Such, in outline, but even more purposeless, more void of meaning, is the world which Science presents for our belief. Amid such a world, if anywhere, our ideals henceforward must find a home. That man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspirations, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, and that the whole temple of Man's achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins—all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair can the soul's habitation henceforth be safely built.
Brief and powerless is Man's life, on him and all his race the slow, sure doom falls pidless and dark....
To which I say softly, Wow! The guy has a point. Steven Weinberg put it more succinctly: "The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it seems pointless." Now we are surely humbled.
There are also those who go all the way in the other direction, who view the effort to understand the universe as not at all humbling but exalting. This group yearns to "know the mind of God" and says that by so doing we become a crucial part of the whole process. Thrillingly, we are restored to our rightful place at the center of the universe. Some philosophers of this ilk go so far as to say that the world is a product of the human mind's constructions; others, a bit more modest, say that our mind's very existence, even on the infinitesimal speck of an ordinary planet, must be a crucial part of the Grand Plan. To which I say, very softly now, that it's nice to be needed.
But I prefer a combination of the two approaches, and if we're going to work God in here somewhere, let's call on the folks who have given us so many memorable images of Her. So here is the script for the last scene in Hollywood's loving transmutation of this book.
***
The hero is the president of the Astrophysics Society, the only person ever to win three Nobel Prizes. He stands at night on the beach, legs planted wide, shaking his fist at the jeweled blackness of the sky. Anointed by his humanity, aware of mankind's most powerful achievements, he shouts at the universe above the sound of crashing waves. "I have created you. You are the product of my mind—my vision and my invention. It is I who provide you with reason, with purpose, with beauty. Of what use are you but for my consciousness and my constructions, which have revealed you?"
A fuzzy swirling light appears in the sky, and a beam of radiance illuminates our man-on-the-beach. To the solemn and climactic chords of the Bach B Minor Mass, or perhaps the piccolo solo of Stravinsky's "Rites," the light in the sky slowly configures itself into Her Face, smiling, but with an expression of infinite sweet sadness.
Fade to black. Roll credits.
Acknowledgments
We believe it was Anthony Burgess (or was it Burgess Meredith?) who proposed an amendment to the Constitution that would prohibit an author from including in his acknowledgments a thank you to his wife for typing the manuscript. Our wives don't do typing, so you are spared that here. There are thanks to be given, however.
Michael Turner a theorist and cosmologist, pored over the manuscript for subtle errors in theory (and some not so subtle); he caught many, fixed them, and steered us back on course. Given the experimental bias of the book, it was as if Martin Luther had asked the pope to proofread his ninety-five theses. Mike, if there are residual errors, blame the editors.
The Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (and its patron saint in Washington, the U.S. Department of Energy) provided much of the inspiration and not a little of the mechanical support.
Willis Bridegam, librarian of Amherst College, made special resources of the Robert Frost Library and the Five College system available to us. Karen Fox provided creative research.
We suspect that Peg Anderson, our manuscript editor became so embroiled in the subject that she asked all the right questions, and in so doing, she earned her battlefield commission as an honorary M.S. in physics.
Kathleen Stein, Omnis incomparable interview editor assigned the interview from which sprang the germ of the book. (Or was it a virus?)
Lynn Nesbit had more faith in the project than we did.
And John Sterling, our editor sweated the whole thing out. We hope that whenever he sits down in a warm bath, he'll think of us, and scream something appropriate.
Leon M. Lederman
Dick Teresi
A Note on History and Sources
When scientists talk about history, one must be alert. It isn't history as a professional, scholarly historian of science would write it. One could call it "fake history." The physicist Richard Feynman called it conventionalized myth-history. Why? Scientists (certainly this scientist) use history as part of pedagogy. "See, here is a sequence of scientific events. First there was Galileo, then Newton and this apple..." Of course, that isn't the way it happens. There are crowds of others who help and hinder. The evolution of a new concept in science can be enormously complicated—and was even in the days before faxes. A quill pen can do plenty of damage.
In Newton's time there was a dense literature of published articles, books, correspondence, lectures. Priority battles (who gets the credit for being the first to make a discovery) go back long before Newton. Historians sort all of this out and create a vast and rich literature about the people and concepts. However; from the point of view of storytelling, myth-history has the great virtue of filtering out the noise of real life.
As for sources, when one sums up the knowledge gained over five decades working in physics, it is difficult to pin down the precise source of every fact, quote, or piece of information. There may, in fact, be no source for some of the best stories in science, but they have become such a part of the collective consciousness of scientists that they are "true," whether or not they ever happened. Still, we hit some books, and for the benefit of the reader here are some of the better ones. This is by no means a complete list, nor do we mean to imply that the following publications are the original or best sources for the information cited. I list them in no particular order except the whim of an experimentalist...
