his specific arguments. Joel Lebowitz gave the book a mixed review for Physics Today where he called Price's arguments regarding backward causation 'unconvincing', but praised the section on quantum mechanics, writing 'his discussion ... of the Bohr-Einstein "debate" about the completeness of the quantum description of reality is better than much of the physics literature'. Peter Coveney gave the book a mixed review for the New Scientist, criticizing Price's treatment of non-equilibrium statistical mechanics, but concluding by saying '[a]lthough I didn't find many of the arguments convincing, Price's book is a useful addition to the literature on time, particularly as it reveals the influence of modern science on the way a philosopher thinks. But given its restricted and idiosyncratic character, this book should be read only in conjunction with more broadly based works.' John D. Barrow reviewed the book in Nature, strongly criticizing the chapter on the cosmological arrow of time but writing 'the author has done physicists a great service in laying out so clearly and critically the nature of the various time-asymmetry problems of physics'. Craig Callender gave the book a detailed, positive review for The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, calling it 'exceptionally readable and entertaining' as well as 'a highly original and important contribution to the philosophy and physics of time'. Gordon Belot reviewed the book for The Philosophical Review, writing '[t]his is a fertile and fascinating area, and Price's book provides an exciting entree, even if it does not provide all the answers' . Carlo Rovelli chose the book as one of his favourite books on the subject of time, calling Huw Price one of the 'best living philosophers' and saying that it 'teaches us an important lesson: we are so used to think time as naturally oriented that we instinctively think that the future is determined by the past even if we try not to' References Philosophy of time Philosophy of physics 1996 non-fiction books