Letters from an Astrophysicist
Page 13
For some people, the search for meaning leads to violence, abuse of others, and crime. These people range from selfish to misanthropic. But those traits are not the unique province of non-religious people. The world is no stranger to religious warfare—with abject slaughter of countless innocents in the name of one god or another. So your supposition that one needs God to behave or to give meaning to life—while it may be true for many people—is certainly not a pre-requisite to a fulfilling, law-abiding life.
I add that if I help an old lady across the street, it’s because she needs help and I can provide it, not because I am expecting rewards for having done so, either in this life or in heaven. My motivation is simply to create meaning and self worth—not only in my own life, but in the lives of others.
Finally, deeply religious people sometimes ask, “Without God, why should people be civil to one another?” or “What’s to stop people from committing crimes or even murder in the absence of divine judgment?” There is a simple answer to this: prison. That’s why laws exist, to restrain offensive behavior from person to person and between person and property. This recipe works for most people. In fact, in Europe, there are whole countries (e.g. Switzerland, The Netherlands, England, France, Sweden) where religion plays hardly any role in politics, culture, business, or family, yet they enjoy far lower rates of violent crime than in America, where more than 9 in 10 people say they are religious. In these other countries, the fraction of people who say they are religious is typically less than 1 in 10.
So rest well, whether or not you are religious, reflecting on the fact that in most western societies, religion is an aspect of culture, and not culture itself.
Best to you,
Neil deGrasse Tyson
* Correspondence with the sister of a lifelong friend.
† Owen Gingerich, The Eye of Heaven: Ptolemy, Copernicus, Kepler (Washington, DC: American Institute of Physics, 1993), 55. Epigram handwritten by Ptolemy in the manuscript of his Almagest (ca. AD 150).
‡ Name changed by request.
§ Stillman Drake, Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo (New York: Anchor, 1957), 173.
IV.
Kairos
A propitious moment for decision or action.
Chapter 10
School Days
A time and a place to learn new things, and to establish the intellectual taproots of life.
A Teacher, a Student, and a Church-State Dispute
A public middle school student recorded his science teacher giving Bible accounts of the natural world. He went public and it made headlines. Normally silent on such matters, I had to jump in, with a letter to the editor of the New York Times.
Thursday, December 21, 2006
New York Times
To the Editor:
People cited violation of the First Amendment when a New Jersey schoolteacher asserted that evolution and the Big Bang are not scientific and that Noah’s ark carried dinosaurs.
This case is not about the need to separate church and state; it’s about the need to separate ignorant, scientifically illiterate people from the ranks of teachers.
Neil deGrasse Tyson
New York City
Space Cadet
In April 2008, Ronald Ward,* an African-American middle schooler with intense interest in space since age six, sought my guidance for his upcoming science fair project. He’d been to Space Camp multiple times. He wanted to be a pilot or an astronaut and every Sunday launches his own model rockets with his dad. He also happens to suffer from a seizure disorder, which made him the brunt of teasing by his fellow students, and may force him to alter his dreams of being an aviator. They called him names like “space cadet,” “nerd,” and “geek” and told him he will never become a scientist, mathematician, or engineer, which hurt his feelings.
If he created a winning science fair project, he wondered whether the kids in school would start being nice to him. He further wondered whether kids made fun of me when I was in middle school.
Dear Ronald,
Thank you for that enthusiastic, personal note.
In my circles, we assign the playful title of “Space Cadet” with pride. And to be called a “Geek” is practically a badge of honor. Remember that one of the richest people in the world, Bill Gates, is a card-carrying Geek. So too is Mike Griffin, the head of NASA. As am I. So when your classmates make fun of you for being enthusiastic about everything aerospace, just remember that there are hundreds of thousands of us out there who understand you. And never forget that the only people who are any good at what they do in life are those who are passionate and persistent.
About your occasional seizures—they will certainly prevent you from becoming an astronaut—as do many common medical conditions, including most chronic ailments that require prescription medicine to overcome. But they will not prevent you from being smart, from being a mathematician, from being an engineer, from being a scientist, or from being the designer of airplanes and spacecraft used on the frontier of discovery.
Remember that for every astronaut in space, there are a thousand scientists and engineers who got ’em there.
I noticed from your return address that you live in the Rockies. Colorado Springs happens to be the headquarters of the Space Foundation—a kind of center of the universe for everything space. Among the many things they do is track how space technology becomes everyday products. I strongly recommend you visit them. If you do, I bet they will send you home with a box of cool stuff—pens, posters, pins, paperweights, and other ponderables that you can use in your science fair project. I know, because I served on their Board of Directors, and every time I visited their headquarters, I went home with a box full of cool stuff myself.
