Angels and Demons
I am only upto Page 75, and though I do not know the story of the book yet, it has been made clear that Dan Brown’s pathetic attempt to invoke scientific wonderment at his description of particle physics and matter-energy conversation , is only out-competed by the pathetic state of his knowledge of the subject.
Though the book uses references to Einstein’s predictions , theories and quotes, Mr. Brown seems to have forgotten Einstein’s most famous and iconic equation E = mc^2 , which tells us that matter and energy are essentially the same thing. He does seem to admit the likeness of matter and energy , as a ‘breakthrough’ discovery of the future.
Further, he goes on to suggest that a Big Bang brought about by colliding particles (of matter of course) that have been accelerated using energy (from CERN of course) is equivalent to creating matter out of nothing. You just smashed a lot of matter and energy together, you moron, are you even surprised that you got matter and energy back out of it ?
It may be of interest to Mr.Dan Brown that there is such a thing as a God particle, and even an Oh-my-God particle and that his descriptions of cutting edge science are terribly outdated. I am sure the people at CERN are cursing you for making them appear like neanderthals in science.
On the last page I read, there is a quote from Ms.Vetra, on of Dan Brown’s characters. “Good Science fiction has its roots in Good Science.” I guess that definitely puts your book firmly out of the sci-fi genre. May I suggest, that good fiction of any kind has at least one of its roots in better research done by the authour.
This may yet turn out to be a better story then it is a reflection of facts… , but I seriously think writers should do their homework or stick to their expertise.
Update : Same book….Protons are the antimatter counterparts of electrons…it seems. And I am a pink elephant. 😛