“Matter” Don’t really matter?

This post is continuation of the previous post on scientific discoveries and insight on the nature of matter that we have gained over past couple of hundred years.

http://anandologue.blogspot.com/2009/10/on-matter-knowledges-great-progress-to.html

Whenever I discuss these topics with others, most ask me why it really matters. Does knowing what “matter” is, of any significance to the common man? Is an understanding of these phenomena necessary?

Despite having extensive experimental evidence for the classical theories, quantum mechanics and relativity, they are neither widely known and understood nor accepted. This baffles me and I can only speculate on the reasons why. Many people find scientific concepts complex and difficult to understand. Surprisingly this is also true in most developed countries. The difficulty stems from the lack of proper grounding and good teaching methods in early years, which cultivates a lack of interest later in life.

The other reason could be that many are more concerned with day to day life to ponder about these questions. Living in the society of today is all about earning a livelihood or pursuit of happiness which is increasingly becoming the pursuit of money, luxury and comfort. While there is nothing wrong with this it also happens to be a never-ending pursuit. We have lot of more technology, amenities and comfort than compared to a few centuries back but do we really lead happier and fulfilled life? Important thing to note that marginal utility of any desire decreases as it becomes increasingly available.

The third reason could be metal comfort. Sometimes there are ready answers provided to us that we grow up with. It’s much easier accepting them and living within these bounds rather than question the artificial bounds itself. Also, what we learn early in life seems familiar and forms our intuition and as a result what we already know seems intuitively right, regardless of merit or correctness of the belief. That’s why new information doesn’t seem to matter that much.

So, why does it really matter? Well! How do you go about life if you don’t know what you are really living for? I find this important and significant but I am in the minority. Would you play a game without knowing the rules? What if you start playing a game that you don’t know why you are playing and you have to figure out the rules as you go? Someone else who has played the game explains a loose set of rules they figured out when they played. You find they apply in some situations but not in others. Would you continue playing believing the handed down set as true or make an attempt to find and improve your understanding? For YOU to play the GAME, isn’t it important to know the RULES or would you rather play the same way irrespective of the rules?

To add to all this very few of the discoveries of the past century are taught in schools these days. And when we grow up we continue to live our lives based on things we already know and have accepted. Very few seek out new knowledge and still fewer accept it, especially if it challenges the very core of what we have believed. “Surely, I can’t have been mistaken all this while!” “In any case I have done okay living the way that I lived so why should I change what I believe here on?” “It doesn’t really matter” Hence the greatest discoveries of the past couple of centuries are kept but for a few to enjoy and pass on. Others just go on to say “There is so much we don’t know perhaps will never find out” Never for once bothering to look!

On “Matter”, Knowledge’s great progress to thousands of years back

“Divisibility” The Greeks started with it! They thought all matter was composed of smaller particles down to single unique and indivisible particle called “atom”. They were right that all matter was made up of atoms but wrong in the sense that it was the smallest unique, identical particle that constituted all matter. However, one interesting notion that came out of this idea was the fact that whatever we see around us is all essential made of the same thing.

Almost couple of thousands years later there came J. J Thompson, his experiments and pumpkin model of the atom. We found electrons and later we found Protons and Neutrons. “Oh! There are smaller particles!” This gave birth to particle Physics. Further down the road we realized that protons & neutrons are made up of Quarks and Electrons of Leptons. These were now considered the elementary particles that made up all the matter. So why did we stop there? Surely if atoms could be made of smaller particles and protons & electrons of smaller particles then ever our elementary particles could be made up of smaller particles too? And that’s what happened! More we searched smaller particles we found but this would not go on endlessly.

On a parallel track, Quantum mechanics took up where classical mechanics left off. Experiments and theories such Max Planks’ Quanta, Einstein’s Photo-electric Effect, De Broglie Wave-particle duality, Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle formed the basis of Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. While quantum mechanics gave us unparallel insight into the small world, Einstein relativity theories finally answered the puzzles of the big world and heavenly bodies.

By 1920 we were begun to understand not only how matter is composed, how it interacts, how forces are created and how macroscopic properties arise. However, we had one major problem. Relativity and quantum mechanics did not agree. It was difficult to account for gravitational forces at subatomic level and quantum effects for large bodies. Both theories within their spheres, however, had plenty of experimental evidence to prove them irrefutably correct and accurate. This was one of physics biggest problem which is still unresolved to this day. Nevertheless, from 60s till now String theory of Universe has come long way in addressing these problems. Essentially what the string theory proposes is that the entire Universe is made up of one thing – tiny strings and all the matter and forces in this Universe are made up of different configuration of these strings. Those you have read books on Quantum mechanics, Relativity or the string theory would understand that in the last 3 paragraphs I have been trying to outline what essentially requires detailed discussion and substantiation. In fact the book “Elegant Universe” does a good job of walking through these theories in fairly simplistic terms.