If you visit the Space Foundation, you will surely get to hang out, even if only briefly, with others who had flatly ignored the bone-headed peer pressure of their classmates.
Best to you, on Earth and in the universe.
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Elementary Curiosity
Friday, April 10, 2009
Dear Neil deGrasse Tyson,
I think it’s cool that you write a lot of books about the universe. I want to read them someday. I want to be an astrophysicist when I grow up, too. I am in first grade and am doing a project on my living hero. Can you answer these questions for me?
Thank you,
Gabe Mopps
1.Do you know what causes the gravitational pull of planets and their moons?
Hi Gabe,
Gravity remains a mysterious force in the universe. When objects wander near another object’s field of gravity we invoke Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, which says that gravity curves space and time. Objects simply follow those curves as they move. But aside from that, nobody knows what gravity actually is.
2.Is it really hard to research about black holes because they are invisible?
Yes. So we study what effect black holes have on their surrounding regions. Black holes do things to space and matter and energy that no other objects do. That’s how we can find these invisible monsters in the universe. Kind of like seeing a bear’s foot print in the snow, which tells you a bear was there even if you did not see the bear itself.
3.How do you do your research for your books on these ideas?
Read, Read, Read. Think. Think. Think. Read, Read, Read.
4.I find all of these things really interesting.
So do I.
5.I heard that you might be head of NASA.
Heard the same thing. Just rumors.
Your friend,
Gabe Mopps
Thanks, Gabe, for your interest.
And as we say in the universe, keep looking up!
Neil
Look But Don’t Touch
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Mr. Tyson,
I am 13 and I want to be an environmental engineer. But with space being the last frontier, it is good to be educated about space and nature too.
I do have one question:
Isn’t it horrible not being able to touch the stuff you look at? All you can really do is use your eyes from light years away. It must be frustrating not being able to be close enough to use your hands.
Sincerely,
Marc Jaruzel
Dear Marc,
Yes, it can be frustrating to not get one’s hands on the subject of interest. But we learn in astrophysics that the telescope is not only as good as the hands, in many ways, it’s better.
Besides, who wants to touch a quasar? Or a black hole? That would not be a particularly safe thing to do.
Sincerely,
Neil
To Know
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
How do you know what you know?
David Lunianski
Dear David,
I was in school until I was 32. And since then I read a lot. School is not only a place to learn, but a place to learn how to learn. And at its best, school should be a place to stimulate a lifetime of curiosity.
In addition, as often as I can, I seek out people smarter than I am to talk to and hang out with. My wife, for example, has a PhD in mathematical physics. She knows a ton more stuff than I do about all kinds of things. And I won’t have it any other way.
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Stigma
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Dear Dr. Tyson
I read with interest your observation (in the July 7, 2008 issue of Time magazine) that improving student performance in science and math requires removing the stigma associated with the study of these subjects.
After many years of observation, I strongly believe that a major cause of this poor performance is the low level of respect the media and society show to those who excel in science and math. After all, why would a student strive to excel in a subject that possesses little perceived value? For example, a quick reading of recent newspaper articles finds references to various people by titles such as “chef,” “officer,” “doctor,” “ranger,” etc. In fact, in the same July 7 issue of Time magazine in which your observations appeared, no “Dr.” appeared before the name of Neil deGrasse Tyson.
As a scientist with a Ph.D. in theoretical physics who has taught several thousand students over a 35-year period at the University of Minnesota, I have had many conversations with students about this subject. And, during these conversations, a scientist’s relatively low position within society was frequently cited as a reason (in addition to subject-matter difficulty) to avoid the study of science and pursue other professions that possess a higher “societal approval factor.”
As the most visible member of the scientific community, you are in a superb position to begin the process of altering the manner in which society views scientists.
Thanks for your time.
Dr. Robert Cassola
Dear Dr. Cassola,
Thanks for sharing your note about the existence or absence of respect that scientists get from the public. You make an intriguing point, but certain (repeatable) surveys, as well as some anecdotal cases I can cite, do not agree with your contention, or rather, would argue that whatever needs to be fixed, is not traceable to titles in any important way.
From Salary.com, we get a glimpse at today’s top ten most respected professions. Of course, forty years ago, soldier and policeman would have been nowhere on that list, so times have changed for them too. And as expected, lawyers, politicians, and salesmen are absent.
1.Doctor
2.Soldier
3.Teacher
4.Firefighter
5.CEO
6.Scientist
7.Engineer
8.Police Officer
9.Architect
10.Accountant
While other surveys vary slightly, scientist, as a profession, has been in the top ten for at least 30 years.
