in math at school and such. When real math has little to none to do with what you do in school.

It's not intended to be pop sci.

>So when it comes to math, and genetics, and other topics I defer myself to "pop-sci".
And this is the reason idiots that opine on topics they know nothing about exist. The all-encompassing worldview that you form and glue together by reading a book per scientific/mathematical topic is close to being worthless because you can't really account for it: you simply can't do the actual math. I am sick and tired of hearing what nobodies like you think about what the world is like in general or in particular (evolutionary psychology, cosmology, or whatever it may be), when I know that you have never been intellectually challenged in your life and know little about what rigorous thinking entails.

As they say: Little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Pirate logicomix if you want to kill some time.

Honesty OP, learning enough maths for a basic understanding of special relativity would not be at all hard.
If you learn some logic (I used Halbach's manual) you should have no trouble reading "Goedel's Proof" by Nagel & Newman.
Something else interesting -an user suggested "The Emperor's New Mind" - well, I'm reading a later book, "Shadows of the Mind", and I'd recommend that.
If you're feeling ambitious, try "The Road to Reality". It will give you some flavour of actual maths & physics.

I majored in math and desu it's really not very enlightening. It's just tedious busy work. At least with a pop-sci book you get some cool anecdotes and stuff.

geezus krist man calm down. are all STEMfags this sensitive?

Which textbook

...

reading pop-sci is like reading pop-phil or wikipedia summaries of literature.

so why does that irk you so? why would anyone embark on an academic endeavor of reading an entire textbook which may include projects and exercises maybe even experiments just to satisfy a curiosity? that's a waste of time.

Pop anything doesn't satisfy curiosity and just ends up being a waste of time.

Not all pop-sci books are empirical, but curiosity satisfaction and time usage factors are more subjective. eat your pills and keep your autism in check.

>curiosity satisfaction
If you're curious about something you want to learn a bit about it, and pop-anything books won't teach you anything at all, autismal retard.

wrong.

Right, you autistic pseud.
Go back to reading wikipedia articles and posturing on Veeky Forums

I've been enjoying GEB. I'm in a STEM field-a lot of the concepts weren't really new, so ymmv. It hasn't been super "educational" or whatever, but I like seeing how he puts different ideas together and I like the zany stories about the turtle.

You might like A Brief History of Time.

I barely read wikipedia articles and I've never been to Veeky Forums care to go on or should I wait till your mum changes your diapers?

Go back to then

So unless math is your specialty, or interest, you have no right to talk about anything? You need to take care of that autism

If you've only read wikipedia-tier pop books on a subject you shouldn't be talking about it.
Oh wait this is Veeky Forums where retards like to talk about books they haven't read.

>shouldnt be talking about

but they're not saying anything. No one in here is saying reading or skimmig a wiki article or pop-sci book makes them an expert in any given subject. Do you sperg out like this whenever someone in public has a misinformed opinion or quotes Neil Degrasse Tyson? buddy no one gives a shit how smart you are and how much ass you have to give at uni for your teach to give you a passing grade.

>whenever someone in public has a misinformed opinion or quotes Neil Degrasse Tyson?
Yes
>no one gives a shit how smart you are
I do and that's all that matters.

I didn't give you permission to reply to me. Listen, it was entertaining, first. Hell, it was actually funny.

But now I'm getting the feeling that you actually think that you're on my level. From the day I was born, I was destined for success, you little shit. I was brought into this world by a software engineer and and a prominent actuary, both of Norwegian descent. From the moment that the fucking curtains were raised, I was set to dominate the STEM fields. And because I had guardians that actually cared about me, I flourished. Pretty soon, I was placed into a special school of correspondence, specifically I.M Gelfand's school for gifted children in New England. I not only reached my parents' expectations, but I passed them with flying colors. I had raw talent. I was fucking better. I was surrounded by 6th graders, many from Hong Kong, whom were smarter than half the posters in this fucking thread. And now, where am I?

In MIT, getting my double BS in Electrical Engineering and Physics, with a Stanford-Binet tested IQ of 147 at age 17.

Get this through your head: you are nothing. I am worth more than your entire goddamn family. I'm smarter than you, better looking than you, taller than you, wealthier than you, and more employable than you. While you type out another post to get cheap laughs, I'll be simultaneously working with the brightest minds in the world and fornicating with my beautiful girlfriend. It gets on my nerves when people pretend to be better than me.

Know your place, you fucking vermin. Never, ever reply to my posts, again.

>A Brief History of Time

Isn't that outdated by now or no?

Is this a pasta?

Not especially. The money as of a few years back all goes into string theory tho, because that concerns high energy but very small shit, and Europe and the US built those massive colliders. So the increase in spending is part of that project and is really the reason for that "fashion". The dialogue now seems to be going back to very large shit though (astronomy, dark matter, dark energy, in some aspects gravity waves) and that's more about general relativity and that's the main part of Hawking's jam.

I think it is hoping to become one.

...