The issue you are raising is partly a moral one, Keith. We currently spend a lot of wealth on guns and bombs and the kinds of military equipment that delivers them. We send some of the brightest people we have off to do battle with and obliterate other very bright people. What if we shifted all of that money, brains and energy into research in genetics and particle physics? Even then we might not find the Higgs boson or resolve the ultimate problem of how we and our universe came to be, but we'd probably get a lot closer to real answers.
Will we ever be able to make that kind of shift? I doubt it. Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: Keith Hudson To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, ,EDUCATION Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 4:42 AM 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
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
