The Ascent of Science by Brian Silver, Oxford University Press, $35, 517 pages.





The News & Observer


February 15, 1998

The Ascent of Science

By Phillip Manning

In times past, intellectuals in the humanities understood the principles of mathematics and science. Plato is supposed to have chiseled above the door of his Academy, "Let no one ignorant of mathematics enter my door." Voltaire said of the great scientist Isaac Newton, "We are all his disciples now." By the twentieth century, though, attitudes had changed.

In 1959, the British physicist and novelist C.P. Snow gave a famous lecture entitled "The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution." Snow suggested that a fully educated person should have knowledge of the sciences -- and that most humanists didn't meet this criteria. This brought a bristly response from F.R. Leavis, the Cambridge don who ruled the literary roost. "The intellectual nullity is what constitutes any difficulty there may be with Snow's panoptic pseudo-cogencies, . . ." The English Department, he said, was the heart of the university and implied that science was not a proper subject for intellectuals. In "The Ascent of Science," Brian Silver, a professor of physical chemistry at the Israel Institute of Technology, refutes the learned English professor. He points out that Watson and Crick had just discovered the double helix of DNA at Cambridge in 1959, and Frederick Sanger was determining the structure of insulin. What was going on in the English Department? Not much, says Silver. "There was, of course, criticism, criticism of criticism, and so on -- infinite reflections in parallel mirrors."

This book is a text for nonscientists who wish to complete their education. Although it is intended for the lay reader, the science is rigorous and humanists will have to work hard to understand it. But those who do can indeed consider themselves "fully educated." The goal is worthwhile, says Silver. "Science is not a harmless intellectual pastime. In the past two centuries we have moved from simply being observers of nature to being, in a modest but growing way, its controller. The layman can no longer afford to stand to one side, ignorant of the meaning of the advances that will determine the kind of world that his children will inhabit."

The scope of the book is immense. Perhaps as a consequence, the writing is uneven -- occasionally cutesy and sometimes dense. But the author's enthusiasm for his subject compensates for these deficiencies, and the sheer amount of ground he covers makes the book a towering achievement. Silver traces the ascent of science, the physics and chemistry and biology that helped create modern Western society. He ranges from the motions of planets to the secrets of atoms, from the big bang to black holes, from classical genetics to cloning, from thermodynamics to quantum mechanics. The cast of characters is equally broad: Newton and Galileo, Mendel, Einstein, Stephen Hawking, and many more.

Silver begins by providing us with a definition of what science is -- and isn't. "Science is not a means of obtaining absolute truth," he writes. "The real test of a scientific theory is not whether it is 'true.' The real test is whether it works." He then gives an example of how science progresses. In 1687, Newton's "Principia" was published. In it, he formulated (among other things) the laws of motion and gravity that explain the movements of planets in the solar system, overturning the laws of motion proposed by Aristotle. No one questioned Newtonian physics for over 200 years, until an obscure German scientist named Albert Einstein realized that Newton's second law of motion did not hold at velocities near the speed of light.
Einstein revised Newton's law. The result was the special theory of relativity, which changed forever the way physicists view space and time. It also the changed the world. In a mathematical footnote to special relativity, Einstein showed that mass and energy were equivalent, a result that led to the most famous equation of all: E=mc2 . It also led to the most famous explosion of all, the mushroom cloud that rose over the New Mexico desert on July 16, 1945, and launched the atomic age.

The best-written section of the book deals with entropy, one of the most misunderstood concepts in science. The second law of thermodynamics can be stated as "The entropy of the universe is continually increasing." Or, as my thermodynamics professor Henry Thomas used to say, "In an isolated system, entropy cannot decrease." Because entropy is a measure of disorder, an easily understood idea, nonscientists sometimes misuse the law to make points that have nothing to do with science.

Creationists, for example, have invoked the second law to support their thesis that life (an ordered or low entropy state) could not spontaneously arise on an abiotic earth (a high entropy state). If entropy is increasing, as stated by the second law, how can the earth go from disorder to order, from lifelessness to life? It must be God's hand, they proclaim. They overlook, of course, part of Professor Thomas's dictum. The earth is not an isolated system; it receives energy from the sun. This allows order to be created from disorder. A correct interpretation of the second law doesn't disprove creationism, but it doesn't support it either. (For a particularly brutal put down of entropy abuse, read Stephen Jay Gould's "Full House," in which he shreds M. Scott Peck's best seller, "The Road Less Traveled," for its sloppy use of the second law.)

A close reading of Silver's book can help us avoid these kinds of errors. More importantly, though, it can help us participate as citizens in influencing the course of scientific research. As Silver says, science is too important to be left entirely to scientists.
###