Planck E PressCenter Articles

• Home
• Articles
• Press Releases
• Reports

---

What If We Could Make a Difference?

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."

Charles Darwin

The first reference to the Earth's sphericity dates back to the sixth century BC. The Greeks observed that perpendicularly 10 km from the coast, a departing ship shows only part of its hull and, at 20km, only the masts.

For political reasons, many scientists were ridiculed, punished, or even killed for defending this possibility until 1522, when Ferdinand Magellan circled the planet.

For most of us, the controversy between evolutionism and creationism is a source of perplexity that takes us to the brilliance of Evelyn Beatrice Hall, where she says, "I don't agree with a word you say, but I defend- until death- your right to say it."

It would be prudent to always use a combination of common sense and flexibility with respect of:

Ideas;

Theories;

Science and

Opinions.

As a rule, ideas generate theories that generate opinions that do not necessarily produce science.

Our comfortable Aristotelian thinking agrees that science is all that we can prove beyond any doubt.

In turn, pure science longs for working as many ideas and theories as possible, where those involved do not seek any personal gain but clarification of the debate. One of the high points in the evolution of science can be seen in the photo illustrating the Solvay Conference in 1929. Of the 29 participants, 17 received the Nobel Prize.

At the time, the first exposures to quantum mechanics, brilliantly reported by Werner Heisenberg in his books, removed the floor from under their feet. And it wasn't just anybody who felt groundless: Heisenberg himself, Planck, Bohr, Curie, Schrödinger, Rubens, Kurlbaum ...

These geniuses had no shame in recognizing what they could not understand when confronted with a new Physics. It is impressive how they engaged in the debate, for their egos and political opinions were simply not part of the conversation. Unquestionably, the superior intelligence of these men and women allowed them to debate ideas, which led to theories that- despite opinions- created science.

When we hear that 195 countries signed an agreement (in Paris) limiting global warming to 1.50C and implementing a global fund of US$100billion, we become compelled to reconsider creationism because, before those geniuses 120 years ago, we undeniably involuted! The agreement does not foresee dates, strategies, science, or way of reaching this target. Nor does it say why 1.50C and not 0.50C or 6.50C. What to expect from COP27?

It is not possible to prove that global warming is anthropic. It is also not possible to demonstrate that it is not. However, instead of calling on scientists with diverse ideas to the discussion, which could lead to theories and- eventually- to science, we condition ourselves to the opinions, issues, egos, and politics of a Consensus.

The Kyoto Treaty, one of the most beautiful articulations Mankind has produced, has been emptied in meaning thanks to the interests of a small group dazzled by the exercise of power, although it is now clear to a large number that the emperor has no clothes.

It is worth rescuing Kyoto's premises, investing in a lower human impact on our planet, and contributing to new ideas and theories. On the contrary, in a short time, we will be tea

Recent Presscenter Articles

• The Parametrization of Science

• A Scientific Impossibility

• The Unsustainable Stability of the Atom

• The Bell-Curve and the Neutron

---

Planck E - Books

---

For further information about Planck E PressCenter, please contact us.