13 Things That Don't Make Sense (28 page)
Read 13 Things That Don't Make Sense Online
Authors: Michael Brooks
I
chose to dedicate this book to the man who taught me physics when I was fifteen because the journey of discovery detailed
within these pages ignited in me the same fascinations, the same passions that he ignited in me back then. Under his instruction,
science became a thing of wonder, something to argue about, to explore, to provoke the mind. He taught me for little more
than a couple of years, but he unearthed something in me that has lasted through more than two decades. And I might as easily
have honored him by dedicating the book to his current students, to the next generation, the one that may solve these anomalies,
creating many more in turn.
Kuhn observed that his paradigm shift model means that major discoveries are only made by people who are either very young
or very new to that particular scientific discipline. Charles Darwin knew it too. In
On the Origin of Species
, he makes a telling statement. “I by no means expect to convince experienced naturalists whose minds are stocked with a multitude
of facts all viewed, during a long course of years, from a point of view directly opposite to mine,” he says. Instead, he
adds, he is looking with confidence to the future, to “young and rising naturalists, who will be able to view both sides of
the question with impartiality.”
It will be the people who are now young and rising who will find life on the planets and moons of our solar system, maybe
even answering a call from beyond those boundaries. It is they who will perhaps create life or rewrite Einstein’s relativity
to take account of dark matter and put the Pioneer probes to rest. Perhaps some genius still currently in preschool will use
her mathematical skills to solve the riddle of dark energy.
Whatever the revolutions to come, one thing is sure. Every advance will most likely tell us as much about ourselves as it
will about the universe we inhabit. We are collections of chemicals made in the cataclysmic explosions of stars; we are stardust,
or nuclear waste, depending on your perspective. But, audaciously, we consider ourselves so much more than the sum of those
parts; we declare ourselves to be alive, even though we don’t know what that means. We want to, we expect to, discover other
living things in this vast universe, while we also struggle to make sense of the chemistry of a few palladium atoms held in
a small tank of water. We can think ourselves out of pain and yet can also prove we do not control even our own muscles. We
launch probes into space, but we are unable to explain our most primitive urges and desires. We consider ourselves the pinnacle
of evolution while aware we know very little of its true story. All this surely speaks to our desire to frame ourselves, to
understand what it means to be a human being in this universe. And this is exactly what science—and the anomalies that drive
it forward—can help us understand. “Who are we?” asked Erwin Schrödinger in 1951. “The answer to this question is not only
one of the tasks but
the
task of science.”
It has been a privilege to write this book—I have never enjoyed anything more. In time-honored tradition, I must now thank
all the people who allowed me to use their time, their labs, their colleagues, and their patience; the book couldn’t have
been written without them.
I would like to thank Fabrizio Benedetti, Luana Colloca, and Antonella Pollo for an extraordinary day in Turin; Patrick Haggard
for a disturbing couple of hours in London; and the United States Navy’s cold fusion researchers Pam Boss and Frank Gordon
for their good humor when faced with difficult questions. I am grateful to Michael Melich and Martin Fleischmann for their
insights over an entertaining (and delicious) lunch.
The list goes on: Gilbert Levin, a man of unusual dignity. Steen Rasmussen, a towering figure—physically and intellectually.
Vera Rubin, an amazing scientist. The Pioneer researchers Michael Martin Nieto, Slava Turyshev, and John Anderson are also
scientists of the highest caliber. John Webb and Michael Murphy are not just impressive and level-headed thinkers; they have
always been great company too.
Jerry Ehman and Seth Shostak are due thanks for their candor about the hunt for intelligent aliens; Bernard La Scola, for
giving me an excuse for a day trip to the sunny south of France; Joan Roughgarden, for helpful suggestions about sex; and
homeopaths Melanie Oxley, Lionel Milgrom, Peter Fisher, and Vilma Bharatan, for their help with, and enthusiasm for, this
whole project. I particularly enjoyed the company of Bob Lawrence, whose honest, down-to-earth approach to things that don’t
make sense gave me hope that solutions to the enigma of homeopathy might be possible. I also must thank Nancy Maret for her
hospitality while I was in New Mexico.
I am grateful to Kris Puopolo of Doubleday and Andrew Franklin of Profile Books, both of whom gave enthusiastic support, excellent
advice, and made extremely wise suggestions during the preparation of this book. My thanks also go to my agent, Peter Tallack
of The Science Factory, who helped in myriad ways to get this book out of my head and onto the shelves. It wouldn’t be right
to leave my family out of the thank-list: my wife Phillippa and my children Millie and Zachary have put up with a distracted
husband and father for long periods over the last couple of years.
Finally, during (and for years before) the writing of this book, I have gained enormous insight and clarity from discussions
with my
New Scientist
colleagues: the collective brain of that magazine is an awesome organism. Jeremy Webb, Valerie Jamieson, Graham Lawton, Kate
Douglas, and Clare Wilson were particularly helpful. Any mistakes in the text are their fault.
