|
The Light of Alexandria By James Maynard Chapter One - The Light First Kindled View as .PDF There is a sort of wonder when we look up into the evening sky. We see perhaps 10,000 stars shine down upon us as we gaze up in amazement. Nearly every child asks him or herself the same questions: What ARE the stars? How come they do not fall down at our feet? Are there other life forms, circling around those stars, gazing up at our distant Sun and asking themselves the very same questions? And what is this thing called “life”? I remember being a small child and trying to send messages to people around other planets, using only a flashlight and the few letters of Morse code I learned when I built a telegraph with my father. The first thoughts of what the stars were and what they were made from, were likely conjured by our earliest ancestors, on the Serengeti Plain, staring up at a multitude of stars, long before the interfering haze of artificial lights. The stars were also special to our distant ancestors for a different reason. We can touch things on Earth. Rocks, trees, water and even mountains far on the horizon were all knowable. They could be touched, felt and examined. The stars were not that way at all. No matter how high one climbed on a mountain, or up the tallest tree, the stars were no closer. Surely, the early ancients thought, this must be the home of the Gods. Perhaps this quest for the stars was where religion was born, answering the eternal questions with stories, myths and rituals. Most people in the ancient world chose this route, as many people choose it today. Civilizations around the world attempted to commune, one way or another, with the Gods. Many cultures built temples to the beings in the sky. Many of these attempted to bring living priests or the honored dead closer to the stars. However, all of these cultures were also subject to the same laws of physics, so the shape of these temples to the sky were all roughly the same. There was only one shape that could be used to build to a great height with ancient materials and techniques: the pyramid. Therefore, this is the reason that we see pyramids from vastly different cultures around the world. There is no mystery to why we see such a commonality between distantly spaced civilizations. There is no need for a super-race of men, or aliens with advanced technology. The quest to become closer to the stars was prevalent worldwide and the only way to get closer to the stars with ancient materials was to build a pyramid. Mysticism pervaded the world and many cultures stayed in this mindset throughout the ancient years. However, something dramatically changed in the lands of Ionia, in the sixth century BCE (Before Common Era ) and a new way of thinking was developed. The area of Ionia was a fertile ground in which the seeds of scientific wonder and curiosity were sown. The people of that distant time and place could see change all around them, as we see it today around us. The movement of the Sun and Moon in the sky, the cycles of night and day, summer and winter, life and death, all beckon to be explored. A brave few of the ancient Ionians and Greeks chose another route. Not of myth and superstition, but of careful observation, study and experiment. If we lived in a world where change never occurred, science likely would have never been born. There would have been little reason to study nature, for all that would exist would be a static freeze-frame of the world. If, on the other hand, we lived in a world where change happened too quickly, or in such an errant fashion that patterns could not be recognized, science would have died an early death from mass confusion. However, we live in neither of these worlds. Our universe and the Earth around it, changes according to regular, largely simple patterns and the laws of physics and chemistry are the same under all but the most extreme conditions. We can recognize the patterns of change and predict how materials, mountains and planets will move well in advance. Science and mathematics are the tools we use to see those patterns, to recognize the underlying patterns and to see the invisible. Science allows us to view the shadows of atoms too tiny to ever make out with the human eye. It allows us to glimpse at ancient quasars, whose light left their source eight billion years before the Earth and Sun were formed. Science allows us to build submersibles to peer onto the ocean floor miles beneath the sea surface where humans would be crushed to death within seconds by the enormous pressures. It allows us to peek at the surface of Venus, which also has crushing pressures, along with sulfuric acid rain and a surface temperature of 900 degrees Fahrenheit. Science is unique in human endeavors. Good science works not by people working to prove each other correct, but by scientists trying their best to prove each other wrong. It is as if a team were building a bridge by having each worker not only lay their own struts and jousts, but also hammer away at the struts and jousts laid by others in an attempt to knock it free from its moorings. Many struts will come free using this approach, but the ones that stay will be very secure. This is not done for the sake for spite, or greed or self-aggrandizement. Scientists strike at each other’s work for the sake of truth. The best method the human race has ever found for coaxing out the secrets of nature is to allow scientists to test each other’s theories, attempting to disprove them. It is only those very few theories that both withstand peer review and which are repeatable that may, one day, stand a chance of becoming known as a true law of nature. Today, scientists have tested nearly all of Einstein’s predictions to better than one part in 10,000. Yet, still, scientists do not refer to the law of relativity. The evidence is not yet good enough for the good scientist to firmly believe, but it is certainly looking like relativity is a very good model for certain conditions and behaviors. The theory of evolution is in the same conundrum. There is much evidence to back it up. Species on one continent are often very similar (but not the same) to species on a far distant continent if those two continents were once