Blog

Planets, Planets, Planets

October 13, 2017

Thanks to Alissa Simon, HMU Tutor, for today's post.

“The vastness of heavens stretches my imagination... Why do the poets of the present not speak of it? What men are poets who can speak of Jupiter if he were like a man, but if he is an immense spinning sphere of methane and ammonia must be silent?” - Richard Feynman

In 1609, Johannes Kepler published a few surprising details. First, he said, “the orbits of the planets are ellipses with the sun at one focus.” Then he added, “the time it takes a planet to travel from one position in its orbit to another is proportional to the area swept out by a planet in that time.” This comes almost 70 years after Copernicus corrected Aristotle's view of the heavens. Aristotle's versions were so widely accepted that Copernicus's assertion that placed the sun in the center of the universe upset many people. Kepler, too, shocked with his description of elliptical orbits around the sun. It was not until Newton arrived on the scene that these theories were put to scientific tests. In fact, Newton explained a lot about the celestial beings in his laws of motion. While Newton used calculus to support his scientific findings, he realized that he had to explain the motions in terms that other scientists in his day might understand. Therefore, he proved the motions of the planets using plane geometry. (“Just for fun”, Richard Feynman proved the same in his “lost lecture”, which can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcD-5UfY1g0 )

Aristotle believed in natural final forms. In his book Meteorology, he explains his hierarchical system which includes: fire, air, water, earth. What may sound trivial to us is incredibly complicated, however. Aristotle observed a great number of events – some of them celestial – and attempted to explain them or their origins within his working framework. Yet even Aristotle understood that his categorization was incomplete. He admits the limits of scientific language in explaining his theories. He argues for a more scientific understanding of the processes on earth. He writes, “Some say that what is called air, when it is in motion and flows, is wind, and that this same air when it condenses again becomes cloud and water, implying that nature of wind and water is the same. So they define wind as a motion of the air. Hence some, wishing to say a clever thing, assert that all the winds are one wind, because the air that moves is in fact all of it one and the same; they maintain that the winds appear to differ owing to the region from which the air may happen to flow on each occasion, but really do not differ at all. This is just like thinking that all rivers are one and the same river, and the ordinary unscientific view is better than a scientific theory like this. If all rivers flow from one source, and the same is true in the case of the winds, there might be some truth in this theory; but if it is no more true in the one case than in the other, this ingenious idea is plainly false. What requires investigation is this: the nature of wind and how it originates, its efficient cause and whence they derive their source; whether one ought to think of the wind as issuing from a sort of vessel and flowing until the vessel is empty, as if let out of a wineskin, or, as painters represent the winds, as drawing their source from themselves.” Science often requires metaphor, and Aristotle certainly used this linguistic device. Drawing upon the idea of vessels being filled or emptied or the idea of a wineskin helps others understand his theory. It also helps to explain when there is no language for explanation. At times he writes of “stuff” or ambiguous “forms” and explains that we must use this terminology because it is what we have to use.

Creating a language for something new requires thought and metaphor. Proper nouns often rely upon metaphor or story. This is especially true of celestial beings. When Uranus was discovered in 1781, there was no standard of naming. It wasn't until 1850 that Uranus was officially accepted and a process for naming celestial beings was established. The International Astronomical Union (IAU), founded in 1919, now controls all names. Assuming that all planets within our solar system have been identified, they deal mostly with moons, surface features, asteroids, and comets.

 Photo credit: Alissa Simon

Photo credit: Alissa Simon

Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn have been recognized in the heavens throughout history. The next three planets were identified as technology advanced. First Uranus in 1781, then Neptune in 1846 and, if you want to include it, Pluto in 1930. Early cultures identified the movement of the planets with the movement of mythological beings. For this reason, Romans named Venus after the goddess of love, who would surely be epitomized by the brightest and most beautiful celestial being. Mars, of course, the god of War, takes on a reddish appearance, and Mercury whose orbit is so short, moves swiftly on winged feet. Merriam-Webster tells us that Earth, ironically, comes from the Indo-European base 'er,'which produced the Germanic noun 'ertho,' and ultimately German 'erde,' Dutch 'aarde,' Scandinavian 'jord,' and English 'earth.' Related forms include Greek 'eraze,' meaning 'on the ground,' and Welsh 'erw,' meaning 'a piece of land.' Jupiter, the largest and most massive of the planets was named Zeus by the Greeks and Jupiter by the Romans. This name depends entirely upon size because he was the most important deity in both pantheons. Saturn (Cronos in Greek) was the father of Zeus/Jupiter. Since it is visible by the naked eye, Saturn has a variety of names from other cultures as well. (Find a wonderful list of names gathered from many cultures here: http://nineplanets.org/days.html ). Uranus was first seen in 1781 as noted above, named for the father of Cronos/Saturn. Neptune followed in 1846 and is named for the Roman god of the sea. Pluto is named after the Roman god of the underworld. The name especially fits this body because Pluto can make himself invisible at will, as does Pluto in its orbit.