So now I can finally come to the point that I am trying to make, which would not be possible without this background. The point is that we are beginning to realize or believe that Universe is entirely integrated body which at its very granular level is made up of the same thing. All different forms of energy, forces and matter are created of different configuration of the same unique material. Well some may say why did this take us so long to realize? Ancient Vedanta Philosophy said the exact same thing around 800 – 1000 BC, almost 3000 years back. They also highlighted principles of truth and reality that are now quite consistent with our understanding of quantum mechanics as well as modern philosophies regarding human perception of truth and reality, in particular Kant’s. Question is, have we rediscovered the same knowledge that existed thousands or years prior and interpreted in a different way. How did we fail to build up on something that already existed and make a full circle?

Happy Birthday Darwin! - May your theory rest in Peace

If after 200 years of your birth people still on a daily basis debate what you said, you have had an impact on society. Today is the 200th Birth Anniversary of Charles Darwin and many people all over are recognising his great achievement. While there is widespread debate and awareness of his theory, the understanding however is lacking. I think many people are either misinformed or misinterpret what he said over 150 years ago. 

The biggest misconception is that Darwin proposed the entire theory of evolution and either you believe it or you don't. While this is somewhat right, it is not accurate. Darwin proposed, in his book 'on the Origin of Species' in 1859 the Theory of Natural Selection. "He introduced the theory that populations evolve over the course of generations through a process of natural selection. Darwin's book contains a wealth of evidence that the diversity of life arose through a branching pattern of evolution and common descent – evidence which he had accumulated on the voyage of the Beagle in the 1830s and expanded through research, correspondence, and experiments after his return."

Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Origin_of_Species

Darwin proposed an overall mechanism but did not propose the exact mechanism on species arise. However, Gregor Mendel's work on the Laws of Inheritance provided the exact mechanism of how mutations are passed on through chromosomes. I can never forgot his great experiment regarding the common fruit fly I learnt in 11th grade. 

Source; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendelian_inheritance

Since then several works have further refined the the Theory of evolution and established the link between genetics, natural selection and evolution of species. In particular was the work of Theodosius Dobzhansky in 1937. Many other works, experiments and evidence has led to what is called the 'Modern evolutionary synthesis'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_evolutionary_synthesis

No matter how much work is done or evidence provided, it is not sufficient for many. Here is an excellent poll on evolution that reveals that Majority of Americans don't believe in it. 

Source:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/Darwin-Birthday-Believe-Evolution.aspx

As per the Gallup the implications of the survey are

"As Darwin is being lauded as one of the most important scientists in history on the 200th anniversary of his birth (on Feb. 12, 1809), it is perhaps dismaying to scientists who study and respect his work to see that well less than half of Americans today say they believe in the theory of evolution, and that just 55% can associate the man with his theory. 

Naturally, some of this is because of educational differences. Americans who have lower levels of formal education are significantly less likely than others to be able to identity Darwin with his theory, and to have an opinion on it either way. Still, the evidence is clear that even to this day, Americans' religious beliefs are a significant predictor of their attitudes toward Darwin's theory. Those who attend church most often are the least likely to believe in evolution, and most likely to say they do not believe in it."

What's most disappointing are the reasons cited for not believing. While some say that "it doesn't explain everything" others say "even scientist debate it" and still others that "there isn't enough evidence". Of course everything in Science is open for debate. That's how scientific theories progress. Each theory builds upon prior work and sometimes theories are overturned. We generally accept scientific theories that are discussed, debated and published as the best explanations given our current knowledge. No doubt that more work will be done and theory modified to adapt to the new evidence. However, it is unlikely that it would change the basic premise of the theory. 

It appears then that most people who do not believe in the theory do so because of religious convictions. They then find reasons or rationalisation to support their point of view rather than it being the other way around. Among the scientific community there is overwhelming agreement that the Modern Evolutionary synthesis is correct. The question is, what would it take to convince the rest. 

P.S> Just stumbled upon this immediately after posting this blog  http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090212/sc_afp/scienceusgermanygenomeanthropology

This is exactly what I was talking about when I mean future discoveries and progress.