Pedagogy and humor: a feast open to more. However, a limit: the end of the book is devoted to the hope of string physics, physical sacrosanct to the author's eyes. To me, this tarnishes end (some) overall. Is it a distortion due to translation? It states for example that "discovers" this or that theory. I see this in the best case a misnomer, in the worst reasoning abuse. Of course, physics today is to adjust theoretical reasoning to experimental findings not easy to reconcile. But when a hypothetical mathematical theory of holography, "we add the extra dimensions of string theory" itself hypothetical, can we still talk about physics? We find this way we regularly accuses the physicists ropes: a kind of certainty that sometimes borders on dogmatism and even intellectual fundamentalism. Remains a fascinating book, which should be confronting other less absolutist views to balance or simply create debate.
