diff options
Diffstat (limited to '75452-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 75452-0.txt | 2150 |
1 files changed, 2150 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/75452-0.txt b/75452-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..1c533c7 --- /dev/null +++ b/75452-0.txt @@ -0,0 +1,2150 @@ + +*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 75452 *** + + + + + + ARCHIMEDES + + OR + + THE FUTURE OF PHYSICS + + + + + TO-DAY AND TO-MORROW + + _For a full list of this Series see the end + of this Book_ + + + + + ARCHIMEDES + + OR + THE FUTURE OF PHYSICS + + BY + L. L. WHYTE + + + LONDON: + KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., LTD. + NEW YORK: E. P. DUTTON & CO. + + + + + To + LOTTE + + + Made and Printed in Great Britain by + M. F. Robinson & Co. Ltd. at the Library Press, Lowestoft + + + + +CONTENTS + + + CHAP. PAGE + + I THE SCIENCES CONVERGE 7 + + II A MODERN DUEL: EINSTEIN AND EDDINGTON _v._ BERGSON AND + WHITEHEAD 22 + + III TIME IN ASTRONOMY AND PHYSICS 37 + + IV AN EVOLUTIONARY EXPERIMENT 47 + + V PHYSICS AND THE HUMAN MIND 66 + + VI THE FUTURE OF THE SCIENCES 79 + + NOTES 95 + + + + +ARCHIMEDES + +OR + +THE FUTURE OF PHYSICS + + + + +CHAPTER I + +_The Sciences Converge_ + + +One of the most fascinating features in the history of thought is that +on several occasions an important new idea has come simultaneously to +independent minds. Thus after Euclid’s geometry had remained without +a rival for two thousand years the conception of an alternative +non-Euclidean system was reached separately by Gauss, Lobatschewsky, +and Bolyai during the years 1820-30. Bolyai’s father, while ignorant of +the fact that Gauss had already made the same discoveries, wrote to his +son urging him to publish his results and used the following prophetic +words: + + “There is some truth in this, that many things have an epoch, in which + they are found at the same time in several places, just as the violets + appear on every side in the spring.” + +Another example of the simultaneous emergence of an idea in the minds +of different thinkers is given by Darwin in his introduction to the +_Origin of Species_. He there calls attention to the fact that in +1794-5 the broad idea of the evolution of species--though not its +cause--was simultaneously formulated by Goethe in Germany, St Hilaire +in France, and his own grandfather, Dr Darwin, in England. Moreover +Darwin himself had the remarkable experience of finding in an essay +submitted to him in 1858 by A. R. Wallace a complete summary of his +own unpublished theory of natural selection as the chief cause of the +evolution of species. + +The last few years constitute another critical period of a similar +kind, since an idea, which when made precise will transform scientific +thought, has already come independently to many thinkers. Since 1922 +many scientists have felt that in studying the emission and absorption +of light physics has come near to the problem of life.[1] Others have +proposed that in order to straighten out its atomic problems physics +will have to take a hint from biology, but what this hint should be +has not yet been indicated. The following pages suggest a definite +line of advance for physics, and interpret these isolated flashes of +intuition as evidence of a special feature in the present situation of +the sciences. + +We stand at the eve of a new epoch. Physics, biology, and psychology +are converging towards a scientific synthesis of unprecedented +importance, whose influence on thought and social custom will be so +profound that it will mark a stage in human evolution. For centuries +science has concentrated its highest genius on the study of inanimate +matter; to-day the three great sciences are at last reaching the +problem of life. For their researches on matter, life, and mind are +now overlapping at one common issue: the nature of the fundamental +electrical processes which underlie radiation and chemical combination. + +Thus physics is at present occupied with the changes that occur when +an atom emits either light or electricity. Biology is at the same +problem in studying the electrical processes which are the basis of all +organic behaviour, whether in primitive forms of protoplasm or in the +highly developed central nervous system of man. Meantime psychology is +dealing with an identical process when it analyses the structure of +mind, and considers the elementary changes of consciousness which are +produced when light of a given colour falls on the retina and sends +its influence to the brain. + +As the result of these convergent researches, life and consciousness +will soon be subject to the first stages of a theoretically-grounded +control, compared with which the present tentative efforts of medicine +and psychology will be looked back on much as we remember the haphazard +work of the alchemists before the foundation of chemistry. But this +development of human knowledge and powers will carry with it great +responsibilities, and scientists have to prepare themselves for the new +tasks that will very soon fall to them. By indicating the main ideas +through which this broad scientific synthesis may come about, this +essay aims at showing that this possibility has to be taken seriously. +We shall first examine the situation in physics and then turn to +consider the influence which future developments of physical theory +may have on biology and psychology. + +Two main types of process defy interpretation within the present scheme +of physical conceptions: life itself, and the atomic processes of +radiation