In a recent issue of the New Scientist (23 July 2011, p.22)
Laurence Krauss, director of the Origins Project at Arizona State University,
complains that science is under attack from a shortage of funding. It has been
estimated that the cumulative cost of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is something
approaching $4 trillion while, Krauss maintains, warlords thrive, political
freedom ranks low and ethnic and gender segregation continue.
At the same time, he observes, the US economy is in trouble.
Both practical and purely academic projects are in danger and both categories
contribute to the quality of life.
He adds that ‘we need to ask what the next generation of
bright minds will lose. The remarkable images captured by Hubble have inspired
a generation of people to dream about the universe and its myriad possibilities.’
Whether the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, with all the
errors of strategy imposed on the military, achieved nothing is an open
question (my own answer would be that overall they did achieve something and that they had little choice if civilisation, including Islamic societies, was to be protected against a destructive minority). However, Krauss is right about the funding threat. For this reason
scientists need to make sure that the population as a whole value and respect
them, rather than consider them as clever nerds filled with hubris and asserting
that all human beings are brought into being by the chance juggling of
chemicals produced by a universe which was created by a universe-generating system
which spontaneously came into being out of existential nothingness and, just in
case you didn’t get the message, that life is totally pointless and
meaningless.
People outside of science hear the most inane theories being
talked about by those who purport to be logical and it must turn young thinking
people away in droves. Fortunately, there are plenty of scientists who do not
subscribe to such philosophical materialism, but, less fortunately, they are
rarely given prominence in the media.
For instance, there is a theory that ‘our’ universe is one
of an infinitely large number of ‘universes’ in which all things are possible
and which happens to look miraculous. This is not only unprovable metaphysical
speculation but totally outside the realm of logic. A professional philosopher
could not possibly take it seriously.
Why? Because if there were an infinite ensemble of universes
there would have to be one in which there were no other ‘universes’. Why spend
time and money even talking about such a paradoxical hypothesis? How much
effort would you be willing to devote to a book purporting to prove that black
is white? And would the writer of such a book be worthy of a research grant?
Hopefully, such inanities will gradually fade into oblivion
so that real science can get the recognition and resources it deserves and
needs if the West is not to fall to the forces of disorder that Krauss rightly
recognises.
So rise up,you non-nerdish scientists, and make
yourself heard!
John
Author, 2077 AD
