Life lessons: things everyone should know about science

[Guest guest]

Z

Wed, 06 Apr 2005 19:07:17 -0700

Subject:[Zepps_News] Life lessons: things everyone should know about

science

 

 

 

 

<http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/feature/story/0,13026,1453311,00.html>

 

 

What is the one thing everyone should learn about science? Spiked asked

250 scientists - here we bring you some of the most provocative

responses

 

Thursday April 7, 2005

The Observer

 

Seth Lloyd Professor of mechanical engineering at the Massachusetts

Institute of Technology

 

You do not have to be a scientist to do science; you can be a child, a

computer, or an intelligent rat. As long as you can verify a result, it

is part of science.

 

Freeman Dyson Emeritus professor of physics at the Institute for

Advanced Study in Princeton

 

Science is about uncertainty. We do not yet know the answers to most of

the important questions — nature is smarter than we are. But if we are

patient, and not in too much of a hurry, then science gives us a good

way to find the answers.

 

Richard Dawkins Charles Simonyi professor of the public understanding

of

science at the University of Oxford, and a science writer and

broadcaster

 

I wish everyone understood Darwinian natural selection, and its

enormous

explanatory power, as the only known explanation of " design " . The world

is divided into things that look designed, like birds and airliners;

and

things that do not look designed, like rocks and mountains. Things that

look designed are divided into those that really are designed, like

submarines and tin openers; and those that are not really designed,

like

sharks and hedgehogs. Darwinian natural selection, although it involves

no true design at all, can produce an uncanny simulacrum of true

design.

An engineer would be hard put to decide whether a bird or a plane was

the more aerodynamically elegant.

 

Lewis Wolpert Emeritus professor of biology as applied to medicine at

University College London

 

I would teach the world that science is the best way to understand the

world, and that for any set of observations, there is only one correct

explanation. Also, science is value-free, as it explains the world as

it

is. Ethical issues arise only when science is applied to technology —

from medicine to industry.

 

Kathy Sykes Collier professor of public engagement in science and

engineering at the University of Bristol

 

I would teach the world that science is not about truth, but is about

trying to get closer to the truth. This is important because, too

often,

people look to scientists as having the " truth " . What we have is

wrapped

in uncertainties, caveats and simplifications.

 

John Gribbin Astrophysicist and science writer

 

I cannot improve upon the comment of the American physicist Richard

Feynman: " The most important information … is the atomic hypothesis …

that all things are made of atoms — little particles that move around

in

perpetual motion, attracting each other when they are a little distance

apart, but repelling upon being squeezed into one another. "

 

Bernard Lovell Astronomer and founder of Jodrell Bank Observatory

 

I would teach the world that fundamental scientific research is

neutral,

but the dividing line between good and evil in the eventual use of the

results of research is often thin and tenuous.

 

In the first half of the 20th century, research into the structure of

matter led to a detailed knowledge of atomic structure, and to a

knowledge that in certain transmutations, there was a loss of mass. The

second world war led to the enormous concentration of tech­nological

effort, to convert this knowledge into devastating weapons of mass

destruction, instead of providing atomic power for the benefit of

humanity. That contrast between the good and the evil, in the eventual

use of research, confronts us today.

 

Simon Baron-Cohen Professor of developmental psychopathology at the

University of Cambridge, and director of the Autism Research Centre

 

I would teach the world that scientists fall in love — with

experiments.

An experiment can be beautifully stunning. Experiments are not just

about proof — some of them have an intrinsic elegance, that you just

want to go back to and look at again and again. Take men with two X

chromosomes. This puzzle of nature just called out for the experiment,

conducted in 1990, to search the two X chromosomes in such individuals

—

to find a bit of the Y chromosome, that might have broken off and

become

integrated into one of the X chromosomes. It just had to be there. And

sure enough, it was. What we now know to be the SRY gene — the

sex-related Y gene — had got into the X chromosome. And this is the

gene

that turns on the process to grow testes, and become male.