and the building up of stable compounds. In organic processes +on the one hand, and the energy-interchanges of atoms on the other +hand, we find something happening which cannot adequately be explained +as a change in the _structure_ of the system considered. By structure +is meant a spatial pattern of particles, which are supposed to be +permanent and to move about like cricket balls or planets. Systems +with a structure of this kind could not display the purposive quality +of organic behaviour, and when we try to make a structural model +of the atom we find that it fails to explain why the atom radiates +energy in the abrupt packets which are called ‘quanta’, instead of +in a continuous wave. We shall return presently to the question of +organisms, after making an endeavour to discover why the atom cannot be +described in terms of a particle structure. + +In 1911 Rutherford achieved remarkable success in accounting for the +results of his own researches in radioactivity by adopting a model of +the atom as a miniature solar system, with planetary electrons rotating +rapidly around a nucleus. But in order to explain the fact that the +spectrum of the light emitted by an atom shows a characteristic series +of lines, Bohr suggested that an electron inside an atom could emit +light only by making a discontinuous jump from one possible orbit to +another quite distinct orbit. This apparent discontinuity in the motion +of electrons has intrigued physicists for more than ten years, and the +following interpretations have recently been offered for this puzzling +behaviour: + + 1. Nature is made up of electrons, but neither space nor time is + fundamentally discontinuous. The electron appears to have some freedom + of choice, and to be able to reappear unexpectedly at forbidden places. + + 2. Nature is not discontinuous or arbitrary, but nevertheless + something prevents us determining all the things we should like to + know about an electron. For instance, if we try to determine exactly + where it is, it behaves so that we cannot simultaneously measure its + exact velocity. (Heisenberg.) This view may perhaps be interpreted + to mean that we have made the atom model more complex than the atom + itself is, and that consequently we have been using more quantities + than are necessary for describing all we can observe of its behaviour. + + 3. Nature is not made up of electrons, but of waves. The atom must be + considered as a system of electric waves spread over its whole volume. + ‘Electrons’ are merely an inaccurate way of describing some of the + properties of these waves. The wave picture of the atom is, however, + to be considered only as a temporary expedient to be used until some + better description of the atom can be invented, in which both the wave + and the corpuscular properties of atoms will appear as aspects of some + more profound physical property. (Schrödinger.) + +The first alternative is a mere cry of despair, since it does not +propose any line of advance. But the other two suggestions may be +combined thus: + + 4. The view of the atom as a structure of Newtonian particles is wrong + since it gives rise to discontinuities, and provides more quantities + than we at present need. A new formulation of atomic processes must + be found using fewer quantities which will explain why we find wave + properties, and why sometimes the electron does behave like a small + billiard ball though really it is some different sort of thing. + +Now since the Newtonian mathematics of moving particles is inadequate +for describing the changes that go on in the atom--just as it is for +describing organic processes--there must be some assumption implicit in +Newton’s laws which is valid neither for atom nor for organism. Such +an assumption can be found very easily, though physics has never given +it much attention. It is that the elementary processes in nature are +_reversible_, or would be if they could be isolated. By reversible is +here meant that the laws governing the process remain unchanged when +the direction of time is reversed, i.e. when -t is substituted for +t. +If the law is changed by this substitution so that the reversed process +never occurs or is recognizably different, then the process is called +irreversible. An irreversible process can therefore be used to yield an +objective criterion of past and future, when these terms have been once +defined. + +To take an example. If I am standing behind a hedge and take a +cinematograph film of a stone which suddenly rises in the air and +disappears from sight, I could not tell from an examination of the +film which way to wind it. Thus if it is wound one way the stone +appears to rise, and if wound the other way to fall from the sky. +To tell which was the right way I should have to use my subjective +sense of the direction of time, i.e. remember the fact that I saw the +stone low in the air before I saw it high up. This case, like every +gravitational process, is reversible, and motions of this kind have +provided the basis for modern physical conceptions. + +But suppose that instead I had taken a film of a cup of tea as it was +cooling. One end of the film would show the steam above the cup and the +spoon changing in length as it changed in temperature. Passing along +the film these effects would grow less marked until the successive +photos showed no variation when the temperature of the tea was nearly +that of the surrounding air. It would be obvious which way to wind +this film, without using any subjective criterion supplied from memory +of the individual process which had