I profited from several biographies of Newton, especially the version by John Maynard Keynes and Never at Rest by Richard Westfall (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981). Abraham Pais's Inward Bound: Of Matter and Forces in the Physical World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986) was an invaluable source, as was the classic A History of Science by Sir William Dampier (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1948). The recent biographies Schrodinger: Life and Thought by Walter Moore (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) and Uncertainty: The Life and Science of Werner Heisenberg by David Cassidy (New York: W. H. Freeman, 1991) were also of great help, as were The Life and Times of Tycho Brake by John Allyne Gade (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1947), Galileo at Work: His Scientific Biography by Stillman Drake (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), Galileo Heretic by Pietro Redondi (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987), and Enrico Fermi, Physicist by Emilio Segre (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970). We are indebted to Heinz Pagels for two books: The Cosmic Code (New York: Simon & Schuster; 1982) and Perfect Symmetry (New York: Simon & Schuster; 1985), and to Paul Davies for Superforce (New York: Simon & Schuster; 1984).
Some books by nonscientists provided anecdotes, quotes, and other valuable information—most notably Scientific Temperaments by Philip J. Hilts (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1982) and The Second Creation: Makers of the Revolution in Twentieth-Century Physics by Robert P. Crease and Charles C. Mann (New York: Macmillan, 1986).
The Very Beginning scenario, as mentioned in the text, i
s more philosophy than physics. University of Chicago theorist/cosmologist Michael Turner says this is a reasonable guess. Charles C. Mann supplied some nice details on the remarkable number 137 in his Omni magazine article, entitled, oddly enough, "137." We consulted a number of sources for the beliefs of Democritus, Leucippus, Empedocles, and the other pre-Socratic philosophers: Bertrand Russell's A History of Western Philosophy (New York: Touchstone, 1972); W. K. C. Guthrie's The Greek Philosophers: From Thales to Aristotle (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960) and A History of Greek Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978); Frederick Copleston's A History of Philosophy: Greece & Rome (New York: Doubleday, 1960); and The Portable Greek Reader, edited by W. H. Auden (Viking Press, 1948).
Many dates and details were checked with The Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles C. Gillispie (New York: Scribner's, 1981), a multivolume set that can cost one many enjoyable hours in the library.
Miscellaneous sources include Johann Kepler (Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1931), which is a series of papers, and Chemical Atomism in the Nineteenth Century by Alan J. Rocke (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1984). Bertrand Russell's gloomy quote in Chapter 9 was taken from A Free Man's Worship (1923).
Index
Abdera, [>], [>]
Accelerators, particle, [>], [>]–[>], [>]–[>], [>], [>]
acronyms for, [>]
and birth of universe, [>]–[>], [>]
and cathedrals, [>]–[>]
detectors for, [>]–[>]
bubble chamber, [>]–[>], [>]
in CERN quest for W's, [>]
cloud chamber, [>], [>]–[>]
at Fermilab, [>]–[>]
and J/psi discovery, [>], [>]–[>]
proportional wire chamber, [>]
scintillation counters, [>]–[>]
spark chamber, [>]
energy levels of, [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
existing labs for, [>]
at Fermilab, [>]–[>], [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>]–[>], [>] (see also Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory)
of 1990s, [>]
in orbit around earth, [>]
as particle factories, [>]
and race for high voltage, [>]–[>]
results from, [>]–[>]
pions, [>]
production of new particles, [>]–[>]
scattering, [>]
size consideration in, [>]
technical breakthroughs for
cascade acceleration, [>]
phase stability, [>]–[>]
strong focusing, [>]–[>]
superconductivity, [>]–[>], [>], [>]
types of
colliding-beam, [>]–[>]
cyclotron, [>]–[>], [>], [>]
electron/positron vs. proton, [>], [>]
synchrocyclotron, [>]–[>]
synchrotron, [>]–[>], [>]–[>]
vacuum tube for, [>]–[>]
and Van de Graaf generator, [>]
See also specific accelerators and locations
Action-at-a-distance, [>]
and electromagnetic waves, [>]
and EPR thought experiment, [>]–[>]
and fields, [>] (see also Fields of force)
as problem, [>], [>], [>]
Aether, [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>]–[>], [>]
Ahab (Moby Dick), [>]
Alpha (1/137), [>], [>], [>]
Alpha particles, [>]–[>], [>], [>],
[>], [>]–[>], [>], [>]
Ampère, André, [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>]–[>]
