{"id":466,"date":"2016-06-24T12:56:33","date_gmt":"2016-06-24T12:56:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/?p=466"},"modified":"2017-10-31T15:39:48","modified_gmt":"2017-10-31T15:39:48","slug":"appendix-z13-major-problems-in-science","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/?p=466","title":{"rendered":"APPENDIX Z13: Major Problems in Science"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
APPENDIX Z13:<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Major Pr<\/span>oblems in Science\n <\/div>\n
[Selected Quotes fr<\/span>om\n <\/div>\n
ON BEING*<\/span><\/div>\n
a<\/div>\n
<\/span><\/div>\n
by Dr<\/span>. Peter <\/span>Atkins*\n <\/div>\n
b<\/div>\n
] <\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
\u201cThe \ue0c4rst great question of being is one that has pr<\/span>obably\n <\/div>\n
entertained us all at one time or another: where did
\n it, the\n <\/div>\n
universe, all come from? How did it begin?…\u201d (p.
\n 1)\n <\/div>\n
\u201cThere ar<\/span>e, in fact, three
\n related pr<\/span>ofound questions to\n <\/div>\n
address in the context of cr<\/span>eation. One is the mechanism\n <\/div>\n
of the coming into being of the universe: what
\n actually\n <\/div>\n
happened at the beginning? Another is whether
\n there\n <\/div>\n
is any meaning to the question of what preceded
\n the\n <\/div>\n
universe and had, in some sense, the potential to
\n become\n <\/div>\n
a universe. Here we ar<\/span>e
\n confronted by the linguistically\n <\/div>\n
and conceptually engaging question of whether
\n absolutely\n <\/div>\n
nothing can have potency to become something. The\n <\/div>\n
third is whether an agent was needed to trigger
\n the\n <\/div>\n
process of cosmogenesis, the pr<\/span>ocess of tur<\/span>ning that\n <\/div>\n
nothing into what is to all appearances something,
\n or can\n <\/div>\n
nothing turn itself into something on its own? All
\n three\n <\/div>\n
questions sound as though they might fall within
\n the\n <\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
\n
range of science to answer<\/span>.
\n A fourth question, why\n <\/div>\n
there is a universe, is rather dif<\/span>ferent, but still apparently\n <\/div>\n
very interesting\u2026.\u201d (p. 2)<\/div>\n
\u201cAs a result of their intrinsic caution, almost
\n every\n <\/div>\n
scientist is wisely unwilling to express a view
\n about the\n <\/div>\n
events accompanying the inception of the universe.\n <\/div>\n
Quite honestly<\/span>, they
\n haven\u2019t a clue\u2026.\u201d (p. 5)\n <\/div>\n
\u201cThe task before science in this connection will be
\n to\n <\/div>\n
show how something can come from nothing without\n <\/div>\n
intervention. No one has the slightest idea whether
\n that\n <\/div>\n
can happen and, <\/span>if so,
\n how <\/span>it can come <\/span>about\u2026.\u201d (p. 11)\n <\/div>\n
\u201cThe unfolding of absolutely nothing\u2014what out of\n <\/div>\n
rever<\/span>ence for the absence
\n of anything, including empty\n <\/div>\n
space, we are calling Nothing\u2014into something is a\n <\/div>\n
problem of the pr<\/span>ofoundest
\n dif\ue0c4culty and currently far\n <\/div>\n
beyond the reach of science. It is, however<\/span>, a target at\n <\/div>\n
which science must aim even though to some, even
\n to\n <\/div>\n
scientists of a pessimistic or perhaps just
\n realistic bent,\n <\/div>\n
it would seem to be for ever out of science\u2019<\/span>s r<\/span>each\u2026.\u201d\n <\/div>\n
(p. 12)<\/div>\n
\u201cPresumably befor<\/span>e the
\n creation, when there was\n <\/div>\n
Nothing, there was no charge; so the coming into
\n being\n <\/div>\n
of the universe was accompanied by the separation
\n of\n <\/div>\n
\u2018no charge\u2019 into opposites. Charge was not created
\n at\n <\/div>\n
the creation: electrical Nothing separated into
\n equal and\n <\/div>\n
opposite charges\u2026.\u201d (pp. 13-14)<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
\n
\u201cI promised to r<\/span>etur<\/span>n to the question of why<\/span> there is\n <\/div>\n
a universe. What is its purpose? Something so big,\n <\/div>\n
complex, and all embracing some hold, must be
