13 Things That Don't Make Sense (28 page)

BOOK: 13 Things That Don't Make Sense
2.12Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
ads

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.”

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

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.

NOTES AND SOURCES

PROLOGUE

pp. 3–4

he wanted to examine the nature of discovery
: T. Kuhn,
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), p. 10.

p. 5

the U.S. Department of Energy recently declared
: Available at
http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/index.htm
.

p. 5

The philosopher Karl Popper once said
: K. Popper,
The Open Universe: An Argument for Indeterminism
(London: Hutchinson, 1992), p. 44.

1. THE MISSING UNIVERSE

p. 11

Slipher is one of the unsung heroes of astronomy
: At the 207th Meeting of the American Astronomical Society, January 8–12, 2006, the Sonoma professor Joseph Tenn gave a talk titled “Why Does V. M. Slipher Get So Little Respect?” See also the Royal Observatory of Edinburgh cosmology professor John Peacock’s Web site at
http://www.roe.ac.uk/~jap/slipher/
.

p. 11

“probably made more fundamental discoveries”
: W. Hoyt,
Biographical Memoirs of the National Academy of Science
52 (1980): 410.

p. 12

Hawking makes a pointed reference
: S. Hawking,
The Universe in a Nutshell
(New York: Bantam, 2001), p. 76.

p. 12

When these velocity measurements were published
: V. M. Slipher,
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society
56 (1917): 403.

p. 14

the only explanation
:
Helvetica Physica Acta
6 (1933): 110.

p. 14

Dutch astronomer Jan Oort added to the evidence
:
Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada
33 (1939): 201.

p. 16

Cambridge professor Malcolm Longair . . . might turn out to be
: M. Longair,
Our Evolving Universe
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 118.

p. 16

Rubin published her results
:
Astrophysical Journal
159 (1970): 379.

p. 17

in 1999 . . . Rees gave an extension
: M. Rees,
Just Six Numbers
(London: Phoenix, 2000), p. 92.

p. 23

The Harvard astronomer was worried
: R. Kirshner,
The Extravagant Universe
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002), p. 192.

p. 25

“This is nutty-sounding”
: K. Sawyer, “Cosmic Force May Be Acting Against Gravity,”
Washington Post
, February 27, 1998.

p. 25

“somewhere between amazement and horror
”:
Science
279 (1998): 1298.

p. 25

many of our finest minds seem to have given up
:
Nature
448 (2007): 245.

p. 26

Weinberg suggested . . . explain its value
: S.Weinberg,
Dreams of a Final Theory
(London: Hutchinson 1993), p. 177.

p. 27

“unthinkable”
: L. Susskind, “A Universe Like No Other,”
New Scientist
, November 1, 2003, p. 34.

p. 27

Susskind calls them the Popperazzi
: A. Gefter, “Is String Theory in Trouble?”
New Scientist
, December 17, 2005, p. 48.

p. 28

the physicists were similarly puzzled
: “Nobel Laureate Admits String Theory Is in Trouble,”
New Scientist
, December 10, 2005, p. 6.

p. 29

a characteristic feature
:
Astrophysical Journal
523 (1999): L99.

p. 30

As soon as Bekenstein developed
:
Physical Review D
70 (2004): 083509.

p. 31

“NASA finds direct proof of dark matter”
: See
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2006/aug/HQ_06297_CHANDRA_Dark_Matter.html
.

p. 32

There was nothing in the Chandra observations
:
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
371 (2006): 138.

p. 32

His modified gravity theory . . . any dark matter
:
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
382 (2007): 29.

p. 33

the Dark Energy Task Force issued their report
: See
http://www-astro-theory.fnal.gov/events/detf.pdf
.

p. 34

hints that the universe is not isotropic
:
Physical Review D
72 (2005): 101302(R).

2. THE PIONEER ANOMALY

p. 40

In 2002 they published
:
Physical Review D
65 (2002): 082004.

p. 42–43

Or maybe the signal photons . . . expansion of the universe?
: can be accessed online at
www.arxiv.org/abs/gr=qc/0610034.

p. 43

accelerated according to the laws of
nonlinear electrodynamics:
Europhysics Letters
77 (2007): 19001.

