Neil deGrasse Tyson is the most famous American astrophysicist and popularizer of science. Since 1996 he has been director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York, part of the American Museum of Natural History. In the United States, is known as one of the people who “killed Pluto” and took away his planet status. The authorities of New Mexico has so far refused to recognize the new classification of Pluto. Neil deGrasse Tyson has written 12 books about outer space, and in April on the National Geographic Channel launched its Scientific talkshow “StarTalk.”
We had a chance to talk to him, so read on to find out what he has to say about the …
… the growing popularity of movements rejecting learning how antyszczepionkowcy, opponents of GMOs or creationists. How can these people get to use rational arguments, and if at all possible is a discussion when one side does not recognize the scientific facts?
Neil deGrasse Tyson: Science is not for me a source of conflict, but something what stimulates and strengthens our intellect. It should also be noted that not all motions challenging the teachings are based on religion, for example antyszczepionkowy movement, opponents of GMOs, or the person questioning global warming. Here, on the one hand and political pressure, on the other, the fear of science. People reject the scientific and not always at the root of such a reaction we find religion.
So, if someone says to me “I do not want any food that has been genetically modified,” I answer, “All right, but then we must remove 95 % of our food, because it has been genetically modified by centuries of agriculture. We changed the flora and fauna to satisfy our culinary needs. So if someone is opposed to laboratory modifications, that’s fine, but it is an arbitrary decision. After changing the food since we have such a possibility, that since the advent of the Agriculture, just after the last ice age. “
Do not get involved in the debate, but I emphasize those things that a person can not take into account . In my experience, when you do so, such a person will gain a new perspective, new insights and knowledge.
… the world and technology for 100 years. Are scientists are able to predict the further development of civilization?
We can learn a lot by looking at how people in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries imagined future. Recall how the world looked in 1900 – had already created cars and internal combustion engine, were common bikes and railway. And now imagine that I read the actual letter sent to the newspaper at the end of 1899 in which it is written: “It is difficult to imagine that the transport and communication in the twentieth century may be more advanced than in the nineteenth century.”. Of course, three years later, the first aircraft.
So I am not sure if anyone is able to predict the development of science in a hundred years. I wish we were then able to feed humanity, beat all the deadly virus. I wish we were looking for, still sought, because if we stop, we might as well go back to the cave. I imagine that in the future we will travel through space as one nation, as in the TV series “Star Trek,” because there will be no countries, only a united Earth. Of course, this sounds like utopia, but considering what we did a hundred years ago, I think it is to achieve.
But this did not happen, if people reject science and technology, because it will stop the development of civilization. Over the centuries, there have been moments in the history of countries and cultures, when people reject science and wants to then nothing new has happened, people streamed into apathy.
… fear of science. Since we launched the Large Hadron Collider, does not have to fear that the uprising in the black hole that will lead to the end of the world?
We have to realize that when we build a device that allows to observe the nature of the new , previously unavailable ways – whether it be a microscope or telescope – we always want this to be bigger than all the previous ones. The history of science confirms that the larger tool will allow us to make new discoveries. Therefore constantly build bigger and bigger telescopes and microscopes getting stronger, and particle accelerators.
Do not specialize in particle physics, so I do not know what we should expect from a more powerful accelerators, but I know that there are at to some theories. One of them is particularly interesting, because it says that black holes exist in higher dimensions, we disclose at higher energy levels, which have not yet reached the Large Hadron Collider. Wychwycilibyśmy then their existence. This is very interesting, because of the black hole’s gravity wylewałaby up.
People may also worry that he Hadron Collider will create a black hole, and so come the end of the world. This is certainly not the case, because the high-energy particles circling around us all the time and they have a lot more energy than accelerator built by us. So if such molecules in the accelerator would create a black hole, we can conclude that it would appear already naturally without our help. Thus, the mere fact that a black hole is not yet led to the end of the world is the best proof that we are safe.
… regret abandoning humanity space exploration plans. What can make you start to do it again? Are private companies such as SpaceX, can help us?
This is not the end, so that we have abandoned plans for space exploration, rather I would say that it is very, very much slowed. I remember the 60s, when President Kennedy said, “In this decade we land on the moon,” but if he had instead said, “We’ll go to the moon, sometime in the next 40 years,” no one would find that we are ever succeed. Just what I now missing – determining urgent goals.
That said, NASA is currently working on a boat that will take us back to the moon and then to Mars. Moreover, in December 2014 was the first test of the Orion capsule, during which created great start recording and recovery of the capsule after landing. This reminds me that in the past we were doing these things all the time, so I’m glad that we’re back to that again.
As for private companies, I do not think that they paved the way, because either they are not unable to do so, or simply do not want to. You know, if you want to do in space, something that no one had ever tried it, then you must be prepared for a difficult conversation with investors:
– Okay, how much will it cost?