Anaximander, [>]–[>], [>]
Anaximenes, [>]–[>], [>]
Anderson, Carl, [>], [>], [>], [>]
Angular distribution, [>]
Annihilation, in particle collisions, [>]–[>]
Antikaon, neutral, [>]
Antileptons, [>]
Antimatter, [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>]
Antimuon, [>], [>]–[>]
Antineutrino, [>], [>]
Antiparticles, [>], [>]
Antiproton, [>], [>]–[>], [>]
and accelerator, [>], [>]
in Fermilab accelerator; [>], [>]
from photon, [>]
Antiquarks, [>], [>]
Archimedes, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Aristotelians, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Aristotle, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]–[>]
Aspect, Alan, [>]
Astrology, [>]
Astronomy, [>]
and Big Science, [>]
and Brahe, [>]–[>]
and Galileo's discovery, [>]
and Kepler, [>]–[>]
Astrophysics
and accelerators, [>]
and Big Bang model, [>]–[>] (see also Big Bang)
and gravity, [>]
and particle physics, [>], [>]
progress in, [>]
Asymptotic freedom, [>]–[>]
A-tom (uncuttable particle), [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
and accelerators, [>]
Boscovich on, [>], [>], [>]
and chemical atom, [>], [>]
contemporary version of, [>], [>]–[>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Democritus's view of, [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>] (see also Atomos)
electron as, [>]
and proton, [>]
Atom, modern conception of, [>], [>], [>]–[>]
Bohr's model of, [>]–[>], [>]
and Daiton, [>], [>]–[>]
and electrical force, [>], [>]–[>], [>]
electron shells in, [>]–[>]
energy needed to crack, [>]
Faraday on, [>]
as invisible, [>]–[>]
Maxwell on, [>]–[>]
nuclear, [>]
and periodic table, [>], [>]
and quantum theory, [>], [>]
research on, [>]
Rutherford's model of, [>]–[>], [>], [>]
spectral lines from, [>]
splitting of, [>]
in turn-of-century physics, [>], [>], [>]
Zukav on, [>]
See also Electron; Nucleus
Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), [>]
Atomism, [>]–[>]
and Boyle's experiment, [>]
and Descartes, [>]
and empty space, [>]
Galileo on, [>], [>]
and Lavoisier [>], [>]
and Newton, [>]–[>], [>]
and reductionism, [>]
Atomos (atom of Democritus), [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
and Daiton, [>], [>]
and medieval authority, [>]
and motion, [>]
and simplicity, [>]
Babel, Tower of, [>]
Barium sulfide, and Galileo, [>]
Barometer, invention of, [>]
Baryon number; [>], [>], [>]
Baryons, [>], [>]–[>], [>]
Beauty (bottom) quark, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Becquerel, Antoine, [>], [>]
Becquerel rays, [>]
Bell, John, [>]–[>]
Bell Telephone Laboratories, [>], [>]
Bernardini, Gilberto, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Berra, Yogi, [>], [>]
Beta decay, [>], [>]
inverse, [>]
Beta particles, [>]
Bethe, Hans, [>], [>]
Bevatron, [>], [>], [>]
Big Bang, [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>]
and basic particles, [>]
black body radiation from, [>]
cooling after, [>]
inflationary, [>]–[>]
and neutrinos, [>]
temperatures after, [>]
time transpired since, [>]
Big Crunch, [>], [>]
Big Science, [>]–[>], [>]–[>]
and exotic particles, [>]
origin of, [>]–[>]
Bjorken, James, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Black body radiation, [
>]–[>]
Bohr, Niels Henrik David, [>], [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>]
Booth, Eugene, [>]
Born, Max, [>], [>]–[>]
Boscovich, Roger Joseph, [>], [>], [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Bose, S. N., [>]
Bosons, [>]
gauge, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Higgs, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]–[>] (see also Higgs field or particle)
X, [>]
Bottom (beauty) quark, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
Bound state, [>]–[>]
Boyle, Robert, [>]–[>], [>]
Brahe, Tycho, [>]–[>], [>], [>]
Bronowski, Jacob, quoted, [>]
Brookhaven accelerator laboratory, [>], [>], [>]
characteristics of accelerators at, [>], [>], [>], [>]
experiments at, [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
and Isabelle project, [>], [>]–[>]
neutrino beams at, [>]
and standard model, [>]
and strong focusing, [>]–[>]
Brown, Charles, [>]
Brownian motion, [>]
Bubble chamber [>]–[>], [>]
Bubble universes, [>], [>]
Budkec, Gershon, [>]–[>]
Bunsen, Robert, [>], [>]
Bush, Vannevar, [>]
Calculus, Newton's invention of, [>]–[>]
Cambridge Electron Accelerator, [>]
"Candle and the Universe, The" (Lederman lecture), [>]
Capra, Fritjof, [>], [>]
Cascade acceleration, [>]
Cathode ray experiments, [>]–[>]
Causality crisis, [>]
Causation
and Aristotle, [>]
and purpose, [>]–[>]
Cavendish Laboratory, [>], [>], [>], [>]
CERN (European Center for Nuclear Research), [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>], [>]
accelerator at, [>]–[>], [>], [>], [>]
ISR, [>]–[>], [>]
The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question? Page 52
