Science Bible
May 31, 2004 2:01 PM Subscribe
Back in 1998, noted scientist Jim Lovelock - granted one of Science Magazine's rare editorial slots - proposed this (noting that we cannot and must not take the continuity of our current civilization for granted) : "What we need is a primer on science, clearly written and unambiguous in its meaning--a primer for anyone interested in the state of the Earth and how to survive and live well on it. One that would serve also as a primary school science text. It would be the scientific equivalent of the Bible." So where is this Science Bible (printed on acid free paper, and widely distributed around the Globe in many languages - so as to survive as the basis for rebuilding in the event of catastrophe) ? Has anyone heard of such a project ?
Have I made myself clear ? Does it exist ? And - if it does not, then :
1) Hundreds of thousands of trained scientists worldwide.
2) Wiki
3) .....Science Bible ?
Does the project grab anyone ?
Have I made myself clear ? Does it exist ? And - if it does not, then :
1) Hundreds of thousands of trained scientists worldwide.
2) Wiki
3) .....Science Bible ?
Does the project grab anyone ?
i'd buy it--i'm woefully ignorant about most science. It would have to be really simple and clear tho, with lots of FAQs and pics : >
posted by amberglow at 2:28 PM on May 31, 2004
posted by amberglow at 2:28 PM on May 31, 2004
I was raised on a series of books called the Time-Life Science Library that filled this need beautifully, but the late-1960s science is a bit out-of-date and I'm not aware of any modern equivalent. Each volume - Time, Matter, Engineering, Space, Vision, The Body, Flight, Mathematics, &c. - alternated photo essays with text chapters that had generous marginal illustrations, so younger readers could grow into the material. I'd love something like this for my nephew... Maybe something could be built on the Wikipedia?
posted by nicwolff at 2:33 PM on May 31, 2004
posted by nicwolff at 2:33 PM on May 31, 2004
I'll second Feynmann's lectures. He had a special talent for explaining complicated physics for an interested layman audience. This special talent probably came about from his deep understanding of the subject matter.
If you're going to restart a civilization I'm afraid that it's more of a technologists handbook that you want than a scientific bible. Knowing how to set up a block and tackle, cauterize a wound, catch small game, plant and harvest crops, and produce analgesics from common flora would be more important in the medium term than knowing how an atom works.
A wiki is a great idea but if civilization is broken (which was the premise of the question) then it's unusable.
posted by substrate at 2:44 PM on May 31, 2004
If you're going to restart a civilization I'm afraid that it's more of a technologists handbook that you want than a scientific bible. Knowing how to set up a block and tackle, cauterize a wound, catch small game, plant and harvest crops, and produce analgesics from common flora would be more important in the medium term than knowing how an atom works.
A wiki is a great idea but if civilization is broken (which was the premise of the question) then it's unusable.
posted by substrate at 2:44 PM on May 31, 2004
The trouble with using a wiki or similar collaborative tool to create this work is the simple fact that what is needed is not an encyclopaedia, but a primer. There already exist many encyclopaedic references for various fields. A primer, ideally, will present the student with a single, unified vision, preferably delivered by a single voice. The breadth of modern scientific knowledge is enormous: any introductory presentation will necessarily be heavily edited. The job will, in fact, be primarily one of careful, focused editing, with an eye towards building on the common ideas that connect fields. A whole hell of a lot of things will have to be left out, so the editor will be faced with some very difficult choices, and will be forced to come up with some ingenious solutions. I just don't think web-based collaboration is the best way to do this particular job.
posted by mr_roboto at 2:50 PM on May 31, 2004
posted by mr_roboto at 2:50 PM on May 31, 2004
Isn't this, to some extent, what Bill Bryson was attempting with A Short History of Nearly Everything?
posted by dobbs at 3:01 PM on May 31, 2004
posted by dobbs at 3:01 PM on May 31, 2004
If the technology could exist/work when you'd actually need it I think a wiki could work mr_roboto. Most wiki's try to emulate an encyclopedia but it doesn't have to be that way, in fact I'd argue that it's the wrong way.
