Doubt and Certainty

You are here: Home » reviews » books

D O U B T and Certainty

D O U B T and Certainty
Book Reviewed by: Prof. N. Sanajaoba *

Tony Rothman
/ George Sudarshan,

The celebrated Academy
Debates on Science, Mysticism, REALITY

Perseus Books, USA, 1998
Scientia Indian paperback, p. XUI +P.320

'Doubt and Certainty' - a book review by a non-physicist, science-literate professor addresses the equation-free, common reader-friendly book written by two philosophy-friendly physicists to the TEN debates of significance in this century, which incorporate laws, established with 'Certainty' and 'Doubt', attributed to certain hypothesis or, pre-law science - principles.

Eastern mysticism and even hazy concepts like God or, ideas harbouring obscurantism of sorts try to find unauthorised access in the cloudy 'doubt'. Epoch-making physicists join the dialogue in the fictional TR-GS Academy at the Plazzo.

TR-GS divides the great ones into two camps of arrogant 'foxes' and defensive 'hedgehogs'. The reviewer feels that scientists of Manipur & North-East states also could have reached at the Plazzo. If tiny ethnic Jewish community could win one hundred Nobel prizes in half a century, why not we? Over expectation! Without super collider, Nobel is won. TR-GS generates the debates. It is amazing and interesting.

In the first debates, TR (Tony Rothman) & GS (George Sudarshan who missed Nobel prize for the second time in 2005) - 'Is Universe describable? Law, Principles, Theories and Models', the creationist's (inventors of non-existent God) contention that in 4000B.C., the earth was created falls flat before scientific experimental verification, based also on reproducibility, whereas new bold theories like that of 'string' face the same difficulty, predictibility of QED particle physicists is verifiable up to 11 decimal places.

Model building of universes could be done vis-a -vis reality. TR-GS unsuccessfully state that mystical experiences could also be made. Wherever, there is trouble with physics, the authors hide their physics behind Gita, TAO and the oriental mysticism, many of whose obscurantist leadership take a HOOCH, inhale it deep, hallucinate and intuit with the Almighty, that Man created just a while ago in geological time.

Finding holes in the tool of reductionism is a part of the game called science. The authors apparently feel panicky for no good reason whenever the road to science is sticky, if not slippery. Science has been a rational revolution against religion, obscurantism and blind faith. Religion martyred hundreds of scientists.

In the Second Debates - 'Is Nature unreasonably mathematical? Mathematics, Theories and Reality', where Dirac has not fully substantiated God as a mathematician, most of the physicists believe that universe is unreasonably mathematical; some consider Mathematics as a cultural phenomenon. Inspired by philosophers - Plato and Pythagoras, Kepler has his solar system model; since then, science started to kick off with Galileo, Newton, Einstein et.al. Science has opened its first page in this age.

Einstein and Poincare consider mathematics as a creation of human mind, whereas Wigner and Dirac take to reductionism i.e. boiling nature (i.e. God) down to physics and physics to mathematics. The debate continues.

The third debates gravitate around 'Is the world symmetrical? Friezes, Particles, Groups'. Symmetry is a belief and beauty rolled in one. It is utilitarian to physicists, who discovered new particles, new relationship among particles, unification of forces and laws, and the properties of space by application of symmetry.

The debate recoils opponents of symmetry, who demonstrate obvious asymmetry in the universe like - lack of considerable amount of anti-matter, magnetic monopoles and gravitational mass. It may also be added that the guerrilla Higgs particle experimentally untested entity, but to be found very useful in giving mass to particles, advances for broken symmetry argument; and GUTs of 1970s had been replaced by the liberating superstring craze of the day.

The physicists - philosophers' fourth debates has chosen the theme - 'Why do things happen? Causality, Synchronicity and All that'. Although Newtonian universe was deterministic i.e. causal, field theories that replace forces as medium cite instances of effects preceding causes. Another stream advances the correlation among events, when causes cannot be measured directly.

'Synchronicity' i.e. coincidence is another aspect, which cannot be taught to 'fascist pigs'. Causal explanation cannot be accommodated in quantum mechanics. It may be added that causality is not above disputations. Causality acts like militants in Kargil like LOC of synchronicity.

'Does time go forward? Past and Future' engage the foxes and the hedgehogs struggling for intellectual onemanship in 'TR-GS'- created Academy or, debating plazzo for the fifth debates, where physics has two incompatible houses - one containing reversible laws of nature, the second containing irreversible laws of nature, most of the theories demonstrate no arrow of time, despite our experience of time moving forward.