 

Antony Hoare Senior researcher at Microsoft Corporation

 

I would teach the world that scientists start by trying very hard to

disprove what they hope is true. When they fail, they have a good

reason

for believing what they hope is true, and can even convince others of

its truth. A scientist always acknowledges the possibility of error,

and

is less likely to be mistaken than one who always claims to be right.

 

Harry Kroto Professor of chemistry at Sussex University, and joint

recipient of the Nobel prize in chemistry

 

The methods of science are manifestly effective, having made massive

humanitarian contributions to society. It is this very effectiveness

which the purveyors of mystical philosophies attack, because they

recognise in it the chief threat to the belief-based source of their

power and financial reward.

 

Michael Baum Emeritus professor of surgery and visiting professor of

medical humanities at University College London, and chairman of the

Psychosocial Oncology Committee of the National Cancer Research

Institute

 

I would teach the world that science = imagination + humility². If only

politicians were ruled by the scientific prin­ciples of conjectures

(hypothesis generation) and refutations (controlled experimentation),

then the world would be a better place. To quote the 19th-century

British biologist Thomas Henry Huxley: " The tragedy of science is the

slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact. "

 

Susan Blackmore Science writer and broadcaster, and visiting lecturer

at

the University of the West of England in Bristol

 

Frighteningly, most people do not understand Darwin's great insight.

What people miss is the sheer inevitability of the creative process.

Once you see it —copy, vary, select; copy, vary, select —you see that

design by natural selection simply has to happen. This is not like

Isaac

Newton's laws, or quantum physics, or any of the other great theories

in

science, where one can ask " why is this so? " It simply has to be the

case. Then, the scary implications follow. If everyone understood

evolution, then the tyranny of religious memes would be weakened, and

we

little humans might find a better way to live in this pointless

universe.

 

John Sulston One of the leaders of the Human Genome Project, and joint

recipient of the Nobel prize in physiology or medicine

 

We have to accept responsibility for the survival of the human race,

instead of praying about it. The prize, if we can embrace this humanist

philosophy, is an infinite and unimaginably exciting journey ahead of

us.

 

Brian Davies Professor of mathematics at King's College London

 

Without doubt, the most important single scientific discovery ever made

was the connection between electricity and magnetism. This was

discov­ered by the 19th-century British physicist and chemist Michael

Faraday, at the Royal Institution in London; and it was systematised by

the 19th-century Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell, at King's

College London.

 

This discovery led directly to the electric motor and dynamo — the

basis

of all electrical power — and also to telephones, radio, television,

and

computers, upon all of which advanced civilisation now depends.

 

Eric Drexler Founder and emeritus chair of the Foresight Institute, and

inventor of the term 'nanotechnology'

 

Physical technology evolves towards limits set by physical law, and a

technology approaching the limits set by physical law must build with

atomic precision. Molecular machinery provides a way to accomplish

this.

 

In today's biological cells and in future manufacturing, large

molecular

structures can fit together and work together, forming molecular

machine

systems.

 

Marcus du Sautoy Professor of mathematics at Oxford University,

presenter of the BBC TV programme Mind Games

 

I would teach the world how the Greeks proved, more than 2,000 years

ago, that there are infinitely many prime numbers. In my mind, this

discovery is the beginning of mathematics — when humankind realised

that, by pure thought alone, it could prove eternal truths of the

universe.

 

Prime numbers are the indivisible numbers, numbers that can be divided

only by themselves and one. They are the most important numbers in

mathematics, because every number is built by multiplying prime numbers

together — for example, 60 = 2 x 2 x 3 x 5. They are like the atoms of

arithmetic, the hydrogen and oxygen of the world of numbers.

 

Stanley Feldman Emeritus professor of anaesthesiology at Charing Cross

and Westminster Medical School

 

I would like it to be universally known that whatever we eat, it is

broken down into basic building blocks of food in the gut, before it

can

be absorbed into the blood.

 

The cholesterol in the food you eat is not the same cholesterol as that

in your blood. Whatever meat you eat — whether it be prime organic

Angus, or chopped-up scrag end from an old cow — it ends up as the same

amino acids in your blood. No matter what the source of the fat, it is

essentially the same fatty acids that enter the bloodstream. We are not

what we eat.

