Towards the end of his life, the great historian of science
Thomas S. Kuhn turned for pleasure to detective fiction. Having
exhausted himself in the controversies that he had sparked about
the growth of knowledge, the physicist-turned-philosopher explained
in a late-in-life interview
that he still enjoyed the unambiguous solution of a good mystery.
As his scholar daughter said to him one day, "It's the
only thing I can read that doesn't feel like work." "That's
it!" replied her pop.
The rest of us, holiday-seeking-busmen of a more ordinary
stripe, may enjoy reading stories in which scientists themselves
are the detectives. We are all part-time epistemologists, after
all, especially we reporters. At least four unusually interesting
books about great scientific investigations have come across
my desk recently, three of them by journalists and the fourth
by a leading professional historian.
Why should persons interested in economics -- say, in development
economics in countries as different as Vietnam or Venezuela
-- read the history of technology and science at all? Because,
among other reasons, it is in the growth of knowledge that economic
history begins.
Before you can think very hard about the choices people make,
you have to know something about how the choices that are available
to them change over time. That's where science and technology
come in -- technology first, then, more powerfully, science.
To know something about how new knowledge happens is
to know something of how it diffuses.
There is, for example, the very readable short biography of
Isaac Newton
by former New York Times science reporter James Gleick. "He
pushed open a door that led to a new universe," writes
Gleick: "set in absolute time and space, at once measureless
and measurable, furnished with science and machines, ruled by
industry and natural law."
So what's it worth to you to know that gravity started out
in young Isaac's notebooks as half a linked pair, gravity
and levity? -- gravity meaning the tendency to descend
downwards, levity the tendency to rise, as sparks fly up from
a fire.
Here you can follow the adventures of Newton's mind as he
discards the possibility that the "matter causing gravity"
must "pass through all the pores of a body" until
it reaches the "large cavitys and inanitys to containe
it in" in the "bowels of the earth," before mysteriously
ascending to the periphery again, lest "all the streames
meet on all sides in the midst of the Earth" and become
"coarcted into a narrow roome & closely press together."
Before your eyes you see the strike-overs in his notebooks.
Of a cannonball: "violent motion is made
continued either by the aire or by motion force
imprest or by the natural gravity in the body moved." Eventually
the concept of gravity as a force emerges, a theory so
fully integrated with mathematical experimentation that it is
considered by insiders to have been proved. But not before Newton
has inquired into virtually every kind of phenomenon readily
accessible to the senses in the 17th century: rainbows and tides,
comets and coins, magnets and vacuums, salts and sulphurs, not
to mention the plague, the Bible, and the odds of dice.
Gleick takes special pains to locate Newton in his times and
to make clear that, in many respects, he belonged to the pre-Newtonian
world. He was born in 1642, twenty six years after Shakespeare's
death. He spent almost as much time on alchemy as on physics.
He was immersed in scientific quarrels, religious controversies
and, as Master of the Royal Mint in his later years, obscure
matters of monetary policy.
Indeed, Gleick sides with John Maynard Keynes, who insisted
that "Newton was not the first of the age of reason. He
was the last of the magicians, the last of the Babylonians and
Sumerians, the last great mind which looked out on the visible
and intellectual world with the same eyes as those who began
to build our intellectual inheritance less than 10,000 years
ago."
If there is a shortcoming in the story here, it has to do
with the possibility that, unless you are related to him --
he had three half-sisters -- you may not feel any very pressing
need to reconsider the significance of Isaac Newton to our lives
and times. What he learned, writes Gleick, "has entered
the marrow of what we know without knowing how we know it."
But for the author of "Chaos: Making a New Science"
and "Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman,"
Newton was an obvious choice, and Gleick is a superb writer,
if slightly hyperbolic reporter.
A guy who doesn't get enough credit is Adam Smith's old friend
and literary executor James Hutton. Jack Repcheck does him justice
in The
Man Who Found Time: James Hutton and the Discovery of the Earth's
Antiquity. Hutton was a leading figure in the Scottish Enlightenment,
a remarkable intellectual conjunction of intellectuals in Edinburgh
that included Smith, Hutton, David Hume and Joseph Black, the
discoverer of carbon dioxide.
In the social context of this "Athens of the North,"
Repcheck describes the series of controversies among natural
historians of the earth that led to Hutton's "breathtaking
discovery" at Siccar Point along the coast of the Firth
of Forth south of Edinburgh in 1788 -- a certain pattern of
older rock amidst the new that demonstrated irrefutably, at
least to trained minds, that the earth was immeasurably old.
This was explosive news in world in which church fathers reckoned
from counting the Bible's "begats" that the Creation
had occurred no more than 6000 years before. And the infant
science of geology in short order led to paleontology -- all
those peculiar fossil bones -- and in due course to the theory
of evolution. Repcheck's account is as thrilling a story as
any adventure of Sherlock Holmes, and a whole lot easier to
read than historian Charles Coulston Gillispie's 1951 classic,
Genesis
and Geology.
