Maybe there are some (many? Most?) things we will never know.  And does it
really matter?

----------------------------

 

I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think

it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have

answers which might be wrong. I have approximate answers and

possible beliefs and different degrees of certainty about

different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything and

there are many things I don't know anything about...

 

 -- Richard Feynman (1918-1988)(Nobel Physicist)

 

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Keith Hudson
Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 4:42 AM
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, , EDUCATION
Subject: [Futurework] There's scientific hope yet

 

Now that we are into an era of austerity -- at least in Europe and at least
for a number of years -- what is the future for CERN (European Organization
for Nuclear Research)? This huge circular particle accelerator running for
miles under the boundary between France and Switzerland is now due to be
moth-balled from 2012 onwards because of its immense running costs. This is
a body-blow to several thousand engineers and scientists, including many of
the best young brains of Europe. From 2013 onwards, if we are realistic, the
likelihood is that it will be many years -- if ever again -- before European
governments will be in a position to support it.

We must also bear in mind another factor which is never talked about. This
is that the cost of particle physics has never appeared in political
manifestos at election times. It has been surreptitiously slid into more
general governmental spending on science education and research. The
proverbial man-in-the-street is vaguely aware that his consumer goods are
due to science, but he would never willingly vote for the immense sums of
money required for further accelerators if they ever began to loom large in
governmental budgets.

The man-in-the-street is potentially as curious as the most dedicated
scientist but his education is so blunted in childhood that he cannot begin
to assess the importance and excitement of particle physics in the whole
scheme of things. Indeed, it is a marvel that the CERN accelerator has been
funded at all, there being hardly a politician or senior bureaucrat in the
whole of Europe who understands anything of basic science (Angela Merkel of
Germany being a notable exception).

But even if the CERN accelerator could have continued, the Higgs boson
discovered, and antimatter atoms created, then one thing is for certain.
Many more questions will have been raised, and the scientists concerned
would have wanted to build an even more powerful accelerator. This, at the
very least, would probably cost several times more than the present one --
probably more than Europe could afford. It is possible that one more might
be built. If a fantastic scientific breakthrough occurs during 2011, then
perhaps America and China could join the project and help to build the next
accelerator which might have to be the size of Europe, or the American
Mid-West or the Gobi desert.

Subsequently, if all the deep matters of physics are not answered, what
then? An accelerator that runs round the whole Equator? This is a classic
Malthusian problem. Sooner or later, the whole world would not be large
enough, nor governments rich enough, to build the next one. This would not
only be a body-blow to particle physicists, it could be devastating to
scientific enquiry itself. 

But never say never. Perhaps all the particles that physicists have
discovered so far, and will discover in the future, are merely
terminological artefacts of our present scientific theories, the principal
one being the Big Bang. Perhaps the universe wasn't created this way.
Perhaps there aren't really such things as sub-atomic particles but
something else that adopts particular appearances according to the
experiments that are applied. Perhaps a different scientific view of things,
different concepts and different theories and experiments will reveal
another way of explaining the overwhelming wonders of the universe.

Perhaps classical experiments in the future -- whatever the current theory
might be -- will have to be held in outer space. If so, then despite delays,
we do have hope for science in the future because the best young minds in
science are not confined to physics alone but also to evolutionary biology.
And we will need this subject if we are ever to go on prolonged flights or
carry out large experiments in outer space. We are probably going to have to
deep-freeze or otherwise maintain human DNA in good condition for long
periods of time. To do this we are going to have to understand and develop
genetics a lot further yet.

And this is already the main growth area of science even though it has only
really come of age since the Human Genome Project in 2003 which blew several
previous ideas of biology shy-high. Biologists are also pursuing answers to
deep questions. "How did Life start?" is the most profound one. This may
turn out to be involving complex issues of a quantum sort that are quite as
deep as those presently pondered by particle physicists. Although this
question only intrigues a minority of the population there are also some
wider ones.  "How can we breed better children?" is something every mother
is interested in. "How can we conquer disease?" is a question that everybody
is interested in.

And, of course, the taxpayer will support this avenue of enquiry. So far,
both the professional careerists and the more fanatical believers of
organized religions kick up a lot of trouble from time to time. But the
motivations of potential recipients of genetic manipulation (particularly
mothers of IVF children so far) as well as the scientific curiosity of
professional biologists has been too strong. Politicians and bureaucrats
already know this, of course, and genetics is now quietly slipping through
the legal cracks and developing quite as fast as is possible, limited only
by the quantity and quality of young minds wanting to enter the subject.
Even if some governments were to outlaw or delay particular lines of enquiry
for electoral reasons -- as President George Bush did concerning stem cells
some years ago -- then other governments will allow it to continue, or even
give it much more substantial backing as Singapore and China are already
doing.

Even if science is blocked along the present particle physics avenue then we
have every hope that it will continue along others. And -- who knows? --
even the "soft" science of biology might one day help to answer the
questions that particle physicists are now asking but can't yet answer. 



Keith Hudson, Saltford, England 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to