As science continues to push to exoplanets and quantum physics, language will continue to evolve. As technology jumps from email to iPhones to cloud computing, we continue to see metaphors emerge and converge, proving that language must evolve simultaneously with culture.

To post a comment, click on the title of this blog and scroll down.

Powell's Adventures

May 26, 2017

Thanks to Alissa Simon, HMU Tutor, for today's post.

Many veterans have shaped our history in both service through military and then ongoing service after their military careers. All military contributions are incalculable, but important for contemplation and discussion. Additionally, the contributions of those once they have left military service is worth our contemplation. Veterans often face great unknowns in their military career, and then upon leaving the service, they return to yet another unknown. In returning to civilian life they have families, find jobs, but lose the military structure. Today's blog discusses the life of one soldier who founded a life on adventure.

Powell was first a scientist and adventurer who enlisted in the Union Army in support of Lincoln's abolition of slavery. At the age of 27, he enlisted as a cartographer, topographer and military engineer. In the Battle of Shiloh, he lost an arm and was briefly hospitalized. However, he did return to the war, in which his bravery promoted him to major and finally, brevet lieutenant colonel. After serving in the Civil War, John Wesley Powell, decided on a personal adventure. Wallace Stegner writes, “Major John Wesley Powell's 1869 expedition down the canyons of the Green and Colorado rivers was the last great exploration within the continental United States, and an exploit of enormous importance in opening the West after the Civil War.”

Directly after the Civil War, Powell became a lecturer, which did not fully satisfy his adventurous spirit. According to his desire, he began to plan a trek intended to map previously undocumented regions of the West. He is memorable both for his military service, and also for, albeit unknowingly, giving the country a new direction post-war. Few people had the capability, planning skills and desire to pursue such a dangerous path. Yet, he successfully gathered a handful of scientists and veterans to navigate the difficult waterways.

After the Civil War, Powell set the goal of traveling into “the Great Unknown”, which includes portions of the Green and Colorado Rivers. The group of nine men traveled for months by small boats through the narrow, tall and dangerous canyon walls. They carried supplies, occasionally losing items to the river's wrath. Most of the men kept a journal or record which described both scenery and their mental anguish and frustration at all of the journey's unknowns. The trip took these men from Wyoming through parts of Colorado, Utah and Arizona. They traveled down uncharted rivers without any knowledge of what they might find or knowledge as to the trip's duration. While three men did not finish the voyage, Powell and the others emerged from the long, arduous canyon as the first ever to accomplish this feat.

Powell is a difficult figure to encapsulate. He studied and wrote about languages, cultures, geology, botany, and survival. Above all, he is most likely an adventurer; someone in whom curiosity peaks at nearly every turn. For this reason, his journals and notes are also hard to categorize since they span a wide variety of specialties. It is perhaps important for any such adventurer to have a wide lens when introducing the world to something new. The country embraced his journals and asked for more. The United States government then funded a second expedition. Additionally, he wrote a number of essays published in Scribner's because of the high public interest. Some of the originals can be viewed here. Also, find photos from his second expedition here.

In addition to Powell's survey of the Grand Canyon, he also traveled extensively in the southwestern desert in order to learn native cultures and ways of life. The Exploration of the Colorado River and Its Canyons dedicates a large quantity of space to native language and culture. He often asked natives about their mythology, structure, lifestyle and food. He attempted to discuss and categorize pueblo life versus the “more primitive” hunter/gatherer style of living. He also narrates a bit about family ties and the way that bloodlines might lead to powerful roles within a Native American community.

While a number of flaws and errors have been found in his journals and writings, his narrative stands the test of time. His adventurous spirit drove him from successful self-funded small trips, through the Civil War, into the Grand Canyon and then on to become director of the US Geological Survey, the Bureau of Ethnology and the Smithsonian Institution. Described as “stoical to a fault” and at times “autocratic”, he has the renown of having achieved all he set out to do.

Major Powell is only one example of the many heroic veterans who have served our country. In order to better understand his life and times, visit a Civil War memorial or the John Wesley Powell Museum. Spend the day researching other famous veterans, or say a quiet thanks to the many who did not leave the battlefields.