been photographed. This process is +irreversible, but physics has hitherto assumed that all such processes +are merely the statistical result of a chaos of molecular motions each +of them perfectly reversible. + +The assumption of reversibility seems to some physicists so fundamental +that they think there could be no science without it. But that is +a mere prejudice arising from the fact that Newton conceived one +particular way of giving mathematical formulation to the measurable +features of physical processes. By suggesting that all the laws of +nature might take a form similar to his law of gravitation, he made +the implicit assumption that all elementary processes were reversible. +Gravitational motions are so, at any rate within the accuracy of +Newton’s law, and as a consequence of the confirmation of his law +and the fact that it has been taken as a model for the whole system +of modern physical conceptions, the latter are only appropriate for +reversible processes. + +Apparent irreversibility, such as the cooling of a cup of tea, +is attributed to statistical effects, and the second law of +thermodynamics, which asserts that temperatures tend to uniformity, +is treated as merely a statement of what is highly probable. This is +probably quite legitimate, but even where no statistical effect can +enter and the process is clearly irreversible physics usually adopts +any measure rather than assume that a fundamental elementary process +is irreversible.[2] We cannot be surprised at this, since if physics +once admitted that any elementary process was irreversible it would +have to give up the whole system of Newtonian conceptions. Matter, +force, energy, action, and wave properties are all unsuitable for the +treatment of irreversible effects since they all ultimately depend on +Newton’s reversible law. + +An entirely new set of ideas is necessary for describing processes +which necessarily proceed in one direction, so that one particular +state of the system must precede another state. It appears conceivable +that an alternative set of conceptions to replace the Newtonian might +be established by demanding the irreversibility of all natural laws, as +well as the demands hitherto made by physics, i.e. the permanence of +matter and the conservation of energy. + +The question of the reversibility of natural processes provides the key +to a great intellectual struggle which is now in progress behind the +complexities of philosophic and scientific thought. The issue can be +formulated thus: + +Is there a real temporal process in nature? Is the passage of +irreversible time a necessary element in any view of the structure of +nature? Or, alternatively, is the subjective experience of time a +mere illusion in the mind which cannot be given objective expression? +These are not metaphysical questions that can still be neglected +by science with impunity. For just as Einstein made his advance by +analysing conceptions such as simultaneity, which had been thought +to be adequately understood for the purposes of empirical science, +so the next development of physical theory will probably be made by +carrying on the analysis of time from the point at which Einstein left +it. Moreover, the above questions may be put into precise scientific +form by asking if the causal relations which are studied by science +are symmetrical and reversible so that we cannot obtain from them any +criterion by which to distinguish past and future. If, on the other +hand, they are asymmetrical and irreversible, the laws of nature lead +us on necessarily from what went before to what comes afterwards. + + + + +CHAPTER II + +_A modern duel: Einstein and Eddington v. Bergson and Whitehead_ + + +In this battle over the importance of time and process great names +stand out as representatives of the two opposed views: Einstein +and Bergson, with their lieutenants, Eddington and Whitehead. The +two leaders use very different methods. Einstein, as mathematical +physicist, suggests that physical laws can best be expressed if we +assume that space and time are so similar that physics can make no +absolute distinction between them. Thus in relativity theory the +symmetry of space involves the symmetry of time, and therefore the +reversibility of physical laws, as has been shown by Birkhoff. +Bergson, as biologist and philosopher, denies that the view of time +which is implicit in relativity mathematics is adequate when a wider +range of experience is taken into account. + +Einstein starts by excluding all but a very narrow range of physical +experience, and finds that he can make successful predictions about +light and gravitation by treating the irreversibility of the passage +of time as of no importance for scientific measurements. Bergson, by +studying a wide range of biological and subjective experience, comes +to assert the existence of a creative process, though the inherent +limitations of the intellect and of science may leave the essence of +this process outside their reach. + +Both protagonists have left their flanks exposed, by omitting to +present their view as a consistent logical system, Einstein because he +is concerned only with the equations that can be empirically tested, +and Bergson because his chief interest is non-intellectual. It is here +that their lieutenants step forward to develop the two points of view, +and hence to intensify the conflict. + +Eddington provides a logical basis for the theory of relativity and +reveals that the significance of physical laws is not quite what we +used to think. They are, he argues, identities which the