Second in a series about the edges of Science.
Science and engineering rely on the repeatable. Two hundred years ago, Georg Ohm experimentally discovered a linear relationship between voltage (V) and current (I), leading to the formulation of “Ohm’s Law” stated as V=IR. The mathematical constant in the linearity became known as “resistance (R).”
Today, we often think of resistance as a physical property. With knowledge of atomic characteristics, physicists have theorized that resistance happens due to the difficulty of breaking electrons free from the covalent bonds in different materials. The electrons are freer to move in pure metals than they are in most salts, so metals have low resistance. However, these physical explanations came along long after the definition; resistance is actually nothing but an observed linearity—a mathematical model for whatever is actually happening.
This is typical of all science. Observation leads to mathematical models, then to theory. The nice thing is that our theories often work widely, so engineers can use the math models a priori to design things that work.
Yet there is an underlying problem here. The experiments don’t always match the math model. Take any object. Apply a series of controlled voltages to the object. Carefully measure the resulting current. Plot the results on two-dimensional graph paper. The trend of the results fits V=IR, but the individual data points always have some scattering. There may even be some outliers that don’t fit the trend at all. Scientists usually discard the outliers for the purpose of the experiment—but those outliers show the reality that Science doesn’t always work.
Why are there outliers? Is it because the voltage control wasn’t precise enough? Or the measurement accuracy is poor? Perhaps the experiment setup isn’t properly devised. Or maybe the material has unaccounted variations. Or—and here’s the real kicker—perhaps there is some completely unknown aspect of reality that isn’t covered by the theory. For the scientist interested in proving a theory, the outliers are a nuisance to be discarded. That scientist states the Truth as seen in the statistics, while ignoring very real results that actually contradict the theory. The real relationship between voltage and current is not linear; it only tends toward linear.
But for the truly inquiring scientist, the one who looks beyond established theory, the outliers become the genesis of new theories. Michael Faraday discovered that some devices, particularly those with coils of wire, behaved differently than Ohm’s Law. He found a delay in the response to an applied voltage. These devices had a tendency to oppose a change in the current when the voltage was changed. He called this tendency “inductance,” and it became a key part of the development of motors and generators. Faraday was curious enough to disbelieve the established knowledge, to explore the outliers in the experiments, and to discover what those outliers could reveal about underlying reality.
Established science is dangerous. It leads to fixed thinking, an erroneous and arrogant belief that our current knowledge of Science is True.
We see this danger rearing its head in today’s world, in the frequently-used but absolutely wrong injunction to “Believe the Science.” Science should always be questioned, not just “believed.” Science is only a mathematical model based on theories. Reality is always greater than the model, and true science explores what may be different than what we believe.
And, of course, one of the greatest benefits of science fiction is when we disbelieve the science, when we question those things generally accepted as true.
Doc Honour
August 2023
Doc Honour Books 