To post a comment, click on the title of this blog and scroll down.

Petrified National Forest

April 7, 2017

Thanks to Alissa Simon, HMU Tutor, for today's post.

“It is only by becoming sensible of our natural disadvantages that we shall be roused to exertion, and prompted to seek out opportunities of discovering the operations now in progress, such as do not present themselves readily to view.” - Charles Lyell

Charles Lyell first published the Principles of Geology in 1830. However, over the next thirty years, he continued to edit and revise his Principles until he published a final two-volume work in 1867-8. This work is a beautiful treatise on understanding changes that have affected and continue to affect the earth. In it, Lyell defines principles necessary for the scientific study of geology, while at the same time, he refutes common myths and stereotypes which previously inhibited the study of the earth. This gigantic work was written with the input of years of experience and conversation with other scientists, including his friend Charles Darwin.

On a recent stop in Petrified National Forest, I found some of Lyell's conversation repeating in my mind. Particularly, the idea that one can travel to a distant land without ever having left the earth, and without ever having left your home. In other words, Lyell's ability to see geologic structures as a mixture of age and processes enlivened the rocks about me as if a literal experience of time travel.

 Photo credit: Alissa Simon

Photo credit: Alissa Simon

The fact that trees of such height and width once existed in the seemingly barren terrain of Petrified Forest demands imagination. Instead of a desert, this land used to be filled with water, rivers, swamps and animals. When these mythic, large trees fell, they landed deep in the rivers and swamps and absorbed sediment which caused them to solidify. Merriam-Webster defines “petrified” as: “to convert (organic) matter into stone or a substance of stony hardness by the infiltration of water and the deposition of dissolved mineral matter.” In other words, the processes acting upon these trees literally changed their composition from wood to stone. They are massive, dense and heavy. They break by their own weight when the sediment supporting a portion of one log erodes. The log, then, fractures like a bone, sticking oddly and forlornly out of the earth. Their interior rings represent more than the age of the tree, but the age of the location, the age of the earth in which they lay and a colorful map of organic matter. This log which looks like a tree stump does not act like one. Instead, they are filled with spectacular colors of various sediments. Light reflects through them, and they no longer show signs of fibrous content. Upon investigation and imagination, one has literally traveled millions of years.

 Photo credit: Alissa Simon

Photo credit: Alissa Simon

The riverbeds in which they lay are now dry dustbeds, which receive violent, but sporadic rainfall. The desert here appears gray, blue, purple, pink and rusty. Somehow, plants eke out an existence. And where there are plants, there will be insects. Where there are insects, there will be lizards and birds. And with these follow larger predators. I imagine it is a very difficult life. But I also imagine that sunsets enliven these pronounced vistas with color unimaginable. And then, there are the fossils and ancient writings. Petrified National Forest offers a wide variety of interests for those wandering along Interstate 40. If nothing else, stop just to take in the views.

For more information, visit: https://www.nps.gov/pefo/index.htm .

Watch a short video about the park: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=068GcVD3VaE

“The adoption of the same generic, and, in some cases, even the same specific names for the exuviae of fossil animals, and their living analogues, was an important step towards familiarizing the mind with the idea of the identity and unity of the system in distant eras. It was an acknowledgement, as it were, that a considerable part of the ancient memorials of nature were written in a living language. The growing importance then of the natural history of organic remains, and its general application to geology, may be pointed out as the characteristic feature of the progress of the science during the present century. This branch of knowledge has already become an instrument of great power in the discovery of truths in geology, and is continuing daily to unfold new data for grand and enlarged views respecting the former changes of the earth.” - Charles Lyell

“But if, instead of vague conjectures as to what might have been the state of the planet at the era of its creation, we fix our thoughts steadily on the connection at present between climate and the distribution of land and sea; and if we then consider what influence the former fluctuations in the physical geography of the earth must have had on superficial temperature, we may perhaps approximate to a true theory.” - Charles Lyell

“[T]he geologist is in danger of drawing a contrary inference, because he has the power of passing rapidly from the events of one period to those of another – of beholding, at one glance, the effects of causes which may have happened at intervals of time incalculably remote, and during which, nevertheless, no local circumstances may have occurred to mark that there is a great chasm in the chronological series of nature's archives.” - Charles Lyell

To post a comment, click on the title of this blog and scroll down.

January Discussion of Heisenberg

February 3, 2017

Thanks to Alissa Simon, HMU Tutor, for today's post.