 

Richard Fortey Senior paleontologist at the Natural History Museum in

London, and science writer

 

Everyone should know about plate tectonics. We all relate to our own

landscape — it is what gives us our sense of homeland. Yet the ultimate

controls on the shape of the Earth are based upon the slow movement of

the tectonic plates. To understand these geological forces gives us all

a new respect for our planet — an awareness of how it has been sewed

together over 4,000m years, and how it continually remakes itself.

 

Through geology, we understand our identity. It is sad that geology is

sometimes regarded as a " dry " science, for it underlies everything.

Geology is a kind of unconscious mind for the world.

 

Lynne Frostick Professor of physical geography at the University of

Hull, and director of the Hull Environment Research Institute and the

Environmental Technologies Centre for Industrial Collaboration

 

I would like to teach the world about climate change, and the role of

every human being in causing it. This is far and away the biggest

threat

to our planet. We will only fight the more serious consequences of

climate change if every individual accepts responsibility, and if every

individual modifies their behaviour.

 

Robert Garfinkle Lunar section historian at the British Astronomical

Association

 

I would teach the world the famous quote, attributed to Galileo

Galilei,

eppur si muove — Latin for " but still it moves " . It lays the groundwork

for understanding the Earth–moon–sun system. Without this orbiting

triangle, life as we know it might not even exist on Earth.

 

I would want my students of science to understand that from this simple

17th-century quote flows all of our knowledge of our place in the local

universe. Our movement about the sun creates our seasons, and gives us

the joy of the changing night sky. The changing seasons, in conjunction

with the movement of the moon around the Earth and — to a lesser extent

— around the sun as well, cause the tides, ocean currents, and

worldwide

temperature and atmospheric pressure variations, thus causing the

weather and ocean movements. This movement helps to promote life in the

seas, and the formation of rain clouds — basic building blocks for all

life.

 

Peggy Lemaux Cooperative extension specialist in plant biotechnology at

the University of California at Berkeley

 

I would nominate the basic formula for photosynthesis: CO2 + H2O +

sunlight/chlorophyll —> O2 + C6H12O6. Why is this so important? Because

without this chemistry, life on earth would not be possible. Glucose

(C6H12O6) is the basic energy source for all living organisms. The

oxygen released as a photosynthetic byproduct, principally of

phytoplankton, provides most of the atmospheric oxygen vital to

respiration in plants and animals. And animals, in turn, produce carbon

dioxide (C02) necessary for plants. Therefore, photosynthesis is

consid­ered the ultimate source of life for nearly all plants and

animals, by providing the energy required to drive their metabolic

processes. Without this important reaction, life on this planet would

cease.

 

Dr Robert Maynard Senior medical officer at the UK Department of Health

 

The principle of refutation put forward by the philosopher Karl Popper,

in his books The Logic of Scientific Discovery and Conjectures and

Refutations, is my choice. Popper argued that scientific knowledge

advanced most reliably by the development and refutation of hypotheses

—

much more reliably than by the accretion of evidence in support of

theories.

 

He said you cannot prove that all swans are white by counting white

swans, but you can prove that not all swans are white by counting one

black swan. Popper's approach is now accepted, in principle, by many

scientists. And yet much research is still based upon induction — upon

the collection of facts to support our ideas. Erecting hypotheses that

can be falsified, and designing experiments capable of doing so, is the

hallmark of the true scientist. In fact, it distinguishes the scientist

from the non-scientist.

 

John McCarthy Emeritus professor of computer science at Stanford

University, and inventor of the term 'artificial intelligence'

 

Find the numbers, and compare them. As the physicist Lord Kelvin said

in

1883, in a lecture to the Institution of Civil Engineers, " when you can

measure what you are speaking about and express it in numbers, you know

something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot

express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory

kind " .

 

Channapatna S Prakash Professor in plant molecular genetics at Tuskegee

University, and director of the Centre for Plant Biotechnology Research

 

I would teach the world not to be afraid of the genetic modification of

our crops, and to accept GM crops, as they can help to feed the growing

world in an environmentally sustainable manner. There is much

apprehension and confusion about this technology, especially in Europe.