human mind +discovers in its search for something permanent that it can call +_matter_ beneath all the changing appearances of the world. We have +made matter the real thing by demanding permanence or indestructibility +as the basis of physical reality. Now that we know that we have done +this it need not trouble us too much to find that absolute unchanging +matter doesn’t exist, since this merely means that we started out with +a demand that nature cannot fulfil. Unfortunately Eddington doesn’t +discuss what alternative demand we might now make in order to build +up a more satisfactory system of scientific ideas. But in spite of his +enthusiastic support of Einstein’s theory, with its implicit assumption +of reversibility, Eddington hesitates at least once in his advocacy +of reversible laws, for facts are turning up which suggest that this +undiscussed presupposition may not prove valid.[3] + +Meantime Whitehead has been at work on the other side, and by +sharpening his logic till few can understand him has made the idea of +temporal process the basis of all intellectual and scientific thought, +whereas up to now process has always presented many difficult problems +for the intellect. He proposes that since the conception of matter +has been found to be unsatisfactory we must start from the basic idea +of process in building up a new physical theory. As a consequence of +his line of thought, Whitehead found it necessary to reject some of +Einstein’s arguments and to show that Einstein’s law could be reached +from quite different postulates. For instance, Whitehead assumed that +the motion of light was irreversible, and that light did not travel +with the same velocity in the two opposed directions. + +So much for one aspect of the conflict, its logical and philosophical +basis. But the issue must be decided by appeal to experimental +confirmation over the widest range of phenomena. Orthodox physics still +assumes reversibility, and has on its side the explicit statement made +by Einstein in 1925,[4] but by doing so it excludes at the start any +reference to organic processes. Conceptions based on this assumption +could never be legitimately applied to life, and all attempts made +hitherto to explain the central controlling processes of organisms in +terms of classical physics have necessarily failed. We know now that +this failure could have been foreseen. + +The same objection cannot be made against the basic ideas of Bergson +and Whitehead, nor against the new atomic physics as interpreted by +Born, as we shall see in a moment. To Bergson and Whitehead, as to many +others amongst whom Lloyd Morgan must be mentioned, the process of +nature is creative, i.e. it involves the coming into being of the new, +the appearance of new combinations essentially precluded before. This +probably means that the laws of physics which are to describe what is +actually happening in the world must be given irreversible form. For +reversible equations make no distinction between to-day and to-morrow, +and cannot express the fact that at later moments new forms may emerge, +either in the evolution of organisms or of stars. On the other hand +irreversible laws can be arranged so as to display time as an active +factor in causation, i.e. to emphasize the fact that a certain period +of time necessarily has to pass before some new combination can be +attained.[5] + +The upholders of a real process in nature can appeal to the facts of +organic life, human memory, and to biological and stellar evolution. +But their case is still weak because fundamental irreversibility +has not yet received explicit mathematical formulation suitable for +experimental test. When this has been done the intellectual battle will +be brought to its decision, and if irreversibility wins the day biology +and psychology will find themselves in possession of a physical basis +well suited to the facts with which they have to deal. + +There is reason to believe that the decision will be made very soon. +We saw that the implicit assumption of reversibility underlies all +Newtonian conceptions. It may therefore be that the reason why we +cannot interpret atomic behaviour in terms of particle motions is that +electrical and radiational processes are essentially irreversible. +Particle motion and wave propagation--the two ideas on which all +modern theories of matter are based--are both represented by +mathematical expressions which are essentially reversible since time +enters only through the square of ‘dt’. If the quantum processes should +prove to be irreversible, we have already found a reason why the old +conceptions of particles and waves must be inadequate. + +This speculation may indeed be found correct, since Born, one of +the leading experts in Quantum Dynamics, asserts that all quantum +processes are irreversible and that the apparent reversibility of +classical processes is only an approximation due to the fact that their +irreversibility happens to be negligible.