3. VARYING CONSTANTS

p. 48

John Webb had what looked like an answer
:
Physical Review Letters
82 (1999): 884.

p. 51

His research team have dissected every result
: See, for example,
Physical Review Letters
95 (2005): 041301.

p. 53

Their conclusion was probably disappointing to Dyson
:
Nuclear Physics B
480 (1996): 37.

p. 53

Steve Lamoreaux and Justin Torgerson . . . the energies involved
:
Physical Review D
69 (2004): 121701(R).

p. 54

a team of physicists published a paper
:
Physical Review Letters
96 (2006): 151101.

p. 55

Webb put the case for coolness like this
: J. Webb, “Are the Laws of Nature Changing with Time?”
Physics World,
January 2001, p. 39.

p. 55

Nobel Prize–winning physicist John Wheeler asked
: J. A. Wheeler,
Frontiers of Time
(Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1979).

p. 56

Feynman published a slim book on the theory
: R. Feynman,
QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter
(Princeton University Press, 1988), p. 395.

4. COLD FUSION

p. 57

a press release, issued on March 23, 1989
: Reprinted in J. K. Footlick,
Truth and Consequences
(Phoenix: Oryx Press, 1997), p. 30.

p. 60

The U.S. Department of Energy convened
: See
http://www.ncas.org/erab/
.

p. 60

“as respectable in science as pornography in church”
: B. Daviss, “Reasonable Doubt,”
New Scientist,
March 29, 2003, p. 36.

p. 62

In eight experiments
:
Journal of Electro-Analytical Chemistry
296 (1990): 241.

p. 63

Noting that Schwinger refused to follow
:
Nature
370 (1994): 600.

p. 63

“The pressure for conformity is enormous”
: From “Cold Fusion—Does It Have a Future?” a talk given in Japan on December 7, 1991, at a celebration of Shin’ichiro Tomonoga’s centennial birthday. Available at:
http://www/ lenrcanr.org/acrobat/SchwingerJcoldfusiona.pdf
.

p. 63

Schwinger’s attitude toward cold fusion
: “A Brief History of Mine,” presented at the Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion, Lahaina, Maui, December 6–9, 1993. Available at:
http://www.infinite-energy.com/ iemagazine/issue1/colfusthe.html
.

p. 63

“one of 20th-century physics’ few unqualified triumphs”
: G. Johnson, “Two Sides to Every Science Story,”
New York Times
, April, 9, 1989.

p. 64

“Schwinger invited me to lunch”
: N. Ramsey, “Which Came First, Theory or Experiment?”
Physics Today
, January 2001, p. 13.

p. 64

The journal duly published Schwinger’s paper
:
Physical Review
73 (1947): 416.

p. 64

a Department of Energy study admitted
: See
http://www.science.doe.gov/Sub/
Newsroom/News_Releases/DOE-SC/2004/low_energy/CF_Final_120104.pdf.

p. 65

an appendix added after publication
: S. Luckhardt, “Technical Appendix to D. Albagli
et al. Journal of Fusion Energy
article,”
MIT PFC Technical Report
(
PFC/RR-92-7
), discussed in E. Mallove, “MIT and Cold Fusion: A Special Report,” available at:
http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/mitcfreport.pdf
.

p. 65

Mallove’s report about the affair
: E.Mallove,
Ten Years That Shook Physics
, Infinite Energy, March-April, 1999.

p. 67

the CR39 chip data
:
Naturwissenschaften
94, no. 6 (2007): 511.

p. 67

One of the few publications
: Quoted in Footlick,
Truth and Consequences
, p. 51.

