Showing posts with label Einstein. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Einstein. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 30, 2015

Day 136: Book Excerpt: The Chaos Imperative



Letters started pouring in to Switzerland’s University of Bern from physicists all over Europe with questions and praise. Some came from the most esteemed scientists of the day. The letters were addressed to one Albert Einstein, who a number of months earlier had published his theory of relativity. But what the letter writers didn’t know was that Einstein didn’t work at the university. The physicists knew that he lived in Bern and just assumed he was a professor at the university there.

In fact, Einstein had nothing to do with the university. He was a patent clerk. A government worker had turned the world of physics upside down.

We all know the story of how Einstein, at a young age, made stunning advances in physics. Most of us also have heard that Einstein was a poor student and was able to make his pioneering discoveries in physics despite being completely divorced from academia.

It was almost too extraordinary to believe. A twenty-six-year-old emerges seemingly out of nowhere with a scientific theory that changes the world. That alone would have been unprecedented. But ten years later Einstein once again revolutionized physics, reinventing our understanding of gravity. Today Einstein’s name is virtually synonymous with genius.

The explanation that most of us have grown up with for Einstein’s breakthroughs is that Einstein had such a brilliant and unusual mind that he—almost magically, in a stroke of insight—saw the universe in a whole new way.
In trying to understand Einstein’s unique genius, scientists over the years initially focused on the structural nature of his brain. Einstein had such an extraordinary mind, scientists reasoned, that there must be something fundamentally different about his brain.

When Einstein died in 1953, coroner Thomas Harvey removed what had become the most famous brain in history as a matter of course; it was a regular part of the autopsy procedure. What he did next, however—putting the brain in a jar of formaldehyde, slipping the jar into a bag, and walking off with it—was not. But Harvey believed it was his duty to science and to the world to preserve Einstein’s brain in order to let researchers study it and unlock the secrets of his mind.

In the succeeding years, neuroscientists, or neuroanatomists, as they used to be called, asked Harvey for certain sections of the brain in a race to pinpoint exactly which part of Einstein’s brain was so unique.

Scientists found that Einstein had a higher-than-average concentration of neurons in the part of the brain responsible for mathematical thinking. This seemed like a promising lead. The problem with this finding, however, was that Einstein wasn’t exceptionally gifted in math. His first wife, Mileva Maric, used to check all his calculations and correct them. And while Einstein was far more accomplished in math than your average English—or math—major, his discoveries weren’t really mathematical breakthroughs. Instead, his theories of relativity reconceptualized our notions of time and space. They were more a new set of ways of looking at the universe, supported by the math, than a set of complex mathematical formulas.

Another scientist, Marian C. Diamond, discovered that Einstein had more glial cells than average. Glial cells make up the myelin layer that insulates the brain’s axons, speeding up communication between the neurons. They also function as a distribution system, bringing energy to the neurons while removing waste.

However, only in one area of Einstein’s brain was the difference in glial cells statistically significant. And since Einstein’s brain was older than the other brains Diamond compared it against, and glial cells continue to divide as we age, it was only natural that Einstein had more of them. So while his glial network conceivably could have had something to do with his genius, we simply cannot know its impact for certain.
On and on went the physiological investigations. Scientists discovered that Einstein’s brain was wider than average. On the other hand, it also weighed less than average.

In the end, the studies on Einstein’s brain proved compromised in many ways and yielded no real insight into his genius. The reality is that each of us has unique idiosyncrasies in the makeup of our brain.

Even Einstein didn’t think it was his brain that made him who he was. He once commented that the gap between what the public thought of his intellectual prowess and the reality was “grotesque.”

But if it wasn’t his brain that made the difference, what did set Einstein apart? And what does Einstein’s genius have to do with chaos?

At the University of Zurich at the turn of the twentieth century, rows of well-dressed students would have been taking copious notes, smoking, and tackling complex formulas. One student who likely would not have been in the room, however, was Einstein, who was inclined to skip class and hang out in the coffeehouses on the Bahnhofstrasse, talking about new ideas in physics with the café crowd.

In the summer, while other physics students were working in labs or helping professors publish papers, Einstein hiked the beautiful trails of the Appenzell District in the Alps. It was as if his entire year were one big, unstructured interlude.

And that is our first clue to Einstein’s genius. To all appearances, Einstein was a slacker. Granted, he was a slacker obsessed with theoretical physics, but he was a slacker nonetheless.

He couldn’t be bothered to go to class. He engendered so little confidence in his academic abilities that one of his instructors suggested he give up studying physics altogether. In a great bit of irony, when graduation rolled around, Einstein was the only unemployed member of the class of 1900. His father, Hermann, tried to call in favors to get his son a job, but to no avail.

Imagine his poor mother’s desperate concern: “You have to start going to class.” “What happened to the intelligent young man I knew?” “You know, if you worked harder, you’d be surprised by how much progress you could make.”

