Wheeler has written a comprehensive review which goes into considerable detail about Gibbs's scientific accomplishments, without using unnecessarily complicated language or mathematics. As a former student of Gibbs, Wheeler is well-placed to provide a detailed biography of a man of whom he had first-hand experience. But this closeness must raise questions as to how objective this book is: at times the biography might be overly-eulogistic. This book was first published in 1951. What is needed now is a modern, more objective work. Amongst Gibbs's contemporaries, for example, Lords Raleigh and Kelvin were critical of Gibbs's thermodynamics. This is not mentioned by Wheeler.

Anyone out there that can help me in trying to explain with the psychological struggle she went through with her children, husband, career,and life in general would be appreciated.

An excellent book! No gross room, autopsy room or surgical suite should be without one. The illustrations are clear and the text is very well written. Every medical student and first year pathology resident should have one.

This is a handy way to comply with question ANP.11670 (a Phase I deficiency) of the anatomic pathology inspection checklist of the College of American Pathologists Laboratory Accreditation Program. It surely beats the blood and formalin stained xerox copies of Appendix H of Juan Rosai's Ackerman's Surgical Pathology text that it replaced.

I read this tome when it first appeared and have re-read it twice. Timothy Phelps is the reporter who broke the news story about Anita Hill charging Clarence Thomas with sexual harassment. Phelps' own liberal bias comes out in the process. But there are a few areas of praiseworthiness in the book.

Phelps tells the truth in that this entire fiasco was NOT about sexual harassment, it was NEVER about sexual harassment, but it was all about the abortion issue and the possibility that Thomas was pro-life and might overturn Roe v. Wade. Phelps does a good job of giving down the middle reporting about the conservative movement's obsession for making up for the sinking of the nomination of Robert Bork in 1987. There was no doubt that that tarnishing was still solid in the mind of conservatives in 1991.

Phelps, however, is on less stable ground when trying to portray Clarence Thomas as a right-wing sex nut. Phelps, of course, was the one who had the confidential FBI file leaked to him and blew this whole thing out of proportion. It was actually Phelps who caused the entire dilemma because he was interested in making a name for himself. After all, Phelps did say, "a reporter could make a career by sinking a Supreme Court nominee."

It also becomes obvious that while admitting that everyone he talked to who was friends with either Thomas or Hill found the charges against each one impossible to believe, Phelps decides to covertly imply that Thomas was willing to perjure himself to make it to the High Court.

Phelps also delves in dirt by stating that the first President Bush was a man who "played politics with race and worried about integrity later." Did Bush play politics with Thomas' nomination? Of course. He put the Democrats who supported affirmative action in the position of defending or admitting it was wrong. But did the Democrats also play politics with Thomas' nomination as well as his life? Yes. The simple fact that Phelps didn't want to report is that BOTH political parties play "the race card" when it suits them.

I cannot recommend this book without recommending David Brock's rebuttal, "The Real Anita Hill." Some will point out that Brock has renounced it, but he has yet to name even a single person who misinformed him. Brock's motives were no purer than Phelps', but he writes well versed on the issue.

It is probable that one's reaction to this book will be colored by one's political ideology (and I can't hold myself as being exempt from that), which is unfortunate. The book is never boring, and the authors seem to go out of their way to be scrupulously fair to both sides, perhaps even too fair. Because what this book says about the state of our judicial system and the stunted, superficial level of our political discourse, is deeply depressing. One can be ideologically opposed to men like Renquist and Scalia and Brennan, but one would be loath to question their competence. Example after example is given of just how mediocre a jurist Thomas was and of how unqualified he was for the position he ended up receiving, a tenure that will last his lifetime and insure the composition of the Supreme Court as an ultra-conservative cabal. The cynicism of the Bush administration, its callous use of race for its own agenda with little regard or respect for the integrity of the judicial process, is clearly delineated. When one reads about the cavalier and contemptible way the issue of sexual harassment was handled by the old-boy politicians who dominated (Specter and Hatch are just 2 of the most egregious examples) the nomination hearings, it's impossible to be anything but disturbed about where this country is heading, whatever the nature of one's political sympathies. Women will be outraged upon reading this book. Any fair-minded person will be outraged, as well as saddened, on reading this book. All in all, this is a comprehensive behind-the-scenes examination of one of the more reprehensible episodes in recent American history, and it seems unlikely that there could be another book on this subject that will be as cogent or sobering.

"Capitol Games" is a very revealing book that takes the reader behind the scenes in one of the most controversial Supreme Court appointments in this country's history. Phelps and Winternitz have written a well-researched tale of how Thomas was picked by the Bush White House over several more qualified candidates to replace the retiring Thurgood Marshall on the Court. If you ascribe to the principle that only the best and the brightest should be appointed to the Court without regard to race or ideology, you will be surprised or, as I was, angered. Although this title is out of print, I strongly recommend finding and reading it to find the truth behind what amounts to little more than blatant manipulation of the appointment process (I will admit to having some bias in writing this review, by the way).