Even more obscure is Leon Foucault. He is brought to life,
however, by Amir D. Aczel in Pendulum:
Leon Foucault and the Triumph of Science. It was the self-taught
physicist Foucault who, in 1851, with a pendulum suspended from
the ceiling of the Panthéon in Paris, demonstrated conclusively
to a crowd of notables including the future emperor of France
Napoleon III, that the earth revolves on its axis.
Big deal, you say? How Gallic? Hadn't Galileo, Copernicus
and Giordano Bruno made all that perfectly clear? And yet the
effect of Foucault's experiment was profound. Church scholars
finally abandoned their half-hearted defense of the Biblical
view of a stationary earth and embraced the heliocentric, Copernican
interpretation of the universe as a result of his demonstration.
Modernity was permitted to proceed.
Various smug certainties on the part of those demi-gods of
abstraction, Laplace and Poissin, were overturned as well. Another
chapter was written in the long relationship between the mathematical
and the experimental traditions.
Perhaps most significant, Foucault invented the gyroscope
in the course of his investigations, a device that maintains
its direction in space even as the earth rotates beneath it.
For 47 years the gyroscope remained a toy -- until an Austrian
engineer rediscovered it and, having learned to keep it spinning
with the application of a little electricity instead of a string,
used it to steer a torpedo, whereupon a considerable guidance
industry was born.
Aczel, trained as a mathematician, is a truly gifted storyteller.
Pendulum is constructed around a beautiful little map
of the triangle of left bank locations with the Luxembourg Gardens
where the story unfolded -- Foucault's house, the Observatoire
de Paris and the Panthéon. To read it is a near-substitute
for a quick visit to Paris.
But the greater triumph of the book is to provide a glimpse
of science being done in a national capital -- a neighborhood
where men of political power routinely go to lunch with those
who have won their influence through intellectual achievement.
From the coup d'état that established it in 1851 to the
defeat of the French army by the Prussians near the little town
of Sedan that ended it in 1870, the Second Empire was a remarkable
efflorescence, as colorful and distinctive as the uniform of
a Zouave.
That leads directly to Einstein's
Clocks and Poincare's Maps: Empires of Time, by Harvard
University historian Peter Galison. And this is a very special
work. Where the first three books involve the retelling of old
stories, Galison's effort involves the creation of much that
is new. He, too, is interested in the nexus between the practical
and the theoretical. And to illuminate it, he chose an apparently
simple problem -- the synchronization of clocks.
"If you want to synchronize two clocks," writes
Galison, "you have to start with one, flash a signal to
the other, and adjust for the time that the flash takes to arrive.
What could be simpler?" Yet with the solution to the clock-coordinating
problem -- or rather the non-solution of it -- the last piece
of a great puzzle fell into place, he says. Relativity replaced
the concept of absolute time, and Albert Einstein supplanted
Isaac Newton as the figure who had penetrated nature's deepest
mysteries.
All this went forward under the stimulus of commercial development
-- and a great race for supremacy to establish standards in
technologies such as railroads and telegraphy among the English,
the Germans, the French and the Americans. Galison writes:
"It was a world where the highest reaches of theoretical
physics stood hard by a fierce modern ambition to lay time-bearing
cables over the whole of the planet to choreograph trains and
complete maps. It was a world where engineers, philosophers
and physicists rubbed shoulders; where the mayor of New York
City discoursed on the conventionality of time, where the Emperor
of Brazil waited by the ocean's edge for the telegraphic arrival
of European time; and where two of the century's leading scientists,
Albert Einstein and Henri Poincaré, put simultaneity
at competing crossroads of physics, philosophy and technology."
The economic forks in the roads came only a little later.
Einstein's Clocks and Poincaré's Maps is a genuinely
difficult book, not made any easier by the political arguments
and fads that bedevil the history of science in the present
day -- the same arguments that drove Tom Kuhn to detective fiction
twenty years ago. But if you want to know something about what
goes on at the highest levels of science -- about what it means
to catch up, thrust ahead, fall behind -- it is a terrific goad
to meditation.
A few years ago the journalist John Crewdson wrote something
similar about the battle between French and American scientists
in the 1980s for priority in the identification of the AIDS
virus. That was an even harder book than this. But then that's
the point. A hundred years ago economic development was about
electrodynamics. Today it is about software and biotechnology.
I am not suggesting that you need to read all this. But a
nation that doesn't train people to speak these languages has
no strong stake in the development game. And an economic historian
who doesn't have some sense of the impact of the growth of knowledge
on ordinary lives is no historian at all.
* * *
Incidentally, I was informed last week that Milton Friedman
in his stocking feet rose to 5'3" as an adult -- something
more than "barely five feet tall," as I wrote last
week when I was unable to locate a more precise measurement
of the little giant. It isn't the size, it's what you do with
it.