[4] We may therefore hope that +the atomic physicists will soon formulate the quantum laws in a clearly +irreversible form which admits of precise experimental test. + +But this may take some years, and in the meantime we must look around +and see how this issue is affecting current thought. We find the doubt +about process presented by Mr Sullivan (in _Gallio_), who has not yet +made up his mind to which side science will grant the victory. Thus on +one page he writes: “it seems to be true that events do not really take +place, we come across them” and suggests that process may be “a totally +irrelevant idea when applied to reality”. But later we learn to our +surprise that “it seems likely that (in scientific theory) the world +will have to be regarded as an evolutionary process, where patterns of +value emerge”. However, this inconsistency need not bother us, since +we are told that “the teachings of science so far as the spiritual +problems of man are concerned are merely irrelevant”. + +These views reflect perfectly the uncertainty of the time, and will be +looked back on as a precious record of the state of mind which preceded +the scientific synthesis. Perhaps the most interesting feature of +the essay is the indecision it displays with regard to the spiritual +importance of science. This is a relic from the days when there were +two worlds, the world of science and the world of religion and art. No +one ever knew which of these worlds they were living in, and this is no +wonder. For the division was made only because at one time it looked +as though the scientific method could only deal with _quantities_, +and therefore that science could have nothing to say about values or +qualities. This view is no longer tenable. For instance, there is a +quality in organic integration which most of us value, and without this +and many other such conceptions biology and psychology could not get +far. + +Before proceeding any further it is necessary to correct a common +misunderstanding with regard to the significance of Einstein’s theory +of relativity. This theory is mathematical, and is based on a series +of postulates which rule out any claim to present an ultimate theory +of space and time. One of these postulates[6] asserts that all our +physical knowledge can be reduced to the space-time coincidences +of pairs of point-events, or in other words the intersection of +the world-lines of electrons. No respect for the supreme genius +who predicted two experimental results and eliminated the chief +discrepancies remaining in Newtonian theory should restrain scientists +from pointing out that this postulate assumes something that has never +been known to occur, and has no valuable reference to the world of +physical experiment. The confirmation of Einstein’s final equations +cannot give any validity to this postulate. For it is difficult to +think of any physical experience considered by theoretical physics +which does not involve the perception of light or colour, and one +cannot assume that the perception of light is a perception of +coincidences. Light varies in colour and intensity; coincidence in +space is too abstract to account for an effect which is subject to +variation. Moreover all physical experience requires a certain amount +of time, and this fact is neglected if perception is reduced to the +recognition of instantaneous coincidences. Even if these two criticisms +are left on one side we still have to notice that Einstein’s postulate +rules out from the range of physics the important fact that many +processes are irreversible. For instance, if we accept Einstein’s +definition of physical experience, then the interesting fact that +radioactivity is only observed in the form of disintegration, and not +also as the reverse process of a spontaneous building up of heavier +elements from lighter, has to be left over by physics to be dealt with +by some other science. + +It almost always happens that the formulations of genius are +exaggerated and form the basis of a pernicious orthodoxy, and it has +certainly happened to relativity theory. Against a tide of exaggerated +praise Whitehead, Larmor, and Bridgman, as well as some Continental +astronomers, have debated the general assumption that the theory of +relativity is adequate to its task, but those in whose hands the power +of orthodoxy lies have not yet answered their criticisms in print. +Neglect has always been the weapon by which orthodoxy has unknowingly +hindered the advance of new ideas. But while this neglect is easy to +understand, it is really remarkable that the postulates of relativity +theory were not subjected to closer examination before it was made the +basis of wide philosophical speculation. The experimental confirmation +of Einstein’s law of gravitation does not guarantee his postulates, +since Whitehead has reached a similar law (identical within the +accuracy of the observations) from different assumptions. + +Einstein’s profound creative intuition and use of a difficult +technique compel our deepest respect, but his work should never have +been regarded as a _general_ theory of time and space. Not only does +he neglect the question of irreversibility but it is very doubtful if +periodic processes can be made to fit into his scheme, as has been +pointed out by Russell and Bridgman during the last year. Probably +Einstein himself has never regarded his theory as more than a stage in +the attempt to create a still wider physical synthesis, and we must +not interpret in a broad sense his statement that one of the demands +of his theory “takes away from space and time the last remnant of +physical objectivity”.