This has led to the needless slowdown of the application of

biotechnology in agriculture.

 

If the world were to embrace GM crops, then we could conquer hunger and

poverty much more easily, cut down the use of chemicals on farms, help

mitigate the cutting down of tropical forests to expand the area of

agriculture, bring more reliability to farming, make farming more

profitable, help developing countries through crops that are hardier

and

tolerant to drought, improve food safety, and improve the nutrition of

crops. GM crops are as safe as conventionally developed crops. The fear

of this technology is unnecessarily holding back progress, and is

denying the fruits of that progress to the developing world, where it

is

needed the most.

 

Martin Rees Astronomer Royal and professor of cosmology, and

astrophysics at the University of Cambridge

 

I'd like to widen people's awareness of the tremendous timespan lying

ahead — for our planet, and for life itself. Most educated people are

aware that we're the outcome of nearly 4bn years of Darwinian

selection,

but many tend to think that humans are somehow the culmination. Our

sun,

however, is less than halfway through its lifespan. It will not be

humans who watch the sun's demise, 6bn years from now. Any creatures

that exist then will be as different from us as we are from bacteria or

amoebae.

 

Our concern with Earth's future is, understandably, focused upon the

next 100 years at most — the lifetimes of our children and

grandchildren. But awareness of this longer time horizon, and the

immense potential that human actions this century could foreclose,

offers an extra motive for proper stewardship of this planet.

 

Matt Ridley Founding chair of the International Centre for Life

 

Science is not a catalogue of facts, but a search for new mysteries.

Science increases the store of wonder and mystery in the world; it does

not erode it. The myth that science gets rid of mysteries, started by

the Romantic poets, was well nailed by Albert Einstein —whose thought

experiments about relativity are far more otherworldly, elusive,

thrilling, and baffling than anything dreamt up by poets.

 

Isaac Newton showed us the mysteries of deep space, Charles Darwin

showed us the mysteries of deep time, and Francis Crick and James D

Watson showed us the mysteries of deep encoding. To get rid of those

insights would be to reduce the world's stock of awe.

 

Roderich Tumulka Researcher in physics at the Mathematics Institute at

the University of Tübingen

 

Paranormal phenomena do not exist. Magic, witchcraft, mind-reading,

clairvoyance, faith healing and similar practices do not work and never

have worked. It makes a crucial difference whether we imagine ourselves

surrounded by supernatural beings and happenings or whether instead we

see ourselves in a world that science can help us understand. Many

scientific principles, concepts, or discoveries need not, despite their

importance, be understood by the public, but just by the experts. The

question of the paranormal is different in this respect.

 

Stuart Zola Professor of psychiatry and behavioural sciences at Emory

University, and director of the Yerkes National Primate Research Centre

 

I would teach the world the importance of staying actively

intellectually engaged throughout our lives, especially as we become

elderly. There are good data now that point to the fact that continuing

to challenge yourself late in life — taking up a new hobby, learning to

play a musical instrument, doing crossword puzzles, etc — actually

helps

to maintain cognitive function, and protects against the onset of

cognitive decline.

 

Gerardus 't Hooft Professor of theoretical physics at Utrecht

University

and joint recipient of the Nobel prize in physics, for his work on the

quantum structure of electroweak interactions

 

Is it really true that the world wants to hear only one thing about

science? And then continue after that, with its ongoing religious,

superstitious and political disputes? Maybe the world wants to hear

only

one thing from me. What could that be? All the important things that

the

world has already heard from my colleagues might be incomplete — my

colleagues may have forgotten to tell the world something. What could

that be? I do not know.

 

 

--

Election 2004

The Triumph of the Swill

" The National Government will regard it as its first and foremost

duty to revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation.

It will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our

nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation

of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national

life. "

Adolph Hitler, My New World Order,

Proclamation to the German Nation

at Berlin, February 1, 1933

 

 

Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!

Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.

 

http://www.zeppscommentaries.com

For news feed, http:////zepps_news

For essays (please contribute!) http://zepps_essays