Why do the laws of physics exist? Our universe is not a place of chaos and lawlessness. It and everything within it follow strict rules that shape the universe into a place where we can exist. For some, this indicates a creator, who set everything in motion for us. For other like Peter Atkins, there has to be a non-mystical reason for the existence of the rules. In Conjuring the Universe, Dr. Atkins sets forth a convincing argument about how the laws of physics exist that is compliant with a universe that sprang from nothing. For example, if nothing is the starting point of our universe, how does conservation of energy exist? This is just one of the questions that Dr. Atkins discusses in this excellent book.

TL;DR: Excellent technical yet readable book that adds to the case for nothing being the beginning. It wouldn’t be a good place to start arguing for a universe popping into existence from nothing.

From the publisher:

The marvellous complexity of the Universe emerges from several deep laws and a handful of fundamental constants that fix its shape, scale, and destiny. There is a deep structure to the world which at the same time is simple, elegant, and beautiful. Where did these laws and these constants come from? And why are the laws so fruitful when written in the language of mathematics?

Peter Atkins considers the minimum effort needed to equip the Universe with its laws and its constants. He explores the origin of the conservation of energy, of electromagnetism, of classical and quantum mechanics, and of thermodynamics, showing how all these laws spring from deep symmetries. The revolutionary result is a short but immensely rich weaving together of the fundamental ideas of physics. With his characteristic wit, erudition, and economy, Atkins sketches out how the laws of Nature can spring from very little. Or arguably from nothing at all.

In Conjuring the Universe, the laws of physics are discussed in terms of what they mean rather than mathematical equations. Even though I’ve studied physics and read a lot about the subject, I still appreciated Dr. Atkins explanations. They are more important than the equations because if you don’t know what they mean, you’re just sticking numbers into a process to get an answer. In order to know if the numbers are correct, you have to know what the equations represent. Dr. Atkins explains physical concepts in clear, understandable sentences and analogies. If you want the equations, he includes them in the back of the book. In my advanced reading copy (ARC), the notes at the end of the book weren’t typeset correctly, and that section caused my iPad trouble. So, I didn’t read the notes and cannot comment on their depth.

The writing style is very British, which I appreciated. It felt dry at first, but as I got accustomed to it, I enjoyed it more and more. It is technical, which means that rereading a sentence, paragraph, or even page will be required. This is a text which demands close reading. I recommend having a dictionary and/or access to Wikipedia to clarify and supplement it. But if you’re curious about physics, it is not over your head. It is not too academic. It requires work but is accessible. The work of understanding rewards us with an interesting perspective on the laws of physics. Anyone with at least a high school education can learn something from this book.

Conjuring the Universe is an excellent study in how to write a novel to build an argument. Each chapter has an objective and generally achieves it by the end. The next chapter then builds or uses the momentum of the previous to achieve its goals. I loved the way this is structured; it fit a concise logical blueprint that was pleasing to me. If I were to write a nonfiction book, I’d study these chapters to learn how Dr. Atkins did it.

While it is an excellent supporting text, if I had to name one book as making the case for our universe springing forth from nothing, it wouldn’t be this book. It’s not trying to prove that nothing was the initial state; it just shows how what we know could come from that initial state. In other words, the starting assumption of the book is that nothing is the initial state, but nothing in the book confirms that assumption as correct. I would recommend Conjuring the Universe to anyone who enjoyed Krauss’s A Universe from Nothing. It makes Krauss’s argument much stronger and should be used as evidence that something from nothing is possible.

Most of the arguments worked for me. Chapter 8, I struggled. In this section, Dr. Atkins argues that some fundamental constants do not actually exist. He says they are human invention. In part, I understand what he’s trying to say, but I find it more a mathematical trick than a convincing argument. In order for this argument to work, we have to redefine units of measurement that humans have used for centuries. The numbers in front of the unit make no sense in terms of what we’ve all used to measure all our lives. This lost me because it departs with common sense in some ways. The underlying mathematical arguments are sound, but they are built on a philosophical ground. If early humans had known about the speed of light or the concept of absolute zero, maybe our system of measurements would be such that we don’t need these conversion constants. But that is not the reality we live in. So, the argument is excellent that some fundamental constants do not exist. But so what? We still have to use them in the world we’ve built.

Despite bouncing off Chapter 8, Conjuring the Universe hooked me and taught me a lot. It is excellently written and supports the argument for nothing. Its explanation of physics enlightens and expands my appreciation of our universe. In the highlighted quote above, it contains one of the best definitions of the scientific method I’ve read. One success means more investigation; whereas one failure means failure. This is what it means to be a scientist, and Dr. Atkins has captured that essence beautifully. His ability to translate the laws of physics into understandable concepts makes Conjuring the Universe readable and a good addition to any library of science.

Score: 7.5/10