Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection, Einstein’s reinterpretation of the cosmos through general relativity and the idea that we live in one of an infinity of universes are some of the most elegant and beautiful human ideas, according to a group of the world’s leading thinkers.
These ideas, and almost 200 others, were the subjects of a series of short essays collated by the Web magazine Edge, which invites people including scientists, artists, journalists, historians and philosophers to address a grand question every year.
For this year, Edge editor and literary agent John Brockman posed the seemingly simple question: “What is your favorite deep, elegant or beautiful explanation?”
The responses included established scientific ideas and theorems, maxims for the way societies operate, as well as considerations of what it means for something to be beautiful in the first place.
Richard Dawkins, the Oxford University biologist and author, led the charge in support of Darwin’s theory, which he said won hands down in terms of elegance because it had the power to explain much while assuming little.
“The ratio of the huge amount that it explains (everything about life: its complexity, diversity and illusion of crafted design) divided by the little that it needs to postulate (non-random survival of randomly varying genes through geological time) is gigantic,” Dawkins wrote. “Never in the field of human comprehension were so many facts explained by assuming so few.”
Frank Tipler, a professor of mathematical physics at Tulane University in New Orleans, chose the idea that there are an infinity of universes parallel to our own, containing individuals exactly like us.
“There are an infinity of Frank Tiplers, individuals exactly like me, each of whom has written an essay entitled ‘Parallel Universes,’ each of which is word-for-word identical to the essay you are now reading, and each of these essays is now being read by individuals who are exactly identical to you, the reader. And more: There are other universes which are almost identical to ours, but differ in minor ways: for example, universes in which you the reader (and I the writer!) really did marry that high school sweetheart — and universes in which you didn’t if you did in this universe,” Tipler wrote.
INTELLIGENCE OF ANTS
The collected intelligence of ants, and self-organization in general, impressed Stanford University neuroscientist Robert Sapolsky. Watch a single ant, and it does not make much sense as it walks in one direction, suddenly changing to another for no obvious reason.
However, a colony of ants is something special.
“Specialized jobs, efficient means of exploiting new food sources, complex underground nests with temperature regulated within a few degrees. And critically, there’s no blueprint or central source of command — each individual ants has algorithms for their behaviors,” Sapolsky wrote.
Out of this emerges a highly efficient colony.
A dilemma raised in 1980 by the UK academic David Collingridge was the chosen topic for technology writer Evgeny Morozov.
“Collingridge’s basic insight was that we can successfully regulate a given technology when it’s still young and unpopular and thus probably still hiding its unanticipated and undesirable consequences — or we can wait and see what those consequences are, but then risk losing control over its regulation,” Morozov wrote.
The idea, he said, set the tone of many subsequent debates about how people assessed technology and is unsolved to this day.
However, it is “one of the most elegant ways to explain many of the complex ethical and technological quandaries — think drones or automated facial recognition — that plague our globalized world today.”
BEAUTY AND ELEGANCE
The laws of physics featured heavily in the collection of essays. The chemist and writer Peter Atkins found beauty and elegance in the second law of thermodynamics, which says that all natural events cause an increase in the disorder in the universe.
“The astonishing feature of this perception of natural change is that the dispersal can generate order: Through dispersal in disorder, structure can emerge. All it needs is a device that can link in to the dispersal, and just as a plunging stream of water can be harnessed and used to drive construction, so the stream of dispersal can be harnessed too,” he wrote.
In total, the disorder of the universe will increase, but in specific places, “structures, including cathedrals and brains, dinosaurs and dogs, piety and evil deeds, poetry and diatribes, can be thrown up as local abatements of chaos.”
Some respondents, such as philosopher Rebecca Goldstein, unearthed deeper questions in their attempt to find beauty.
“Where do we get the idea — a fantastic idea if you stop and think about it — that the beauty of an explanation has anything to do with the likelihood of its being true?” Goldstein wrote. “What do beauty and truth have to do with each other? Is there any good explanation of why the central notion of aesthetics (fluffy) should be inserted into the central notion of science (rigorous)?”
For the author and former New Scientist editor, Alun Anderson, the concept of “deep time” was most elegant.
“The Earth is extremely old and the life of our species on it has been very short. When that idea first emerged it stood against everything that was then believed and it was to eventually change people’s view of themselves as much as the earlier discovery that the Earth revolved around the Sun,” Anderson wrote.
If we look into the abyss of time, Anderson said, “we may not grow giddy, but we can simultaneously feel our own insignificance in the Earth’s 4.6 billion-year history and the significance of the precise moment in this vast span of time in which we live.”
Kevin Kelly of Wired magazine and author of What Technology Wants found beauty in the fact that everything we know of on Earth is made from the ashes of stars.
“Where did we come from? I find the explanation that we were made in stars to be deep, elegant, and beautiful,” he said. “This explanation says that every atom in each of our bodies was built up out of smaller particles produced in the furnaces of long-gone stars. We are the by-products of nuclear fusion.”
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry