Speculations of Science and the Universe: A comparison of Forward and Davies

Abstract:

Scientific philosopher Paul Davies and his The Mind of God and science fiction writer Robert Forward with Dragon’s Egg might be considered to have very different aims and consequently present contrasting views on the scientific world. However, Davies and Forward, both scientists, present many ideas that are very much alike. They both, in their very different genres, consider the universe has patterns and laws that can be discovered, is inhabited by intelligent beings who want to find out about it and are able to do so, at least to a certain extent. They differ not in their commitment to the possibility of design but possibly on how that design occurs. They agree that inspiration may be part of the discovery. Above all, they agree that there is a key to the universe and that intelligent life can unlock it.

Speculation about developments in science and technology is as old as the advances in science themselves. Some of these suppositions have been from scientists making guesses as to the direction their research or that of their colleagues might take them, but much of the conjecture has been by science fiction writers, especially in the last two centuries. H.G. Wells and Jules Verne were amongst the earlier writers who combined the telling of great stories with intelligent assumptions as to the direction of science and technology and in doing so also discussed its impact on society. Much science fiction explores the influence that changes of science and technology have on the society and the people within that society in which it is used. On a page of definitions of science fiction, Asimov states his position very clearly.

Modern science fiction is the only form of literature that consistently considers the nature of the changes that face us, the possible consequences, and the possible solutions.

That branch of literature which is concerned with the impact of scientific advance upon human beings. (Asimov, 1952)

Scientific speculation tends to consider the advances, the technical developments, and the impact this might have on scientific thinking and ways of looking at the world. The surmises about possible changes tend to be on the specific advantages such changes may have, but less on the ripples of effect the alteration will make to ordinary people. Scientific writers also concentrate on the general, rather than the specific. The nature of the examination of scientific discovery in each case is different. Both groups of writers pride themselves on grounding their conjectures in possible scientific extrapolations from present reality. The explorations writers of science fiction make are constrained, of course, by the necessity of the storytelling; parameters of scientific and academic methodology limit the investigations of science writers.

If we consider aliens, for example, the approach of each kind of writer is very different. Science writers may consider the possibility of alien intelligence, where and how it might occur and whether it would be biologically different. Science fiction writers sometimes use alien races to examine the human condition more closely. We do not know how aliens will think of course but most aliens in science fiction, though they may vary in physical description and cultural backgrounds still have essential selves that mirror the human psyche for two reasons. Firstly being human, we cannot imagine another way of understanding the world and secondly, the exploration of aliens can make it easier to stand back and examine ourselves more clearly.

If we consider the two books The Mind of God by Paul Davies and Dragon’s Egg by Robert Forward, we are examining books that have different aims and so we would expect their differences will outweigh their similarities. Nevertheless, some of the issues raised in each book find echoes in the other. Davies, Professor of Mathematical Physics, and Forward, PhD in gravitational physics, are practising scientists. Paul Davies in The Mind of God is a scientific philosopher exploring how discoveries in science might change our view of the nature of God. On the way we learn a great deal about how scientists, including physicists and mathematicians made their discoveries and what that means to our ideas about science and philosophy. Robert Forward in Dragon’s Egg is writing a fictional work that probes how specific individuals in their respective societies (both human and alien) discover their world through science and mathematics.

One obvious similarity between the two works is the underlying assumption that there is order in the universe. Each writer believes implicitly that there are patterns to discover; simple beautiful equations that transcend our small planet and link Earth to the wider universe.

Davies says

 “Human beings have always been awestruck by the subtlety, majesty, and intricate organisation of the physical world” (p194)

And later “Experience has shown that nature does share our sense of economy, efficiency beauty, and mathematical subtlety, and this approach to research can often pay dividends “(1992, p209)

Paul Davies spends most of his book referring again and again to the discoveries scientists make which relate to observable reality but which are definitely there to be discovered. He says it even more bluntly in his Templeton Prize Address

It has become fashionable in some circles to argue that science is ultimately a sham, that we scientists read order into nature, not out of nature, and that the laws of physics are our laws, not nature's. I believe this is arrant nonsense…

It is one that regards the universe, not as the plaything of a capricious Deity, but as a coherent, rational, elegant, and harmonious expression of a deep and purposeful meaning. (Davies, 1995)

In the same way, the humans in Dragon’s Egg are definitely are committed to investigating and finding out about the universe. The axiom of their existence is that there is something to find out and that finding it out will make it easier to operate in the world. The drive to find patterns and structure is what allows our young heroine, Jacqueline, to find the Dragon’s Egg in the first place. She sees a periodic pattern in the noise of her data, and she is impelled to investigate. It is axiomatic to examine anything that has a pattern.

Davies, postulates that aliens may not think mathematically the way we do

(1992, p151) “it is possible to imagine alien life forms with a completely different evolutionary history, and brains that bear little relationship to ours These aliens may not share our categories of thought , including our love of mathematics”

But he also (1992, p152) asks why should the ability of human beings to think about abstract mathematics be dominant as it has no evolutionary apparent survival purpose

Furthermore, he does report that

(1992, p152) “most scientists (believe) that major advances in mathematical physics really do represent discoveries of some genuine aspect of reality, and not just the reorganisation of data in a form more suitable for human intellectual digestion”

Forward certainly believes this.  We watch as the aliens, the cheela, on Dragon’s Egg grow and develop until they too search for patterns. The cheela live on a neutron star in much greater gravity, operate at a much greater speed, have very different physical make up but Forward makes it very clear to us that the patterns of the universe and science are the same for both human and alien. Numbers and mathematics while they might have different names, and measure different distances have the same function of thinking abstractly about the world.

”in a flash of inspiration, One of the greatest mathematical minds, ever hatched in the past or future history of the cheela made a great leap of abstract thought” (Forward, 1980, p87)

The search for symmetry so often pursued in our world finds an echo in Forward’s universe. In fact, one comment reflects very closely the conflict between Galileo and the clerics of his day.

 “Bright did not really stand still but moved in a tiny circle about an invisible point in the sky. This lack of perfection of Bright had been a nagging splinter in the tread of the philosophers of theology since it was first discovered” (Forward, 1980, p110)

Davies  (1992, p 108) quotes the mathematician Hamming “my amazement that the abstraction of integers for counting is both possible and useful” while Forward tells in his story

“Great-Crack tried in many ways to get Blue-Flow to make the jump in abstract thought that now came so naturally to her, but he could not do it”.

On Forward’s Dragon’s Egg physical laws and other mathematical and scientific truths leading to technological uses still operate, even in this place so far away from Earth. Necessity prompts many discoveries. Forward believes the first impetus comes from this

“An animal does not need to develop curiosity and intelligence if it has no problems that need solving” (1980, p8)

New needs prompt the use of the pathbreaker technique (p62) and the manipulator crystal (1980, p101) and the counting of the pods and development of a mathematical system (p93), but not only this. Scientific curiosity not just necessity also operates with the aliens as well as the humans. Swift-Killer, his mind always active, plays with and finds uses for the mirror plates and flares. (p175)

When the signals arrive from the Inner Eye the Institute astrologer points out the pattern in the pulsations they receive and remarks on it. Swift-Killer recognises the number pattern and immediately sees to the possibility of life on the Inner Eye. The pattern is the key. He jumps to the assumption of life because it makes a particular kind of pattern: a primer in mathematics. (Forward, 1980, p184 -187) Using his new expander to send messages from the spaceship, Swift-Killer starts the push to try to communicate at the cost of some significant difficulty and with considerable sacrifice in lives.

The cheela like the humans, want to know everything they can. They are willing to receive the knowledge alphabetically if that is the quickest way to receive it, even if that is not the logical. There is no suggestion that the laws of physics and mathematics are different in any way. The only difference is the primary focus of the two groups on specific knowledge that is relevant to their situation. The cheela have a great hunger for knowledge that parallels our own.

The “Visit to the Humans” — was quixotic in nature, since there was nothing that could be communicated during the visit, they all knew that the real reason for the project was to crack the invisible egg-sac of gravity that had kept the cheela bound in the hatchery of their laying” (Forward, 1980, p297) As Amalita remarks “It seems ridiculous to go through this visit” but she continues “if I were offered the opportunity to visit the surface….I would jump at the chance” (p301)

The knowledge that the humans communicate to the cheela at first astounds and bewilders, but very quickly in the period between transmissions (the messages are very slow because the cheela live at such a fast rate compared to the humans) the cheela begin to match and soon outstrip their tutors. The cheela outstrip the humans to such an extent that they encrypt their later discoveries so it will not bewilder and confuse the humans nor make it too easy for them, as they find the secret to anti-gravity and faster than light travel while they are still receiving the alphabetical sections of the encyclopaedia the humans sent. The point however is that the aliens can build on, anticipate and outstrip the humans because the nature of the universe is there to be revealed and uncovered. Davies discusses many mathematicians who hold mathematics is there to be discovered (1992, p 141-145) In his conclusion,

Davies says “through science we human beings are able to grasp at least some of nature’s secrets. We have cracked part of the cosmic code” (p232)

And Forward would say intelligent beings will find and understand it too, perhaps even better than we, especially if they live so many times faster!

When they outstrip the humans they stop giving the information in clear and resort to encryption Forward makes it quite clear that the cheela share the hunger for knowledge that humans feel.

“We have given you enough material to keep you learning for thousands of your years. The we will both be off on our separate ways, seeking truth and knowledge through space and time” (Forward, 1980, p319)

Another point of similarity between the two writers is their belief in other ways than the plain ordinary working out of formula, experiment and abstract thought to discover the truths underlying the universe. Forward’s Jacqueline dreams the suggestion of her answer She is quoted as saying ”I take that dream almost as seriously as I do the results of my calculations”  (Forward, 1980, p 31, 32). The cheela too have flashes of inspiration (p87) and conceptual breakthroughs (p91). Davies reports many scientists having breakthroughs in sudden, inspirational episodes (1992, p145, 228-229)

In fact, he gives this process a great deal of importance.

“The essence of the mystical experience then, is a type of shortcut to truth a direct unmediated contact with a perceived reality” (Davies, 1992, p228)

Forward explains, “ God came to the cheela slowly” (1980, p107) when they notice the unmoving light in the sky (Earth’s Sun) at the same time as the volcano forces them to discover a better land. The study of what the cheela call astrology, linked to their worship of Bright, is the basis of writing and further discovery. The ultra-violet scans from the humans, which only Pink-Eyes/God’s Chosen can see, lead to the building of the temple, which consecutively alert the humans to intelligent life, which in turn prompt the humans to send a message. The existence and path of the Dragon’s Egg, the neutron star, made the creation of intelligent life on Earth possible. (p4)The cheela later realise this first. (p269) Forward, by his telling of the story interweaves the fate of the humans and cheela inextricably, so that the progress of each is dependent on the other. The underlying assumption is that this is meant to be - or at the very least is rather amusing. (p267)

Similarly, Davies quotes Hoyle who reckons “the universe looks like a “put up job”., as though somebody had been “monkeying” with the laws of physics” (1992, p199)

As Davies remarks “ The fact is we are here and here by grace of some pretty felicitous arrangements”(p204)

He reports that Cantor (p230) “finally succeeded in providing a rigorous logical demonstration of the self-consistency of the actually infinite” In the end, after all the discussion and investigation,

One could not say Forward postulates overtly a mystical design or creator in the same way that Davies does. The cheela create a God to explain the inexplicable. Theirs is a god-of-the-gaps. Once they start to understand the physical world fairly clearly, they no longer tie their scientific endeavours to religion. Scientists replace the High Priests. The humans, while searching for pattern, order and answers in physics do not refer to any religion or God. Neither group of scientists once they are in the realm of scientific knowledge, discuss a religious view of the world. Davies, on the other hand, is convinced of a designer, or at the very least a design outside the universe.

Despite the fact that Davies is writing scientific philosophy and Forward is writing science fiction there are many points of congruence. Forward does not come to the same conclusions as Davies (or his characters do not) but while their paths of writing are different, many of the assumptions are very similar. Both writers seem convinced of the purposefulness of the universe, the design and the patterns there to discover. Both Davies and Forward see that the laws of the universe are consistent across the stars, part of the fabric of the cosmos. They both, in their separate ways, make it clear that there is a truth to be revealed that intelligent beings can uncover and use to their advantage These discoveries explicate the universe and allow us to come to understandings. They also permit us to use the laws we decode to use energy and fly to the stars, to exploit the knowledge we gain for practical applications. In addition, it is apparent that both authors see the search for answers as part of the condition of intelligent beings. Not only is there a code, but also we instinctively investigate it, at first from necessity and then a hunger for knowledge. They are also both aware of the spark of inspiration that illuminates the way for scientists, the happy revelation that lights up the way, almost independent of plodding experiment and intense calculation.

The primary axiom of science is that there is an order in the universe there to be discovered: that it is beautiful, elegant and simple and is capable of being understood by the intelligence within it. Both these writers operate from this assumption. Neither doubts that there is sense in the cosmos, that we have the hunger and the ability to begin to understand.

In the same tradition Turner is quoted as saying in a recent Time article “ We’ve got this absurd, wonderful picture of the universe, and now we’ve got to test it” (Lemonick, 2001, p52)

The astrophysicists, astronomers and physicists reported in the article are trying to find out how the universe ends. They have found some new indications of where the universe might be heading. They have found some new patterns that give them a fresh way of looking, now they have this need to scrutinize it, weigh it up and see how it fits with the rest of their theories and facts. They believe there is a pattern to their ideas, that in some way it will fit.

Another facet of this search is the one we might call philosophical or religious.

Lemonick asks:

Why do we care? For one thing, this is a question that has haunted humans for a long as we have walked the earth. A definitive answer-if that is indeed what we have will force philosophers and religious leaders to rethink their assumptions and beliefs about eternity and how the world will end”. (p46)

I think that all developments of knowledge cause all people to reconsider how they view the world. For we all try to fit what we know into the pattern of our understanding. Like Davies, I am convinced that the wonder and interconnectedness, diversity and simplicity of the universe argues a purpose for it all, and that purpose includes the mystical or religious. In my case, I believe in a personal creator who designed the universe and saw that it was good. Like Davies and Forward, I believe there is a code to be deciphered, and that intelligent beings are both a part of it and can begin to interpret it. I also believe that rational analysis can only take us so far along the way of understanding and that ultimately that mystical experience is another necessary part of the unravelling.

And with Davies,  I am convinced “We are truly meant to be here”(1992, p232)

Asimov, Isaac (1952) Definitions of Science Fiction http://www.panix.com/~gokce/sf_defn.html (Accessed 2001 July 4)

Davies, Paul (1995) Physics and the Mind of God: The Templeton Prize Address [Online]

Available http://www.origins.org/ftissues/ft9508/davies.html (Accessed 2001 July 4)

Davies, Paul (1992) The Mind of God, Penguin, London  

Forward, Robert (1980) Dragon’s Egg Ballantine: Del Rey, New York

Lemonick, Michael. D.(2001) “How it all Ends” Time  No. 25 June 25, pp 44 -52)

Updated

March 7, 2006

Rosemary Horton

M.Sc; B.A. (Hons) Grad Dip Ed; Grad Dip Lib; Grad Dip Women's Studs

Visitors