What is Science? Had we never seen the stars, and the sun, and the heaven, none of the words which we have spoken about the Universe would ever have been uttered. But now the sight of day and night, and the months and the revolutions of the years, have created number, and have given us a conceptions of time, and the power of enquiring about the nature of the Universe; and from this source we have derived philosophy, than which no greater good ever was or will be given by the gods to mortal man. -Plato
Main Ideas in Today s Lecture Why Study Science? An attempt at a precise definition of Science. What is not science
A Buddhist Temple in Chiang Mai: Paradox and Confusion must be conquered before approaching truth. Truth (Buddha) Paradox 3/6/08 Confusion NATS 206-2, Spring 2008
Sunday school in Bangkok. Notice the concentration evident on the faces of most of the students; finding truth is hard work. 3/6/08 NATS 206-2, Spring 2008
Why Study Science? Know your world Appreciate your world Understand your world Control your world
Housing Traditional housing in the Yucatan, Mexico A Favela in Rio de Janeiro. The benefits of modern technology are sometimes not apparent. The Shanghai skyline- Modern in the extreme
Transportation Modern travelers can reach anywhere on the globe in a matter of days or hours, with essentially no risk. A Traditional Form of Transportation Daily travel sometimes has a negative effect on one s life.
Medicine Artificial Heart Surgery at the UofA Despite advances, we are, in some ways, a very unhealthy society. A Witch Doctor
Science and Public Policy Climate Change Evolution versus Creationism Stem Cell Research Etc. An optimistic observer of modern culture would claim that intelligent and well informed citizens will need to make decisions on these issues. A pessimistic observer of modern culture might think otherwise.
A compilation of data on science literacy and education published recently by the federally-funded National Science Foundation (NSF) suggests that Americans are likely to have serious misconceptions about the scientific process, incorrect knowledge of scientific facts, and strong beliefs in pseudoscientific theories [2]. For instance, only 45% of Americans surveyed knew that electrons are smaller than atoms, and only 23% were able satisfactorily to explain what it means to engage in scientific study. About one fourth of those surveyed professed to believe in astrology, and about one third of Americans believe astrology to be sort of scientific. Quoted from The Triple Helix
From Framing the Engineering Outsourcing Debate, by Dr. Gary Gereffi and Vivek Wadhwa (Duke Pratt Engineering School)
Observing and Experimenting Science attempts to explain nature. Nature is probed with observation & Experimentation. Observations constitute the objective record of characteristics of nature. Though experiments we establish a specific physical situation and observe the results. In both cases abstraction is required because we focus only on a subset of specific characteristics and on small scale of the Universe.
Finding Patterns Accurate observations and recording is not enough. Scientists seek to find a pattern that is repeatable and holds in many circumstances. Science may be described as the art of systematic oversimplification. - Karl Popper Karl Popper, Philosopher of Science. The Logic of Scientific Discovery Sir Karl Raimund Popper was born in Vienna on 28 July 1902. His rise from a modest background as an assistant cabinet maker and school teacher to one of the most influential theorists and leading philosophers was characteristically Austrian. Popper commanded international audiences and conversation with him was an intellectual adventure - even if a little rough -, animated by a myriad of philosophical problems. His intense desire to tear away at the veneer of falsity in pursuit of the truth lead him to contribute to a field of thought encompassing (among others) political theory, quantum mechanics, logic, scientific method and evolutionary theory.
Looking for Patterns Science starts with the recognition of repeatable patterns in phenomenon. The art of science lies in finding interesting patterns that tell us something about workings of overlapping (cluttered) phenomena in the Universe. The best way to describe patterns is with equations because specific, quantifiable predictions are made.
Some Patterns in Nature Possible sand dunes on Saturn s moon, Titan. Sand Dunes in Namibia, Planet Earth 3/6/08 Sand Dunes on Mars. NATS 206-2, Spring 2008
The pattern that started it all. This photograph was made by leaving the shutter of a stationary camera open for an entire night. The lines track the motions of the stars as they appear to move through the sky. You can see this also without a camera, but it requires careful observation. The observation of this patterns raises many questions. Why do the stars move? What s special about that point that doesn t move? Do all heavenly objects follow this pattern, or are there exceptions?
Hypotheses and Theories Observations and/or experiments must be repeated and reproducible by other scientists. The only useful hypotheses are those that are falsifiable, that is they make specific predictions that are testable and can be proven wrong. If the predictions are wrong, the theory is discarded. The only truth in science, the only authority that matters, are observations and experiments. Science does not rely upon belief or appeal to authority, it relies upon testing. Prejudice and pre-conceived notions are difficult to get rid of or even to be aware of. Progress in science has often been the recognition and removal of incorrect assumptions.
Scientific Theories must be Falsifiable (Karl Popper) The Earth is at the center of the solar system. This theory is incorrect, but it is falsifiable because it make specific predictions that can be tested to determine if the theory is correct. Freudian Analysis is sometimes useful. This may be true, but it is not falsifiable. There is not experiment, observation, or test that can prove the theory false, that Freudian analysis is never useful; thus, the theory is not falsifiable.
