Utopia - Is This it?

'If you want to know what Utopia is like, just look around - this is it,' said Professor Steve Jones, of University College London, who is to present his argument at a Royal Society Edinburgh debate, 'Is Evolution Over?', next week. 'Things have simply stopped getting better, or worse, for our species.'

For the full article, click HERE

Firstly apologies because in this post, I won't be adding anything unique to the debate. I dont think I can make it any better by adding/subtracting to it and so I have refrained from doing it. However, I thought that it was quite an eye opener for me and so on it comes on my blog.

In a gist, Prof. Steve Jones has based his argument on the principle of natural selection. He argues that the principle tool of natural selection is 'Death' and human beings have almost taken this tool out of the hands of nature. A piece of statistics: The chance of a child in the west reaching the age of 25 has become 98%. The life spans have increased. And so virtually every tom, dick and harry can pass on his genes whether or not he is the best specimen out there. As a result, the process of natural selection is hindered. And hence stagnation.

Controversial? Of course yes. With the olympics just gone by where so many new levels of human accomplishments were recorded, when we believe that our intelligence level is higher than ever before, it comes off as a bit of a shock. But consider this: Both our brain size and the physique have reduced over the past ten thousand years. Counterintutive?

There are a few arguments against the above doomsday scenario:
i) Constant mixing of human races vis inter-racial marriages. Although, the article states that this will further thwart the evolution in the long run. But, in the mid-term, it will lead to uniformly brown race which should classify as evolving.
ii) Biologist Christopher Wills argues that there is a premium on sharpness of mind and ability to earn money and thus this becomes the modern evolutionary path.
iii) Peter Ward states that there is a way out if we can influence our own evolution by Gene therapy and cloning.
iv) The Evolution goes on unchecked in the developing world. For example, after some time, Africa might only be populated by people who carry HIV but are unaffected by it.

What do you think?

Did God play dice with the world?

Einstein famously mentioned that God did'nt play dice with this world. This was in spite of the fact that his own findings (further worked upon by others) suggested that our universe, capable of bearing intelligent life, belonged to an infinitesimal minority of all the universes possible. More recently, this was coined in the form of "Anthropic Principle", stated simply:

The universe must be such so as to admit the creation of us as observers within.

In my mind, such a principle overly simplifies things and undermines any deeper research. Consider some answers from the Anthopic principle:

Q: How can intelligent life exist in the Universe in spite of such heavy odds against it?
A: Heavy odds or not, the event has happened. We are here. That is the explanation.

Q: How could the condition on earth be ripe for our existence?
A: If the condition were'nt ripe, we would'nt be here to ask this question, now, would we?

This leads to the question whether the nature is truly random and we are here just as a statistical possibility. Put another way, if I throw coins for millions of years, will the results be equally split between heads and tails?

I have been intrigued by this question before and considered it to be just a matter of belief since I did'nt think it could be possible to prove one way or the other. But a program on National Geographic yesterday shook my thoughts again. The episode was about a Random Event Generator (REG) Experiment. Pioneered by Prof. Jahn in 1970s and furthered by Doctor Nelson at Princeton University, the experiment consists of REG black boxes (smaller than a cigerette box) containing a microchip which constantly throws a one or a naught randomly. 65 such REG units have been installed in 40 countries and have been throwing one/naught for over a decade now at extremely high speed. If nature is truly random then the results should be equally split.

And so is the case. However, not quite so. Every once in a while, when a global event happens, the results go out of whack. The first such event was in 1997, Princess Diana's funeral. The chart shot upwards recording a major shift in the results. Infact, since then, the REG has somehow sensed a whole lot of global events ranging from September 11 attacks to the Asian Tsunami. And behold for the spookiest detail - the charts sensed Sep 11 attacks four hours beforehand and the Tsunami 24 hours beforehand !!! An electronic oracle??

The Scientists are skeptic as well as flabbergasted. The project team states that the chances of such correlation between REG and global events is a million to 1 and ascribes the correlation to a "hypothesis" that human community shares a common sub-conscious mind and when they are all focussing on one thing, they tilt the odds of the nature. Phew !!!

I am not so much concerned about the power of mind, important as it might be. I am just happy that there is some hope that we are just not statistical freaks of nature but there could be more to us.

Thoughts?