It’s easy to sympathize with his parents’ likely responses. Einstein’s seemingly dilettante behavior would have driven most parents to distraction.

But his parents’ misgivings were for naught. What Einstein was actually doing was exercising a very special part of his brain.

Most of us tend to have clearly defined ideas about what makes up the road to success. We value discipline and diligence, hard work, and the idea of “paying your dues.” Unstructured time just “hanging out” is for teenagers with too much time on their hands, we think, and for surfer bums. Most of us need to pay attention, study hard, and learn.

But that’s not what Einstein did at all. As we’ll see, Einstein followed a specific process in developing his ideas—one intimately related to the chaos imperative. It is one that arguably led to his extraordinary and unpredictable brilliance. And it is one that each of us can tap into as well.

~~The Chaos Imperative: How Chance and Disruption Increase Innovation, Effectiveness and Success -by- Ori Brafman and Judah Pollack

Tuesday, September 29, 2015

Day 46 : Book Excerpt : Making Starships and Stargates

Ernst Mach, an Austrian physicist of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, is now chiefly known for Mach “numbers” (think Mustang Mach One, or the Mach 3, SR71 Blackbird). But during his lifetime, Mach was best known for penetrating critiques of the foundations of physics. In the 1880s he published a book – The Science of Mechanics – where he took Newton to task for a number of things that had come to be casually accepted about the foundations of mechanics – in particular, Newton’s notions of absolute space and time, and the nature of inertia, that property of real objects that causes them to resist changes in their states of motion.

Einstein, as a youngster, had read Mach’s works, and it is widely believed that Mach’s critiques of “classical,” that is, pre-quantum mechanical, physics deeply influenced him in his construction of his theories of relativity. Indeed, Einstein, before he became famous, had visited Mach in Vienna, intent on trying to convince Mach that atoms were real. (The work Einstein had done on Brownian motion, a random microscopic motion of very small particles, to get his doctoral degree had demonstrated the fact that matter was atomic). Mach had been cordial, but the young Einstein had not changed Mach’s mind.

Nonetheless, it was Mach’s critiques of space, time, and matter that had the most profound effect on Einstein. And shortly after the publication of his earliest papers on General Relativity Theory (GRT) in late 1915 and early 1916, Einstein argued that, in his words, Mach’s principle should be an explicit property of GRT. Einstein defined Mach’s principle as the “relativity of inertia,” that is, the inertial properties of material objects should depend on the presence and action of other material objects in the surrounding spacetime, and ultimately, the entire universe. Framing the principle this way, Einstein found it impossible to show that Mach’s principle was a fundamental feature of GRT. But Einstein’s insight started arguments about the “origin of inertia” that continue to this day. Those arguments can only be understood in the context of Einstein’s theories of relativity, as inertia is an implicit feature of those theories (and indeed of any theory of mechanics). Since the issue of the origin of inertia is not the customary focus of examinations of the theories of relativity, we now turn briefly to those theories with the origin of inertia as our chief concern.

Einstein had two key insights that led to his theories of relativity. The first was that if there really is no preferred reference frame – as is suggested by electrodynamics – it must be the case that when you measure the speed of light in vacuum, you always get the same number, no matter how you are moving with respect to the source of the light. When the implications of this fact for our understanding of time are appreciated, this leads to Special Relativity Theory (SRT), in turn, leads to a connection between energy and inertia that was hitherto unappreciated. The curious behavior of light in SRT is normally referred to as the speed of light being a “constant.” That is, whenever anyone measures the speed of light, no matter who, where, or when they are, they always get the same number – in centimeter-gram-second (cgs) units, 3 10 10 cm/s. Although this works for SRT, when we get to General Relativity Theory (GRT) we will find this isn’t quite right. But first we should explore some of the elementary features of SRT, as we will need them later. We leave detailed consideration of Einstein’s second key insight – the Equivalence Principle – to the following section, where we examine some of the features of general relativity theory.

Mention relativity, and the name that immediately jumps to mind is Einstein. And in your mental timescape, the turn of the twentieth century suffuses the imagery of your mind’s eye. The principle of relativity, however, is much older than Einstein. In fact, it was first articulated and argued for by Galileo Galilei in the early seventeenth century. A dedicated advocate of Copernican heliocentric astronomy, Galileo was determined to replace Aristotelian physics, which undergirded the prevailing Ptolemaic geocentric astronomy of his day, with new notions about mechanics. Galileo hoped, by showing that Aristotelian ideas on mechanics were wrong, to undercut the substructure of geocentric astronomy. Did Galileo change any of his contemporaries’ minds? Probably not. Once people think they’ve got something figured out, it’s almost impossible to get them to change their minds. As Max Planck remarked when asked if his contemporaries had adopted his ideas on quantum theory (of which Planck was the founder), people don’t change their minds – they die. But Galileo did succeed in influencing the younger generation of his day.


~~Making Starships and Stargates- The Science of Interstellar Transport and Absurdly Benign Wormholes -by- James F. Woodward