PROLOGUE
pp. 3–4 | he wanted to examine the nature of discovery |
p. 5 | the U.S. Department of Energy recently declared |
p. 5 | The philosopher Karl Popper once said |
1. THE MISSING UNIVERSE
p. 11 | Slipher is one of the unsung heroes of astronomy |
p. 11 | “probably made more fundamental discoveries” |
p. 12 | Hawking makes a pointed reference |
p. 12 | When these velocity measurements were published |
p. 14 | the only explanation |
p. 14 | Dutch astronomer Jan Oort added to the evidence |
p. 16 | Cambridge professor Malcolm Longair . . . might turn out to be |
p. 16 | Rubin published her results |
p. 17 | in 1999 . . . Rees gave an extension |
p. 23 | The Harvard astronomer was worried |
p. 25 | “This is nutty-sounding” |
p. 25 | “somewhere between amazement and horror |
p. 25 | many of our finest minds seem to have given up |
p. 26 | Weinberg suggested . . . explain its value |
p. 27 | “unthinkable” |
p. 27 | Susskind calls them the Popperazzi |
p. 28 | the physicists were similarly puzzled |
p. 29 | a characteristic feature |
p. 30 | As soon as Bekenstein developed |
p. 31 | “NASA finds direct proof of dark matter” |
p. 32 | There was nothing in the Chandra observations |
p. 32 | His modified gravity theory . . . any dark matter |
p. 33 | the Dark Energy Task Force issued their report |
p. 34 | hints that the universe is not isotropic |
2. THE PIONEER ANOMALY
p. 40 | In 2002 they published |
p. 42–43 | Or maybe the signal photons . . . expansion of the universe? |
p. 43 | accelerated according to the laws of |
3. VARYING CONSTANTS
p. 48 | John Webb had what looked like an answer |
p. 51 | His research team have dissected every result |
p. 53 | Their conclusion was probably disappointing to Dyson |
p. 53 | Steve Lamoreaux and Justin Torgerson . . . the energies involved |
p. 54 | a team of physicists published a paper |
p. 55 | Webb put the case for coolness like this |
p. 55 | Nobel Prize–winning physicist John Wheeler asked |
p. 56 | Feynman published a slim book on the theory |
4. COLD FUSION
p. 57 | a press release, issued on March 23, 1989 |
p. 60 | The U.S. Department of Energy convened |
p. 60 | “as respectable in science as pornography in church” |
p. 62 | In eight experiments |
p. 63 | Noting that Schwinger refused to follow |
p. 63 | “The pressure for conformity is enormous” |
p. 63 | Schwinger’s attitude toward cold fusion |
p. 63 | “one of 20th-century physics’ few unqualified triumphs” |
p. 64 | “Schwinger invited me to lunch” |
p. 64 | The journal duly published Schwinger’s paper |
p. 64 | a Department of Energy study admitted |
p. 65 | an appendix added after publication |
p. 65 | Mallove’s report about the affair |
p. 67 | the CR39 chip data |
p. 67 | One of the few publications |
5. LIFE
p. 70 | “What is life?” |
p. 71 | The physicist Paul Davies has perhaps done most |
p. 71 | A living system must also be contained |
p. 71 | In June 2007 an editorial |
p. 72 | In 1953 they sealed ammonia |
p. 72 | Robert Shapiro likened the experiment’s production |
p. 72 | Oro put water, hydrogen cyanide, and ammonia together |
p. 72 | “life is either a reproducible” |
p. 73 | Carl Sagan took the rapidity of life’s emergence: Bioastronomy News |
p. 74 | “We knew the world” |
p. 77 | Venter headed the team |
p. 77 | “radically engineered organism” |
p. 77 | “minimal cell project” |
p. 77 | At Harvard, Jack Szostak is also planning |
p. 78 | Anderson has always been a provocative voice |
p. 79 | two more physicists took up Anderson’s stance |
p. 80 | “organisms are not just tinkered-together contraptions” |
p. 80 | “true source of physical law” |
p. 81 | Carl Sagan perhaps said it best |
p. 81 | “revel in our insignificance” |
p. 81 | The study took several years |
6. VIKING
p. 84 | NASA researchers are drawing up work schedules |
p. 89 | Levin counters this |
p. 91 | Levin and Lafleur published |
p. 92 | In 2006 the final nail was driven |
p. 93 | “over 90 percent” certain |
p. 93 | NASA’s Chris McKay |
p. 94 | As you scroll through NASA’s list |
p. 95 | Ward is unequivocal |
p. 95 | Rees made the statement in a book |
p. 95 | Elsewhere he argued |
p. 96 | Piet Hut . . . has offered fifty-fifty odds |
p. 96 | Life’s solutions are constrained by the laws of physics: |