What is not Science? Astrology Creationism Belief in UFO s Psychic Phenomena The X Files Almost anything you see on late night T.V.
What is Creationism? Creationism or creation theology is the belief that humans, life, the Earth, and the universe were created by a supreme being or deity's supernatural intervention. The intervention may be seen either as an act of creation from nothing (ex nihilo) or the emergence of order from pre-existing chaos.most who hold "creation" beliefs consider such belief to be a part of religious faith, and compatible with, or otherwise unaffected by scientific views, while others maintain that scientific data supports creationism. Proponents of theistic evolution may claim that understood scientific mechanisms are simply aspects of supreme creation. Otherwise, science-oriented believers may consider the scriptural account of creation as simply a metaphor.those who hold literal creation views often reject views of science and certain scientific theories in particular. Most notable is the rejection of evolution and its implications for current evolutionary biology. While the general idea of natural selection may fit into various particular views, the evolutionary concept of common descent that humans are "descended from lesser creatures" - is a point of great issue with most creation believers. Most creationists also dispute evolutionary theories about the origin of life, origin of the human species, the geological history of the Earth, the formation of the solar system, and the origin of the physical universe. Wikipedia
Public Opinions on Evolution Opinions in USA (Pew Forum of Religion and Public Life, August 2005.) Existed in its present form since the beginning of time 42% Evolved over time 48% Evolution guided by a supreme being 18% Evolution through natural selection 26% Don t know how life evolved 4% Don t know 10% Evolved over time Opinions in Europe (UN Planet Project) Existed in its present form since the beginning of time 18% 82%
Is Creationism Science? Creationism is not falsifiable. There are no observations or experiments which can prove it incorrect. Creationism relies on an authority other than observation and experiment. There is no pattern in nature that creationism attempts to explain. It s intent is not knowledge of the natural world.
What is Intelligent Design? The theory of intelligent design (ID) holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection. ID is thus a scientific disagreement with the core claim of evolutionary theory that the apparent design of living systems is an illusion. http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/ Problems. Not a theory on its own, but a criticism of evolution. Generates no new hypothesis. Cannot be tested: Is not falsifiable. Thinly veiled reworking of creationism creationism in a bad tuxedo.
How do we determine if there is a scientific consensus on an issue? 1) Consult Scientific Societies, i.e. the National Academy of Sciences. 2) Read the peer-reviewed literature Scientists of all types publish their results as articles in professional journals. To be published the article must be approved by an editor who is advised by ~1-3 other scientists that are experts on the topic in question.
National Academy of Science Position on Creationism Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition (1999) While the mechanisms of evolution are still under investigation, scientists universally accept that the cosmos, our planet, and life evolved and continue to evolve. Yet the teaching of evolution to schoolchildren is still a contentious issue. In Science and Creationism, the NAS states unequivocally that creationism has no place in any science curriculum at any level. Briefly and clearly, this booklet explores the nature of science, reviews the evidence for the origin of the universe and Earth, and explains the current scientific understanding of biological evolution. This edition includes new insights from astronomy and molecular biology. [read FREE online] [FREE download] http://www.nap.edu/books/0309064066/html/
The Peer-Reviewed Literature There are approximately 9 papers on Intelligent Design in the peerreviewed literature. This is less than one week s worth of published papers on biological evolution. Moreover, many of the 9 papers mentioned above only deal with the question in a peripheral way or are limited only to criticizing evolution, rather than advancing another theory. Remember, the only relevant authorities in Science are experiment and observation. The nearly complete acceptance of evolutionary biology by the scientific community does not mean that it is correct. However, it is clear that it is incorrect to say that there is a split in the scientific community over the question of creationism/intelligent design. There is very near universal agreement against creationism/intelligent design.
Is Evolution Correct? No scientific theory should be viewed as completely correct. Remember, a theory must be falsifiable and therefore subject to future improvements. The theory of evolution is complex and multi-faceted. Some of it may be correct and some may require revision. Changes to well-established theories usually incorporate and extend the successes of the earlier theories. Changes are usually gradual, not revolutionary, though there are exceptions. It is important to criticize evolution and advances will be made, but this doesn t mean that the whole theory should be discarded. A more sensible question is: Is the evidence for evolution strong enough that we should be studying biology within this framework, or should we discard it and find a different framework?
News Report on the Battle Over the Teaching of Evolution Kansas Board Approves Challenges to Evolution By JODI WILGOREN (NYT) 1134 words Published: November 9, 2005 CORRECTION APPENDED The fiercely split Kansas Board of Education voted 6 to 4 on Tuesday to adopt new science standards that are the most far-reaching in the nation in challenging Darwin's theory of evolution in the classroom. The standards move beyond the broad mandate for critical analysis of evolution that four other states have established in recent years, by recommending that schools teach specific points that doubters of evolution use to undermine its primacy in science education. Among the most controversial changes was a redefinition of science itself, so that it would not be explicitly limited to natural explanations. (Instructor s emphasis)