[6] This could only be true if physical time +shared the absolute symmetry of space, i.e. if physical processes +were all reversible. But there are processes from which we can obtain +an objective criterion of the direction of time, and hence time does +retain an element of physical objectivity as distinct from the +absolute symmetry of space. One of the most interesting features in the +future of physics will be the explanation of the fact that Einstein +reached a correct law from postulates of limited validity, and in +this connection Whitehead’s alternative derivation may prove to be of +importance. + + + + +CHAPTER III + +_Time in Astronomy and Physics_ + + +The real discrepancy between the world of physics and that of life lies +in the fact that physics has never recognized the irreversibility of +time, while this is fundamental to life. We may even feel a doubt if +the ‘t’ of physics has the same significance as the time of biology, +evolution, history, and human experience. The physical conception of +time arose from the practical utility of clocks for describing natural +processes, and finally took the form of defining astronomical time in +terms of the rotation of the earth. The day was in fact taken as an +absolute measure of time, and this remained quite satisfactory so long +as the laws of physics were found to take a simple form with reference +to the time so defined. + +But then a complication arose. The study of the moon’s motion suggested +to astronomers that the earth’s rotation was slowing down, i.e. to +account for the apparent motion of the moon they had to assume that +the day was increasing in length. The theory of the tides revealed +a possible cause for this slowing down in the tidal friction on the +bottom of shallow water basins, for instance the rush of the Atlantic +tides into the Irish Sea provides an appreciable frictional force +retarding the spin of the earth. In addition to this slowing down there +appears to be a very slow periodic variation in the length of the day +such as would be accounted for by a rhythmic expansion and contraction +of the earth’s crust. + +The astronomers declare that our old measure of time is not only +getting slower and slower, it is even varying rhythmically! It is clear +that they have thrown over the earth as their definition of equal +time intervals and have surreptitiously substituted something else. +Yet one cannot discover any formal announcement of this, or find out +if they realize that by doing this they have altered the theoretical +significance of all physical measurements. In earlier days physics +defined time in terms of a selected clock, and then set about finding +the laws of nature. But the old ways aren’t good enough for the modern +astronomer who gives us our time and sets the clocks of our physical +laboratories. He has reasons for disapproving of the earth, and has +almost reversed the procedure. In order to save the laws of inertia +and gravitation in connection with the moon’s motion--and to a lesser +degree in the cases of the planets and the sun--he has made these laws +his standard of equal time intervals in place of the earth’s rotation. + +It is a curious situation, especially in view of the fact that +Einstein’s law, which has superseded Newton’s, is not very suitable +for use as an astronomical clock, as has been pointed out by Larmor. +Perhaps the physicist will soon be able to use the atom as the +theoretical clock for physics, and we can go on using the corrected +rotation of the earth as our practical standard. There is a faint +chance, for instance, that if physics can invent some way of measuring +the minute time intervals along the track of an electron, then +electrons might be used as giving the fundamental measure of time. Thus +if the velocity of an electron were first measured by some indirect +method the electron itself might then be used as a clock. But in the +meantime the astronomers should make a formal announcement to the Royal +Society of what they have been up to. It then might be found necessary +to appoint a commission to discover exactly what physics is now doing. +For by using an astronomical clock of the new type it is assuming +classical laws while researching on processes which are already +known to undermine the absolute validity of these laws. Theoretical +physics cannot hope to clear up its fundamental problems until it has +considered exactly what is involved in this suspicious procedure. + +Like most professions, physics includes a good deal of bluff, but +unlike the others physics is now occupied on a campaign to get rid of +all pretence. For instance, physical text-books have been filled for +twenty years with phrases of this kind: “an electron with a velocity +of so many cms per sec.” Yet the professors omitted to tell their +students the awful secret that this hypothesis of electron velocities +is one that has never yet received direct experimental confirmation. +To-day a reaction has set in and the demand is being made that physical +theory shall not make use of conceptions that do not correspond to +directly observed quantities. Thus the latest theories of the atom have +eliminated the idea of electron orbits because it was realized that +these were nothing more than a mathematical trick for calculating +something quite different: the wave-length of the light an atom can +emit. In place of the orbits it is hoped to substitute something which +only makes use of the directly-observed features of the atom, but this +new picture is not complete. + +Yet physics still makes use of ideas that have not been adequately +justified. For though the idea of moving electrons has been removed +from the latest atomic model, no substitute for it has yet been +proposed for the case of electrons outside the atom. It therefore +becomes very important for the experimental physicist to discover +whether he can measure the distance travelled by an electron in a +measured fraction of a second. As yet we have no proof that nature +has not confused us by making electrons behave rather like moving +particles, though really they are something different. In fact we +have not yet