In Copper Crucible, Jonathan D. Rosenblum sets out to grind his ax and bash the evil "big business & Corporate giants". Too bad he didn't tell the rest of the story,... As he fell all over himself demonizing Phelps Dodge and raising Union organizers to sainthood, he conveniently omits the fact that a fully loaded beer truck was the drawing card the union used for its strike meetings. Alcohol just set the stage for the violence to come. And beleive me there was plenty & encouraged by the union. "Lets get the miners drunk & they will vote how we say" after all,... its all about power & money -on the union side as well. Copper Crucible may be based on true events, but it certainly does not paint a full true picture.

This book focuses on the destruction of individuals' lives when they cross paths with a powerful corporation, Phelps Dodge, when that company has the leverage to do so. This book reveals clearly how thin was the veneer of the labor-management accord after WWII. Phelps Dodge saw an opportunity to bust their unions and aided by labor law, labor law officials, and law enforcement departments did so. This book is strongest in its depiction of personalities but is weakest in putting this entire episode in a larger perspective. Rosemblum casts doubt on the unions understandings and strategies in this strike of 1983. But what is missing is any broad attempt to frame this labor conflict in context of the political understandings and power of the American working class in general. Why are the anti-labor biases of labor law officials, judges, and law enforcement officials tolerated in this country? Do most working poeple support these biases? Do they not know that they exist or consider them to be irrelevant? Do they support union-busting? If not, are they powerless to elect pro-worker Congressmen and change labor laws? Union actions and community understandings take place in these unanswered contexts. The book is highly readable but one is left primarily with sympathy for the mostly Chicano workers who had their lives uprooted and not with a broader understanding of labor relations other than the obvious capability of a company with an extreme anti-union animus to carry out its will.

This history of a bitter Arizona mining strike in 1983-86 is a top-notch case study of how unions were mugged by American corporations in the 1980s. To judge by the endnotes, Rosenblum interviewed every player in the strike -- from Phelps Dodge executives and union leaders to ex-Governor Babbitt and undercover cops -- and the result is a vivid narative that weaves together labor history and political and legal analysis. The sections on pro-management bias at the NLRB and the use of undercover police to spy on strikers are gems of investigative reporting. Rosenblum is pro-union but he presents management's case at length and doesn't hold back from sharp criticism of the United Steelworkers leadership. If you're interested in labor history or labor/management relations in the US, read this book.

Simon states the world has trended positive in the past and will continue to do so in the future. If you read a review which states Simon has been proven wrong since the time of publication, then that reviewer totally misunderstands Simon's position OR really hasn't read the material. It would be impossible to say anything has been proven at this point, because Simon's analysis requires long periods of time for a trend to develop. Pointing to an increase in fuel prices or a decline in a region's life expectancy (due to a disaster, natural or economic) does not show a flaw in Simon's reasoning, only a bump in the road, to which humanity must develop a response. It is the RESPONSE which has made humans what they are, and has brought us to the modern state in which we now live.

I find the reviews of this book interesting. The last few comments made on the book are on how Simon's "predictions" have been debunked. His predictions are in fact panning out quite nicley. The united states "fall" on the world life expectancy list does not mean things have gotten worse: it means more countries are improving, and some have surpassed us. This is a bad thing? Other readers point out how things just havn't panned out. Are you all on crack? In truth Simon makes no predictions in his books that aren't based of fact. Over the last 100 years things have gotten MUCH better for EVERYONE. You can argue about disparities among the races, but the TRENDS for ALL of humanity show great improvements (ie, for all races). Scoff at his claims if you will, but you are likley living proof of some miracle brought about within even the last 40 years. It matters not what race you are. If you don't like Simon, hit up the statistical abstract of the united states and verify his numbers - this is a claim simon makes. Lastly, seeing some blips in humanity, such as the adverse effects of the fall of the soviet union (again, you cannot simply say simon is wrong because the soviets dove into free market economies and are struggling, anymore than you could have said capitalism is wrong because of the recession in the 80's, or the depression before WW2; russia is an EXTREME example of how NOT to transition into democracy, hence the term use of the uncontrolled "fall" in "fall of the soviet union"). This is the essence of simons ENTIRE BOOK - that the overall TRENDS are improving. Readers who miss that miss the book. Life isn't easy every day or every year, sorry. Don't go blaming Simon for that.

I'd be an extreme environmentalist if I thought pollution in the world was getting worse. It's not. I'd be a back-to-the-plow agrarian if I thought industrial life was not good for humanity. But it is. I'd be a social liberal if I thought that crime was on the rise, poverty was growing and rampant, and life was generally getting worse. But it's not.