The Exact Science

As a child, the thing that initially attracted me most to Science and math was that they were exact. History was always written by the victorious. Language had too many nuances in both the usage and pronounciation that I find hard to comprehend even today. Civics was a study too far removed from the reality and geography seemed too backward (Who wants to dig when one could fly out to space and beyond)

However, as I grew up, the same exactness of science and math became too predictable and monotonous. The periodic table listed all the elements discovered and also had slots for the ones to be discovered. The speed of light was defined and constant. A star's life was reduced to a choice between being blown up, being crunched to a dot or flicker away into non-existence. Big pregnant bang gave birth to the universe which was again pre-destined to either continue expanding or oscillate between expanding/contracting. It seemed that our predecessors were too selfish and had discovered everything by themselves leaving us with no mystery.

How wrong was I? Over the past years, science is no longer as exact as it used to be. Some examples:

Blackholes are'nt entirely black any more.

The smallest particle is not an electron but it is a quark and that too because a smaller one is yet to be discovered.

The uncertainty principle states that at a given time, one can either know the velocity or the location of a particle, but not both.

Speed of light may be a constant at a given point of time but there are indications that it was much faster to begin with and has slowed down over time. Seems, it is tiring down.

The big pregnant bang theory still holds its fort but further research is on to identify the father.

When I came across the above, I presumed that all this must have been discovered only in the recent years. But that was'nt the case. Some of the above is recent but a lot was known as early as seventies and eighties. It turns out that my curriculum was behind time. Infact, it was so behind time that time would have been a speck on the horizon. Too bad, the world lost out on another Einstein.

Nonetheless, all this has made Science interesting once again, even in this old age. I can hardly follow much of the recent theories but it is a pleasure in looking at these immense puzzles that nobody knows how to solve, for sure. Infact, with each small step towards the solution, the puzzle becomes even more complicated. May be Scott Adams was right when he said that as soon as a theory to explain the universe and everything is found, the universe will immediately transform itself into even more complicated form. Spooky, well, this puzzle is definitely better than a crossword or a sudoku.

Science Fiction

I have been reading science fiction for a long time. The limited knowledge of physics that I have always seemed to take the credibility/punch out of the most consummate plots. I guess that is why it is Science Fiction and not just science. Nonetheless, I thought that in the past decade that I havent stayed in touch with the development in physics beyond the third law (There is no end to being pushed around) and relativity (in grading and performance appraisal, that is), it may be that some of the old science fiction may have ceased to be fiction. After a long time of struggling with five dimention mathematics and string theories, I had to give up (Surprise, surprise). But, it did enable me to look at science fiction from a very comical angle.

Consider an example of a starship located about ten light years away from Planet Earth (It will still be next-door neighbour to Earth at a cosmic scale) and communicating with Earth over a three-dimensional telephone line (wireless, of course). Now, since I know, thanks to Einstein, that nothing can travel faster than light, let us see how the communication flows:

Earth: "Hi there" ; October, 2047, Solar Calendar, Galactic Era

This signal, assuming it travels at the speed of light, will take about ten years to get to the Starship.

Starship Captain: "Hi yourself" ; October 2057, Solar Calendar, Galactic Era

Earth in-charge, if he chooses to continue this rather quiet conversation, will get the reply in 2067, Solar Calendar, Galactic Era. Imagine if he did'nt really keep a detailed log of all the multiple conversations he has been having and in this particular case, cannot recall what they were talking about.

Earth: "Sorry, how can I help you?" October 2067, Solar Calendar, Galactic Era

Starship Captain: "Huh?" October 2077, Solar Calendar, Galactic Era

Earth: "Oh yes, you are relieved of duty with immediate effect and can come back home. A very well deserved vacation. Congratulations." October 2087, Solar Calendar, Galactic Era

Starship Captain: "There is some disturbance in the line. Can you repeat that?" October 2097, Solar Calendar, Galactic Era.

The captain, in this story, finally gets the message two decade hence and promptly dies of heart attack as the excitement of the news was too much for that old age. The above is just one example. Now, imagine coordinating troops for a space-war against aliens, romancing with your lover, wishing your son on his birthday or playing long-distance scramble/chess with your grand-dad etc. etc.

The only way, this could be faster, is a) modes of travelling faster than light are possible or b) the world is full of almost immortal bored individuals devoid of any life (Notice the similarity with zombies). Since (a) is virtually impossible (or so I think), it is most likely going to be (b).

I am glad that I wont be around to check that out.