A wiki could easily have an onion-like layering system for information. You log in with no 'credentials' and you're presented with science 101. Things are explained in simple language for the non-scientific layman. If you're interested in more you expose another layer of the onion by establishing your knowledge in a little bit of mathematics. Ideally there are tutorials on simple algebra up to grade 12 calculus. You can just say "I know this, give me more" and it'll give you more. Just in case you don't know what you think that you know the tutorials are available.
This is a huge amount of information but what does storage cost these days? Around 50 cents U.S. per gigabyte? The hardest part is actually getting people to enter the information. You're cramming in everything from mid-grade school (at a minimum) to graduate school into one compendium.
It's easy for most people to write at a level they understand but difficult for them to conceive of the problems that neophytes will experience even though they at one time weren't experts. So rather than one person for a topic you'd actually need many and you'd need an editor to meld together the topics.
I'm thinking of something that starts off with say a verbal explanation of Newton's laws. If you push something, or apply a force, that object will accelerate or in other words it will move faster. Once it's moving it will tend to stay moving. When you push on something it also pushes back on you.
That's something that anybody can understand and even play with. After that a deeper explanation with simple algebra can be introduced. Then an even deeper explanation using calculus and so on.
For a text book to do something like this you'd need walls full of books. I already see a problem with books. I'm not inexperienced at science but there are few books that can take the physics background an electrical engineer has and prod them along into more advanced and modern physics.
posted by substrate at 5:07 PM on May 31, 2004
A wiki could easily have an onion-like layering system for information. You log in with no 'credentials' and you're presented with science 101. Things are explained in simple language for the non-scientific layman. If you're interested in more you expose another layer of the onion by establishing your knowledge in a little bit of mathematics. Ideally there are tutorials on simple algebra up to grade 12 calculus. You can just say "I know this, give me more" and it'll give you more. Just in case you don't know what you think that you know the tutorials are available.
This is a huge amount of information but what does storage cost these days? Around 50 cents U.S. per gigabyte? The hardest part is actually getting people to enter the information. You're cramming in everything from mid-grade school (at a minimum) to graduate school into one compendium.
It's easy for most people to write at a level they understand but difficult for them to conceive of the problems that neophytes will experience even though they at one time weren't experts. So rather than one person for a topic you'd actually need many and you'd need an editor to meld together the topics.
I'm thinking of something that starts off with say a verbal explanation of Newton's laws. If you push something, or apply a force, that object will accelerate or in other words it will move faster. Once it's moving it will tend to stay moving. When you push on something it also pushes back on you.
That's something that anybody can understand and even play with. After that a deeper explanation with simple algebra can be introduced. Then an even deeper explanation using calculus and so on.
For a text book to do something like this you'd need walls full of books. I already see a problem with books. I'm not inexperienced at science but there are few books that can take the physics background an electrical engineer has and prod them along into more advanced and modern physics.
posted by substrate at 5:07 PM on May 31, 2004
They're busy writing it out on Terminus -- that is except for when a Seldon Crisis happens every 50 years or so.
posted by willnot at 8:26 PM on May 31, 2004
posted by willnot at 8:26 PM on May 31, 2004
I'm thinking of something that starts off with say a verbal explanation of Newton's laws.
I think it should start with thermodynamics. Specifically, with the second law. That's the closest thing that I know to an easily understood, universal, inviolable principle.
posted by mr_roboto at 10:11 PM on May 31, 2004
I think it should start with thermodynamics. Specifically, with the second law. That's the closest thing that I know to an easily understood, universal, inviolable principle.
posted by mr_roboto at 10:11 PM on May 31, 2004
I would be suspicious of such a project. To create a single, relatively concise work is supposed to represent the state of science is to court disaster. I can think of at least two ways in which it would immediately fail: It would necessarily be much too short to contain everything we (the general we) think we know for sure, and much too long to contain everything we actually do. Like a poem written while drunk, we would look back on it later and cringe at how sloppy it is in the light of day.
posted by Hildago at 10:41 PM on May 31, 2004
posted by Hildago at 10:41 PM on May 31, 2004
« Older What cell phone meets my criteria? | Emulator for playing my old computer games with a... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by andrew cooke at 2:05 PM on May 31, 2004