The state of humanity provides several discrete chapters that list statistics, trends, and quantifiable facts concerning the true state of the world today. True, you can use statistics to lie, if you're vague. Simon's book is far from vague, with shovel-fulls of information relating to several topics: acid-rain, global temperatures, infant mortality, suicide, standards of living, and on and on...

You don't have to live on the street or in the third world to do research, to find out that life is better everywhere than its ever been.

Initially it didn't register why this book is distinctive in the expatriot relocation genre. However, about of a third of the into it one realizes that it is intuitively obvious. First, this isn't a popular culture ethnography designed to provide charming anecdotes. A "House in Sicily" is a memoir, and is distinctive as speaking in the voice of an earlier generation. It reflects values, priorities, and a code of behavior which clearly reflect an more formal, and more genteel time (even though a number of the anecdotes are from the sixties). The book challenges assumptions later generations might have about this era, because the writer, and those with whom she associated clearly had a progressive and opened minded perspective, despite a seemingly rigid sense of social proprieties.

This book isn't a biography; the writer establishes how this house in Sicily became her responsibility, and how events lead that responsibility to change her life. That being the first half, the remainder of the book consists of selected vignettes from her life describing some of the colorful and eccentric figures who, through word of mouth (among a cerebral set) were encouraged to visit her.

The writer speaks in a characteristically restrained, understated English manner. While she remains proudly, unrelentingly English she is very admiring of Sicilian culture which she represents as a distinctly different, yet dignified and admirable.

A quick, enjoyable read; I found myself surprised that it progressed so quickly and found myself wishing for more.

This is a charming tale of a part of Sicily as seen through the eyes of a woman in love with its land and people. Daphne Phelps is as warm-hearted and generous as the Sicilian men and women she writes about. Although her perspective at first is that of an outsider, she enlarges her view eventually to give us a number of interesting stories about both the Sicilians and the foreign visitors who arrive and quickly fall in love with Sicily. Phelps's modest and reticent nature sometimes prevents her from telling us all that she hints about in her stories, especially when she relates her friendship with the Mafia Don Ciccio. Was there more romance here than she lets on? There are a dozen tales in her book that she could have dwelt upon at length, but she give us enough fascinating details to stir our imagination. If you love or want to fall in love with Sicily and its open-hearted men and women, read this book.

I am a Sicilian American of 2nd generation. My father was born in Sicily and my mother's parents are both Sicilian. My entire family went to Sicily last July (2001) and we found Ms. Phelps book to be entertaining, respectful and delightful. In response to the critique by Antonina LiCastri-Boocock who is Sicilian: "Please leave the machismo at home." Ms. Phelps was very respectful of both the people and place of Sicily. My entire family is reading this book and has enjoyed it all the same. This book is a five star read. It is refreshing to see a dignified outside look at Sicily from an English perspective. (If Ms. Phelps supposedly had so much disdain for Sicily, why did she stay so long?) Antonina could not give insight other than from a Sicilian male perspective. I am very traditional, but I give credit where credit is do. If you are American, you will not like this book but love it. If you are Sicilian, I bet you will probably love all the more. The Sicilian people are a loving, lovely people and I believe that all of the characters that Ms. Phelps wrote about would be more than honored by her writings.

Salvatore

This book simply does not deliver any content. It is a well-written, attractively formatted, 199 page advertisement for a commercial product. I was extremely disappointed. It is the only book I have ever bought (and I've bought thousands) that I sent back. You will not learn anything from reading this book as most of it is spent describing a demo of the commercial product.

As Mr. Downey writes, this book is horrible. There are about 2 sentences of valuable information in the whole thing. Half to book is dedicating to instruction for the included software, which crashes my PC. Obviously this book was written to try and sell software, not as the technical resource it claims to be.

Whatever you do, do not buy this book, unless you want to waste some money.

I bought this book expecting at least a little information on what the book promised to tell about: Robot Sensors. What I received was completely vague theory of what a robot could have to do theoretical things. This is a fictitious book that most anyone could write without any prior knowlege on the subject. It astounds me that any respectable company would publish a book like this. I hope that in the futre, the author of this book will actually tell readers what the book is about and not try to swindle them.

A sample sentance of this book might say something like: "If we had a robot that had to navigate through a room, what would he need? Sensors! These would alow it to navigate through the room."

This is about the depth of the book. To make it worse, I was expecting a sizable book. Instead, the book is very small and filled with giant diagrams which contain absolutely NO information.

Why should you listen to me? I am a microcontroller programmer and I actually do many of the things this author dreams of in his book.

Bottom line, this book is the worst book I have ever seen on any subject. Do not buy it. I was forced to return mine and luckilly get a refund.