I am always amazed at the amount of information and understanding that I gain from the Natural Science discussions at Harrison Middleton University. Since my childhood, I have immersed myself in nature, but rarely attempted to study the natural sciences until more recently. At HMU, many students are interested in the difficult and amazing philosophical questions incorporated in the natural world. Therefore, our most recent discussion of Newton, Heisenberg and Hawking was no letdown. In fact, I have been thinking about this discussion all week. Each participant brought a diverse background to the discussion which always helps widen the scope of our understanding and imagination, I believe. We discussed a few of Isaac Newton's first definitions from The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Then we read Werner Heisenberg's Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Theory. Last, we read one chapter from Stephen Hawking's book A Brief History of Time.

In setting up the discussion, I gravitated towards these pieces mainly due to Heisenberg's Interpretation. I wanted to better understand if Heisenberg argues that chaos founds quantum mechanics, or if, instead, he leaves the possibility open to the possibility that humans simply cannot adequately study the small bits that make up quantum theory. Either way, Heisenberg insists that scientists continue using the same language as before. He says, “[w]e must keep in mind this limited range of applicability of the classical concepts while using them, but we cannot and should not try to improve them”. As one who studies literature and language daily, I found this paradox particularly instructive. The repercussions of changing scientific language makes science bulkier, denser and perhaps more difficult to grasp. It could also potentially make it inaccurate. Or, in sticking with the same terminology that describes large-scale physical events, we run into the potential for absurd or meaningless statements, or even overpopulating a word with definitions. Any of these dilemmas presents problems. Yet, Heisenberg was insistent. He demands that we stick with our known definitions, those first mapped out by Newton (and others) and apply them as best as possible to quantum mechanics.

I did get the impression, from Heisenberg, that language was of vital importance. I did not, however, understand that he claims quantum mechanics to be unpredictable. To me, he seemed to say that humans lack adequate measuring sticks. Stephen Hawking notes Einstein's reaction to Heisenberg's theory. He writes: “Quantum mechanics therefore introduces an unavoidable element of unpredictability or randomness into science. Einstein objected to this very strongly, despite the important role he had played in the development of these ideas. Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize for his contribution to quantum theory. Nevertheless, Einstein never accepted that the universe was governed by chance; his feelings were summed up in his famous statement 'God does not play dice.'” Upon first reading, I assumed that Einstein understood Heisenberg to say that uncertainty will always underlie our scientific understanding and Einstein could not accept that conclusion. This may in part be true, but upon review and discussion, I am thinking that Einstein believes that God gave humans the ability to think through these problems. Einstein knows that current rhetoric and abilities do not meet the needs of quantum physics, but he allows for the human brain (endowed by God) to figure out a plan to make it possible.

Neither Heisenberg nor Einstein definitively claim that quantum behaviors are without pattern. Instead, they claim that it is difficult to study quantum behavior, even using modern technologies. Einstein then adds that humans are endowed with a pretty sophisticated system of navigation. We judge and measure the world in terms of our physical reality, which only offers bits and pieces of information at a time, but it does not preclude progress or deny a better understanding of quantum mechanics. Precisely at the spot where our awareness of the world breaks down, our senses (and therefore our language) inevitably fail. And yet, we have mental capabilities which allow us to design ways to overcome this. We have designed means of which to see farther into the universe, to travel into space, to go beyond atomic behaviors into quantum behaviors. In his Interpretation, Heisenberg asks scientists to continually rely, however, on the analogy that makes the most sense to the audience. He asks that we use the language of physics. And yes, it is paradoxical.

And so, the Merriam-Webster dictionary lists quantum as:

- any of the very small increments or parcels into which many forms of energy are subdivided

- any of the small subdivisions of a quantized physical magnitude (such as magnetic moment)

We continue to apply existing language (even if it is in metaphor only) to such a complex topic.

While science and technology change rapidly, it is refreshing to have conversations that span such a chronological spectrum. Moreover, it is vital to understand, honor and respect these concepts which came to us even from Newton. Our current infrastructure is founded upon principles that few stop to think about. Newton's elements are as fun to study today as they were in his day (also because they are so easily reproducible). Not surprising, then, is Hawking's assertion that, “The only areas of physical science into which quantum mechanics has not yet been properly incorporated are gravity and the large-scale structure of the universe.” I take that as an invitation to apply the language of physics, combined with the elements of reason and imagination. I take that as a challenge!

Thanks to all of our January Quarterly Discussion participants. If you are interested in the next discussion, email asimon@hmu.edu.

To post a comment, click on the title of this blog and scroll down.