Over the decades, there has been a real phase shift in how scientists are portrayed in movies and television. The mad scientist is a fading icon. In television, the shows CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and NUMB3RS are hit prime-time network crime dramas that feature socialized, attractive, brilliant scientists (chemists, mathematicians, physicists, biologists) in leading roles. In fact, the enrollment of girls in college chemistry and mathematics has increased dramatically over the years these shows have been hits—e.g. today, 48% of all mathematics majors in college are women.
Recent American Institute of Physics (AIP) data reveal the median 12-month salary of senior professional scientists (in research academia or industry) to be twice that of the median national household income.
In my life experience, shedding the “Dr.” title helps to dissolve a communication barrier and makes people want to learn more from you—provided that your pedagogical message is one that empowers the listener’s capacity to think. If you accomplish this, they will beat a path to your door regardless of your title.
And as you know, unlike in the social sciences, in your and my professions, titles are omitted from published research papers—a tradition I have always enjoyed. I see it as a tacit recognition that, for example, an untitled graduate student might have an idea as important as that of a more senior researcher, and a reader of the paper would not necessarily know who was whom.
That being said, about 60% of my media interviews (print and broadcast) do invoke the title “Dr.” and are quite respectful about it when they do. But in both cases—when they do and when they don’t—they keep coming back to learn more about science, which is, for me, the best of all measures of respect.
There is more quality science documentary programming on television today than ever before. When you combine the broadcast calendars of PBS, Discovery Networks (including their Science Channel), National Geographic, the History Channel, and intermittent network specials on selected science subjects, the public’s exposure, appreciation, and appetite for science has grown exponentially over the years.
Of course, none of this addresses the recurring and paradoxical fact of our low test scores and other metrics of poor performance relative to that of other developed nations. But it would be hard to pin that blame on titles not being used for scientists.
So, while your concerns are sensible and precise, the above information does not support them, and in particular, argues for an opposite trend. A good thing.
Thanks for your interest.
Neil
Not a Shadow of Doubt
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Dear Dr. Tyson,
I am an Indiana State Police Officer, a big fan of scientific endeavors, and most of all, a fan of yours. I know you are a mega scientist and celebrity, but I wondered if you would speak to me about how I could use scientific applications (ie. observation techniques, crash damage investigation, investigative techniques/discoveries) in the field (on the road—not forensics). I like your thought process and would like to know if you would share a “layman” approach into how you perceive the world. My goal is to become a better Police Officer/Investigator, but at times use a different approach to get the same ends.
Maybe one day, when you are in the Chicagoland area, I can meet you personally.
Lawrence McFarrin
Dear Officer McFarrin,
Thanks for your note about trying to use science in your work. Of course the hit TV show, CSI, in its multiple incarnations (CSI: New York; CSI: Miami; CSI: Cyber), is all about using science to solve crimes, although they usually have one or two dead bodies to deal with along the way, and everyone not dead is otherwise good-looking.
In your specific case, I offer a possibly unorthodox reflection . . .
What you should do is not learn about how to apply the laws of physics to police work. Instead, you should learn the laws of physics—“Physics 101” at a local community college or university. Community colleges, as you surely know, tend to offer course schedules that knowingly accommodate working people, so they may be your best option.
When you learn about motion and gravity and forces and acce
leration and statics and thermodynamics and light and electricity, then the ways and means of how they apply to your work will become obvious to you. These are fundamental elements of car accidents, bar fights, gunshots, and almost everything else your day on the job may bring.
I’ve been asked by attorneys to estimate the time a photograph was taken (which might implicate the defendant, depending on the answer) based only on the lengths of shadows cast by the Sun within it. For that line of work, you also need an astro course: “Astro 101,” which is surely offered right alongside physics, wherever you choose to go.
The act of solving the course’s homework problems is, in a way, a slow re-wiring of your brain—ultimately empowering you to use a lens of investigation that’s forged in the operations of nature.
If you have not taken physics before, nor the math to go with it, then these classes may be hard. But if doing things “because they’re easy” were part of your identity, I don’t think you would have chosen to be a cop in the first place.
Good luck. In the end, you will not regret a moment of it.
Best to you,
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Gifted Students
In October 2004 I visited Kent State University’s Stark campus to participate in their Featured Speakers Series. In my talk I emphasized the value of hard work and ambition to success in school, job, and life. During the Q&A session, Bronwen, a student, asked about the importance of gifted education for smart kids from grades K through 12. In a letter sent a week later, she continued her commentary, noting that she, herself, was identified as “gifted” from the very beginning of elementary school and was persistently ignored by teachers, knowing she’d get an “A” without extra help from them. Because of these forces, she worried that untold numbers of gifted students would never rise to their potential. This formed an occasion for me to expand on my views as well.