5. LIFE

p. 70

“What is life?”
: E. Schrödinger,
What is Life?
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), p. 3.

p. 71

The physicist Paul Davies has perhaps done most
: P. Davies,
The Fifth Miracle
(London: Allan Lane, 1998), p. 7.

p. 71

A living system must also be contained
: L. Margulis, D. Sagan, N. Eldredge,
What is Life?
(New York: Simon and Schuster, 1995), p. 113.

p. 71

In June 2007 an editorial
:
Nature
447 (2007): 1031.

p. 72

In 1953 they sealed ammonia
:
Science
130 (1959): 245.

p. 72

Robert Shapiro likened the experiment’s production
: R. Shapiro, “Where Do We Come From?” in
How Things Are
, ed. J. Brockman and K. Matson (Lon-don: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1995), p. 46.

p. 72

Oro put water, hydrogen cyanide, and ammonia together
:
Nature
191 (1961): 1193.

p. 72

“life is either a reproducible”
: C. de Duve,
Vital Dust: Life as a Cosmic Imperative
(New York: Basic Books, 1996), p. 292.

p. 73

Carl Sagan took the rapidity of life’s emergence: Bioastronomy News
7, no. 4 (1995).

p. 74

“We knew the world”
: See
http://www.atomicarchive.com/Movies/Movie8.shtml
.

p. 77

Venter headed the team
:
Science
270 (1995): 397.

p. 77

“radically engineered organism”
: P. Aldhous, “Countdown to a Synthetic Life-form,”
New Scientist
, July 11, 2007, p. 6.

p. 77

“minimal cell project”
:
Anatomical Record
268 (2002): 208.

p. 77

At Harvard, Jack Szostak is also planning
:
Nature
409 (2001): 387.

p. 78

Anderson has always been a provocative voice
:
Science
177 (1972): 393.

p. 79

two more physicists took up Anderson’s stance
:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
97, issue 1 (2000): 28.

p. 80

“organisms are not just tinkered-together contraptions”
: S. Kauffman,
At Home in the Universe
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1995).

p. 80

“true source of physical law”
: R. Laughlin,
A Different Universe
(New York: Basic Books, 2005), p. 208.

p. 81

Carl Sagan perhaps said it best
: “Visions of the Twenty-first Century,” a speech given at St. John the Divine Cathedral in New York, 1995. Available at:
http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/carlsagan.htm
.

p. 81

“revel in our insignificance”
: G. Johnson,
Miss Leavitt’s Stars
(New York: Atlas Books, 2005), p. 11.

p. 81

The study took several years
:
Science
274 (1996): 161.

6. VIKING

p. 84

NASA researchers are drawing up work schedules
: See
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mars/mars_colonize_terraform.html
.

p. 89

Levin counters this
: For a discussion of extremophiles, see M. Gross,
Life on the Edge
(New York: Perseus, 1998), p. 16.

p. 91

Levin and Lafleur published
: “Instruments, Methods, and Missions for Astrobiology,”
SPIE Proceedings
4137 (2000): 48.

p. 92

In 2006 the final nail was driven
:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
103, no. 44 (2006): 16089.

p. 93

“over 90 percent” certain
: L. Oliwenstein, “A Day in the Life on Mars,”
University of Southern Califonia Health
, Winter 2002.

p. 93

NASA’s Chris McKay
: D. L. Chandler, “Searching for Life in a Handful of Dust,”
New Scientist
, October 30, 2006, p. 48.

p. 94

As you scroll through NASA’s list
: See, for example,
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/
.

p. 95

Ward is unequivocal
: P. Ward,
Life as We Do Not Know It
(New York: Penguin Viking, 2005), p. 239.

p. 95

Rees made the statement in a book
: M. Rees, “Cosmological Challenges: Are We Alone, and Where?” in
The Next Fifty Years
, ed. J. Brockman (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 2002), p. 18.

p. 95

Elsewhere he argued
: M. Rees, “Is the Search for Alien Life Futile Nonsense?”
New Scientist
, July 12, 2003, p. 25.

p. 96

Piet Hut . . . has offered fifty-fifty odds
: See
http://www.newscientist.com/ article/dn10485-piet-hut-forecasts-the-future-.html
.

p. 96

Life’s solutions are constrained by the laws of physics:
S. Conway Morris,
Life’s Solution
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), p. 285.

BOOK: 13 Things That Don't Make Sense
2.12Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
ads

Other books

Chosen by Sin by Virna Depaul
A Love So Tragic by Stevie J. Cole
Burden of Proof by John G. Hemry
Masters of Illusions by Mary-Ann Tirone Smith
Forever My Girl by McLaughlin, Heidi
I Am No One You Know by Joyce Carol Oates
Sky on Fire by Emmy Laybourne
Keeping Time: A Novel by Mcglynn, Stacey