After the first couple of pages I thought that I was not going to like this book. By the time I was halfway through I was enjoying it immensely. Once I had reached the end, however, I was rather more confused about it. Perhaps this reflects three different moods that I was in as I made my way through the book, but I do not think so. I think that it is more to do with the book dividing into three sections.
The first, short, section of the book lays down the history of ideas from the early Greeks to the time of Newton. The longest middle section explores the six 'roads' of the title - six paths that physics has taken since the time of Newton that have led us from the world view of Newtonian Physics. The final section discusses some modern physics (fundamental particles, nuclear physics and cosmology), outlines the author's critique of quantum mechanics and summarizes where we have got to in the modern world view.
The middle section of the book is beautifully written. The author explores his six roads (wave theory, fields, probability and thermodynamics, special relativity, quantum theory and general relativity) with enthusiasm and a convincing grasp of the ideas. The occasional Americanism or reference that might be obscure (how many readers these days will know what an IBM punch card was?) merely add to the character of the book. I especially liked the chapters on waves and probability which were authoritative and stimulating. The author's many years of studying and teaching physics were evident in this section. It had the feel of having been polished by years in the classroom. The basic ideas were laid out clearly, the details explored slowly and the occasional hint dropped of more difficult things, to keep the most interested happy. There is a very nice discussion of the twins paradox that many people could read with profit.
I was not so convinced by the start of the book and the final couple of chapters. Subjectively I found the language used in these sections harder to follow - as if the author was feeling his way through with rather less conviction. Chapter 8 rather rushes through nuclear and particle physics. It gave the impression of having been trimmed to get the book down in size. As a result some of the ideas were not as well presented. The same was true in Chapter 10 on cosmology. Occasionally I was not sure what the author was talking about. For example, on the dominance of matter over antimatter in the universe today he says:
'The implication is that atomic matter was formed only once, or at most a few times. Matter won the toss over antimatter, supposedly in the first second after the Big Bang, and that settled it. If matter and antimatter had been created from electromagnetic energy many times, half the time antimatter would have won out (equipartition). The great prevalence of one form over the other today is evidence for a single Big Bang'.
If he means what I think he means, then he is wrong. Modern GUT theories will always have matter winning out over antimatter due to a complex process taking place as the universe expands.
I'm afraid that I did not understand the view of quantum theory that the author was trying to explain. At one point, referring to the De Broglie relationship he says that real waves have velocities dependent on the medium through which they are moving but quantum waves have velocities dependent on the velocity of the particle, and so they cannot be 'true' waves. Quite. Wave packets are complicated things and the component probability waves travel faster than light. I do not know what to make of the comment that 'the compression of the energy in an electromagnetic wave [presumably a photon] might also occur in other ways ... by piling up on itself, when it encounters certain types of obstacles' either.
These are two examples that stick out. The author is obviously trying to built a critique of quantum theory and suggest a different way of looking at it based on information theory. Having read the middle section of the book, I was very keen to see what this would be. However, it came across as a confused mish-mash of ideas that I could not pick my way through. Again this felt like a section that had been edited to length.
My overall impression is of a book which is strangely unfocused. I am not sure what audience the author is aiming for. The middle section is highly recommended and would make a good introduction to areas of physics for the interested reader. Some of the points raised are used in the last section to develop the critique of QM, making it seem that this is the real aim of the book. If so, that part should have been developed more thoroughly. If the aim of the book was to be a development of ideas since Newton (and a very good book like that it could have been) then the personal critique of QM should have been missed out.
I'm going to read it again, which has to be some sort of recommendation. I think.