Newtonian mechanics, electrodynamics, relativity and quantum mechanics display time-REVERSIBLE theories. The debate on CPT continues, while obscurantists cite the quote in Gita - "I am Time the destroyer of all; I have come to consume the world". TR-GS succumb to temptations by not drawing a thick cartographic line between phantasy and physical problems, found unresolved at a point of time and waiting for a resolution.

Chirality or left-right handedness happens to be nature's choice starting from human organisms, animal species and even down to elementary particles. Electromagnetic, gravitational and strong nuclear interactions do not take care of left or, right i.e. parity conservation. At the same time, parity-violating weak force indicates the fundamental asymmetry of nature.

This is the theme - 'Why is there left and right? Chirality, Complexity and Emergent properties' - the theme of the sixth debating team, sponsored by the All Scientists United Clubs Organisation on the one side, and the United Philosophers Committee (nicknames - reviewer's private choice) on the other at the foxes and hedgehogs debating plazzo.

IS THE UNIVERSE WEIRD?

Quantum mechanics - is the theme for the Seventh Debates. Measurement has problems, as it can reveal one of the states in which a quantum particle exists as a combination. EPR paradox demonstrates that its effects seem to spread over space and time. Although a large number of physicists are either atheistic or agnostic, some of them are apparently attributed to Eastern mysticism and non-scientific obscurantism. The latter, I may be allowed to add, would be tempted to address the hiding Higgs particle in vacuum as compatible with misplaced theism. TR-GS cites - "You look to the Spinx for explanation, but she is eating the tourist (i.e. who cannot answer to her question)". Spinx loves to devour hallucinating or drugged philosophers, but not committed physicists.

TR-GS's celebrated Academy (non-existent) selects for their eighth debates, the question - 'Is there an answer? Theories of Everything'. TR-GS looks out for the answer in either superforce or SUSYGUTS or, string - M-Theory with all the five string versions. Stephen Hawking assuming to be successor to Einstein (reviewer's random thought, ref. to his A Brief history of Time, wherein Newton was alleged to be plagiarist, thief and politician) states : " A physical theory is just a mathematical model and it is meaningless to ask whether it corresponds to reality".

One can plead for a 'superforce' to represent all four, but gravity is a mismatch, and law of evidence does not prove GUTS. Distinction between forces and matter could be more blurred but "sparticles" are not yet discovered. Quantum gravity is expected to be a candidate, but debate about the flatness and the curvature of space is in the Supreme Court of laureates.

Inspite of Edward Witten's M-theory, no 'supersymmetric particles' are as yet discovered. 'Theory of Everything' is a craze, yet the bride has left the groom before any meaningful honeymoon - the everything package. Obscurantists and religion-propagandists should be kept at bey from laboratory and colliders.

The ninth debates is all about Hollywood science - 'How did we get here? Cosmology'. Big-bang, FLRW model, inflationary version, puzzling Higgs-field, symmetry breaking give testimony to the labour of honest physicists.

Unlike other sciences, cosmology is nonreproducible. At the difficult times of physics Tsunami, the hedgehogs of hazy, unverifiable, religious dogmas and profiteers of religion would shift the paradigm to the most confusing issue of a creator that did never exist till our scripturalists made him out of this cerebral hooch just a while ago in geological times.

TR & GS may not actually attempt to aggravate the confusion, yet they would like a blending two incompatible disciplines. Overlapping areas exist though.

The tenth debates dualizes on theme -'What do you mean? Metaphors, Analogies, Culture wars' by debating on analogy, reductionism, natural selection of universes (?), logico-scientific method of inquiry, Eastern mysticism, European blending of philosophy and science, American preferences for cutting-edge fields. The debate appended at the end is - 'Can we make any MONEY off this?'.

The physics-philosophy book agitates basic issues underlying the laws of nature. It would literally awaken sleeping minds, irrespective of who the sleeper is in the town.

A wake-up call to non-blinking 'galaxy-nature' gazers. Buy and do read it.

* Professor Naorem Sanajaoba contributes for the first time to e-pao.net
This article was webcasted on 29th May 2006.

* Comments posted by users in this discussion thread and other parts of this site are opinions of the individuals posting them (whose user ID is displayed alongside) and not the views of e-pao.net. We strongly recommend that users exercise responsibility, sensitivity and caution over language while writing your opinions which will be seen and read by other users. Please read a complete Guideline on using comments on this website.