– I do not know exactly, but certainly a lot.
– Is this project is dangerous?
– Yes.
– Did someone lose his course of life?
– Probably.
– How much can potentially earn on your investment?
– I do not know, probably nothing.
Typically, such meeting with the investor ends up in 30 seconds. In this situation, governments must be pioneers, because they are not obliged to a note of the return on investment at the end of the next quarter. A lot can plan ahead, so you will create and only patent new inventions. Learn, figuratively speaking, where the wind blows, sketch maps and pave the optimal route. Only then can give the reins to private entrepreneurs, who will perform these, then not routine in a way typical of private companies – by minimizing costs. So if you have a bright future waiting for us in the universe, we must first create a partnership between governments, which lead the way and private companies that will enter as soon as we define the exact degree of risk and possible returns on investment.
By the way, if you’re rich enough, it now could go to Mars. However, this would be a one-time project, and we want more stable business model such flights. Plus it is worth noting that the first tryliarderem the world will be a man who invents how we can extract the natural resources of asteroids.
… pointless re-flight to the moon. In the end, if not already seen everything he has to offer us?
Many people are of the opinion that the flights to the moon do not make sense, but no one who thinks so, there is a geologist. The moon still has some interesting secrets, for example, on the south polar craters are the edges of which are so high that sunlight never reaches the inside of them. There is evidence that their bottom there is water – although frozen, but it’s still water. So if we were to establish a colony on the moon, it is close to such a crater. Then, by means of machines wyciągalibyśmy water, which would not only be a necessary element to sustain life, but also could break the H2O into hydrogen and oxygen and thus receive rocket fuel. Then we will have a station outside the Earth’s atmosphere.
So there are things we can do on the moon and Mars are impossible. Sam, of course, I would prefer that we flew to Mars, but that’s because I’m a romantic and intrigued by the possibility that life once existed there. However, does not cancel the flights to the Moon and eventually my answer is: polećmy everywhere. Do not just keep one goal at the expense of the other.
Take the example of the formation of the motorway network in the United States, which is a lesson for the rest of Germany. What would happen if we said then: “Let’s build a highway from New York to Los Angeles, and that’s it.” No! It’s not like developing the infrastructure of the country. We have to build highways everywhere, through the mountains and valleys, and then the people themselves know what worth doing in these places. My idea is to explore the cosmos we took tourists to the moon, asteroids sent miners, flew to Mars to look for life, landed on the comet, because it is incredibly cool, and then left it there the probe, because maybe one day some commentaries will be heading towards the earth, and it would be good to change its flight path. Let the whole solar system will be our home, because it will change the whole of humanity.
… presenting science in popular culture, especially in the movies.
This is what the “StarTalk” to connect to popular culture and science. It is also in the mix a lot of play, in the end, my co-host is a comedian. This does not mean that we tell jokes – rather, we are trying to be humorous observations on the relationship between science and popular culture.
I did not expect that my posts on Twitter about the films “Gravity” and “Interstellar” are so popular. This made me realize that people are interested in how science is portrayed in the movies. Maybe this is the time when viewers start to pay attention to this and ask the creators of “scientific Dopracowaliście page of your film?”. It may be a new requirement for the upcoming production.
When my guest was Christopher Nolan mail many critical comments about the “Interstellar”, but most of what I said, it was that the audience knew for what science should pay attention to the elements. I am not from this, to tell people what they like and what not. I just want to talk about science and provoke the people behind such films as “Interstellar” to say about it too. So I expect that more artists like Christopher Nolan, will did films in which science is the center of attention.
… fear of ignorance, because we will never be able to understand everything. Is not it a common feeling?
We know that there are regions of the universe, which no one understands. Does it make me feel lost and helpless? Many read about the history of science, and pay attention to it, as in the past, people have struggled with issues that Solutions for granted now. For example, that the Earth is not the center of the universe. The discovery of this took mankind thousands of years so who am I to say “I do not know what dark matter is, so I go home worried.” No! I do not know what dark matter is, so I’ll be working on it, it might me able to finally find out. And even if not, then maybe it to someone else, and this is also exciting. As a scientist, you can not be afraid of the questions, you need to learn to love the questions any more than you love answers. Only then will become a real scientist.
… the study of human behavior. Because what is more difficult to understand – the universe, or the people?
People are complicated in ways that contradict the laws of nature. That’s why I prefer to explore the universe, than human behavior. It intrigued me and I am pleased that we have a whole branch of science that deal with it. An interesting philosophical question is whether the mind is able to understand himself. I noticed, however, that most of the problems in the world due to the fact that people do not understand each other, not because scientists do not understand the universe. At least for this reason, people are more complicated than the laws of physics.
No comments:
Post a Comment