\n there\n <\/div>\n
for a reason\u2026.\u201d (p. 18)<\/div>\n
\u201c\u2026science is a ceaseless probing with a view to\n <\/div>\n
overturning authority\u2026.science, though delighted\n <\/div>\n
by the glorious complexity of the world, seeks the\n <\/div>\n
simplicity that lies beneath it\u2026.science is
\n extraordinarily\n <\/div>\n
dif\ue0c4cult, as it seeks covert mechanism\u2026.science is\n <\/div>\n
ever thrusting forward, wriggling into new modes
\n of\n <\/div>\n
understanding,\u2026science gives an opportunity for\n <\/div>\n
humanity to achieve the aspirations it already has
\n and\n <\/div>\n
opens its eyes to new ones\u2026.\u201d (pp. 26-27)<\/div>\n
\u201cA scientist, the arch-descendent of Occam, looks
\n \ue0c4rst\n <\/div>\n
for the simplest explanation, then builds
\n elaborations\n <\/div>\n
only if the explanation\u2019<\/span>s
\n barr<\/span>en, rocky simplicity pr<\/span>oves\n <\/div>\n
inadequate\u2026.\u201d (p. 33)<\/div>\n
\u201cOne problem with evolution is how it began.<\/div>\n
Competition between primitive organisms is all
\n very\n <\/div>\n
well, the triumph of one message over another<\/span>,\n <\/div>\n
but how did matter step across the national bridge\n <\/div>\n
from the inorganic to the organic in the \ue0c4rst
\n place?\n <\/div>\n
…It would be much more satisfying\u2014satisfying of\n <\/div>\n
curiosity<\/span>, intellectually
\n satisfying, and possibly spiritually\n <\/div>\n
satisfying\u2014if we could \ue0c4nd a physical process by
\n which\n <\/div>\n
that gap was bridged, presumably without the
\n appar<\/span>ent\n <\/div>\n
intervention of an agent\u2026.\u201d (pp. 38-39)<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/p>\n
\u201c\u2026Scientists are still puzzled about how this
\n complexity\n <\/div>\n
[of life] emerged under the impact, presumably<\/span>, of\n <\/div>\n
natural selection, and it remains a pr<\/span>oblem of evolution.\n <\/div>\n
That is not to say that there ar<\/span>e not many ideas about\n <\/div>\n
how it came about. Just as for the origin of life
\n itself,\n <\/div>\n
which is still a real puzzle, evolutionary
\n biologists ar<\/span>e not\n <\/div>\n
without ideas, but have not yet identi\ue0c4ed which, if
\n any<\/span>, is\n <\/div>\n
valid\u2026.\u201d (pp. 60-61)<\/div>\n
*a<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Peter Atkins, On Being<\/span>
\n (Oxford, England: Oxfor<\/span>d University Press, 2011), pp.1-2,\n <\/div>\n
5, 11-14, 18, 26-27, 33, 38-39, 60-61.<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
b <\/span><\/div>\n
Scientist Peter Atkins is the author of almost 70
\n books, including <\/span><\/div>\n
Galileo\u2019<\/span>s Finger: The T<\/span>en Great Ideas of Science, Four Laws <\/span>\n <\/div>\n
That Drive the Universe, and the world-renowned textbook <\/span>\n <\/div>\n
Physical Chemistry. A Fellow of Lincoln College, University of <\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
Oxford, he has been a visiting pr<\/span>ofessor in France, Israel, New\n <\/div>\n
Zealand, and China, and continues to lecture
\n widely thr<\/span>oughout\n <\/div>\n
the world.<\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

APPENDIX Z13: Major Problems in Science [Selected Quotes from ON BEING* a by Dr. Peter Atkins* b ] \u201cThe \ue0c4rst great question of being is one that has probably entertained us all at one time or another: where did it, the universe, all come from? How did it begin?…\u201d (p. 1) \u201cThere are, in fact, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/466"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=466"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/466\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":469,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/466\/revisions\/469"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=466"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=466"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.potentialismtheory.com\/td\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=466"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}