in contact2. Dig deep in the ground and one will see simpler organisms in the older layers (strata) of Earth. However, the greatest proof of the truth of evolution has only come forward in the last forty years, with the discovery of DNA - the blueprint of life. We have had decades of studying the genetic code of many, many forms of living beings. We can see how species that have similar features have the same strings of amino acids in the same parts of their DNA. We have read the blueprint of life and it shows the road map of evolution. Yet, here as well, no one speaks of a law of evolution. Does that mean that scientists today are not sure of the process, as if Darwin had just recently announced the results of his studies of finches he made in the Galapagos while sailing on the HMS Beagle? Creationists often say that evolution has no more precedence in public schools than creationism, because evolution is “only a theory.” Perhaps many of the people who make this claim do not understand how scientists use the word theory. Almost nothing becomes a law of science. Nearly every model we have of the universe is just a theory. Yet, many of those theories have been shown to be correct to a tremendous degree. There is a concept in mathematics known as a proof. If one makes an assumption that can be formed into an equation and you can work both sides of the equation, through mathematically legal means, producing a statement that no one can argue with, only then can we say that the equation has been proven. For instance, if I presented you with the wholly unremarkable notion that 6+4 is the same thing as 5+5, if we wished (if just to pander to the obvious) we could say 6+4=5+5, then solve the equations on each side and produce 10=10. This is a statement about which few would argue - therefore, our original notion has been proven. It is only this level of certainty that scientists will accept as having been proven. Everything else is a theory. A few of the Greek scientists took the bold step of introducing mathematics into their study of nature, securing this vital tool for proving and modeling assumptions. Patterns, once discerned, can be described, predicted and applied to other situations and conditions. It allows us to see the future. Mathematics is the language with which nature speaks. Just in the last hundred years, science has remarkably changed our lives with airplanes, synthetic materials, fuels and fertilizers. Plastics have changed how we build nearly everything. Electronics have given us radio, television, computers, intercontinental ballistic missiles and instant, inexpensive, personal worldwide communication. Quantum theory has opened the nature of the Sun’s energy source to us and given us microelectronics, nuclear reactors, as well as the ability to destroy our entire planet and all human life, if not all forms of life on the planet, in less than a day. Yet, as knowledge of science becomes ever more important for both the populous and especially the leaders to grasp, people are falling further and further behind modern research. When important decisions need to be made, such as whether to allow a nuclear plant or a coal burning plant in town, it is far too common for the side with the greatest amount of money, or the best PR people, or the catchiest slogan to win the decision. Meanwhile, science related bills before Congress can swell to mammoth size, include riders that have nothing at all to do with the bill attached to them and the Congressperson has little or no time to read the proposed law or regulation. They will then cast their vote based on faulty assumptions, clever lobbying and political gain. Science created today's society and lifted us from simple agriculture to the information age. Now there is only one way for people to tend to the dangers and responsibilities of our modern era. That is to understand science. There were societies and cultures throughout the world which had flashes of insight – notably the Egyptians and the Chinese. Egypt had astronomy that was far superior to anything in the Grecian world at the time of the start of our story and they also had extensive skills in record-keeping and building canals. Nevertheless, as we will see, these talents were mainly put into use for daily living and not for the further exploration of the phenomena uncovered. China also had some great advances in technology well before the rest of the world: inexpensive paper, gunpowder, the printing press, rockets and kites, just to name a few. The numbering system of the Chinese also gave the people of that nation an advantage – unlike the English language today, in the Chinese numbering system, one only needs to learn how to count to ten and all other numbers are derived from those first few numbers. For instance, instead of twenty-two, the Chinese would say “two ten two”. But China had two unique characteristics that kept them from a full flourishing of science. The first was that when designs were made of new machines, the art was considered more important than the functionality of the design. Thus, when new designs were passed on from one person to the other, the look of the drawing was more important than the ability of the person reading it to build the machine, thus creating errors. The other major problem with the growth of science in China was the fact that the people there, since ancient times, considered a career as a government bureaucrat to be the highest calling, largely not considering science a worthy profession. However, there was a time and place where science first began to flourish: the sixth century BCE in the lands surrounding the Aegean Sea, between modern-day Greece and Turkey. This area is known to us today as Ionia. 1BCE (Before Common Era) and CE (Common Era) are the same as the more familiar BC and AD. But the BCE/CE format is becoming more accepted today among historians and authors. 2Not only does this provide good evidence of evolution (since the separated species were once one species and are no more), but it also scores some points for continental drift! © Copyright 2005 James Maynard |
|
Home Page Buy the Book Table of Contents Preface Chapter One Chapter Two Photos About the Author Extras Site Menu
|
