Just Because We Want the World to be Pretty, Doesn't Mean It Is.
By: Stephanie Ross
The quest for a Theory of Everything represents an unnecessary, but ambitious endeavor to unify the fundamental forces of nature. The idea that there exists a single “pretty” framework capable of explaining all the phenomena in the cosmos reflects humanity's intrinsic desire to uncover the underlying aesthetic principles that govern our existence.
At the heart of the Theory of Everything is the hope to unify the four fundamental forces of nature: gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. This unification not only promises a more comprehensive understanding of the universe, but also holds an aesthetic allure. The idea that diverse phenomena, from the graceful orbits of planets to the complex behavior of subatomic particles, can be elegantly summed up within a single framework speaks to our desire for unity and simplicity.
Albert Einstein's quest for a unified theory of gravity and electromagnetism began with the theory of general relativity. It replaced the Newtonian theory of gravity with a more elegant and comprehensive explanation that resonates with our sense of aesthetic satisfaction. Additionally, Einstein's famous equation, E=mc², is a representation of the aesthetic appeal of simplicity. The Theory of Everything, if discovered, is expected to be expressed in a set of equations that elegantly capture the fundamental principles of the universe. Scientists are hoping that these equations, like Einstein's, will likely be celebrated not only for their explanatory power but also for their aesthetic beauty and simplicity.
The pursuit of the Theory of Everything embodies how scientists are drawn to the elegance of equations, the beauty of symmetry, and the unity of theories. But when scientists search for an answer to the universe based on how they think the world should work, they are leaving themselves open to the potential of blinding themselves to how the world does work. It has been reflected in the history of science that humans can be blinded by what they want to see. In psychology, this is the idea of confirmation bias: the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories.
One example of this is the narrative we have surrounding the egg and the sperm. The original narrative around how the egg and the sperm works was that the egg was a “passive” actor, with many feminine traits; whereas, the sperm was an “active” actor and had many masculine traits. It wasn't until later on that research showed that the egg had a much more active role than originally believed. The egg’s influence wasn't originally seen because scientists were never looking for the female organ to have non feminine traits. Early scientific knowledge was influenced by societal views, biases, and cultural norms that marginalized the female role in reproduction. Historical scientists, let what they saw confirm their existing beliefs of the females being passive actors. By correcting those societal views, we allow ourselves to open our minds towards the real truth, and not just what we think the truth should be. More about this can be read in Emily Martin’s The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male Female Roles.
The Theory of Everything is a concept that scientists made up, because they want to believe that the world is “pretty”. As Sabine Hossenfeld says “scientific history teaches us that [scientists] method of guessing some pretty piece of math and hoping it’s useful for something is extremely unpromising”. Imparting world views onto your hypothesis, whether implicitly or not, can lead scientists astray. Maybe when scientists shift their view of how the world may or may not work, they will open themselves up to a new breakthrough in physics.
Citations
Hossenfelder, S. (2020, July 1). Do we need a theory of everything?. Backreaction. http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2020/07/do-we-need-theory-of-everything.html
Martin, E.(Spring, 1991). The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical MaleFemale Roles. Chicago Journals. https://web.stanford.edu/~eckert/PDF/Martin1991.pdf
Simkus, J. (2021, June). Confirmation Bias In Psychology: Definition & Examples. SimplyPsychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/confirmation-bias.html
Comments
Post a Comment