made enough direct experiments to know even whether +the dimensional system which is used for electrons is correct. Since +no electron velocity has ever been directly measured we cannot be +sure that the dimensions of the new constant ‘h’--called Planck’s +constant--are really what we suppose, energy multiplied by time. Until +a way has been invented of making a direct measurement of some _time_ +involved in electronic motions, it is impossible for physical theory to +know how it should deal with the quantum processes. + +When we realize how uncertain are the conceptions on which the whole +of electron theory is based, we may wonder what is really known about +the atom itself. Yet it is possible that we know more about the atom +than we think, and that what are talked about as facts concerning +electrons and radiation may really be better viewed as information +about individual atoms and the way in which they influence one another. +The emission of light is an atomic process, and we only know about +light when it has reached some atom and been at least partially +absorbed. Some un-understood change of condition occurs in an atom when +it radiates and passes this changed condition on to another atom. The +absorbed energy may cause chemical change, as on a photographic plate. +But if a human mind is to become aware of this change of condition, +then sooner or later, directly or indirectly, its influence must be +passed on to an atom in the retina. We know very little about this +change of atomic condition, and though it is usually called a change of +the internal electrical energy of the atom this supposes more than we +really know until some electron velocity has been directly measured. +The dimensions of electrical energy are taken as those of kinetic +energy, i.e. mass times square of velocity, but we do not yet know if +this describes atomic changes correctly. Since no one has ever measured +a _time_ involved in an electronic process, the scale of time in the +atom might be quite different from that given by our calculations. + +Our ignorance of what this change of atomic condition really signifies +is so profound that some writers have begun to treat the atom as though +it were an organism, alive when the atom is excited, and dead when in +a state of minimum energy. Thus Whitehead proposes that we should call +the atom an organism, though this of course may only muddle us since we +know even less about life than we do about the atom. + +Yet we do know one very interesting thing about this change which +happens to atoms but cannot be reduced to a change of structure. When +light reaches an atom in the retina, an electrical stimulus passes +up a nerve and alters the condition of the protoplasm somewhere in +the brain. This change in brain condition is known to us directly as +the perception of colour. Therefore in one sense we know more about +this change of atomic condition than we ever did about ‘electric +fields’ or ‘gravitational potential’ or any other of the mathematical +conveniences used by physics in correlating observed quantities. The +change in a sodium atom when we put salt in a flame is not a change +in the consciousness of the sodium atom, because it is not part of a +complex nervous system with the same high co-ordination as is found in +the human being, and therefore the atom has no consciousness. But when +an atom in the brain undergoes the same change we may become conscious +of it, and the changes in matter which occur when light is absorbed are +undoubtedly associated with the problem of consciousness. + +Thus we are led to ask: how are single atoms built up into complex +systems which have the characteristics of life, and finally into still +more complex systems which have human consciousness? + + + + +CHAPTER IV + +_An Evolutionary Experiment_ + + +Questions are often made unnecessarily difficult by their being +expressed in an abstract or theoretical form, and instead of asking +What is life? it will be more valuable to put forward a practical issue +for discussion: Could an infinitely wise physicist order the necessary +chemicals to-day, and to-morrow put together a synthetic man? If not, +why not? What are we really up against, that seems to put some aspects +of life beyond our control? + +Let us watch this ambitious physicist as he enters his laboratory. +He has started quite easily and has in a moment prepared some simple +molecules from their elements. Now he has completed the first colloid +that he will require, and is starting on his first organic synthesis. +But his infinite wisdom does not give him eternity within a minute, +and we notice that he is getting on more slowly. While the actual +combination of the first molecules took only about a thousandth of a +second, once he had the apparatus ready, the simplest colloid took +about a second. The organic colloid has taken him about a minute; it +seems that nature won’t work faster than that. She has her own rhythm +and won’t be rushed. If we wait patiently till the end of the day our +friend may have his first speck of protoplasm, and all the skill in the +world would only have helped him to make more of it, not to have got +any further in his game of evolution. + +But look at him now! He is making a hasty calculation as though he had +just realized some great secret of nature, and knew that he could never +create his homunculus. We look over his shoulder and read: + + + _Estimated minimum time required by the synthetic processes of nature + to attain various evolutionary stages._ + + Starting from the Minimum + elements, to Time + + Simple inorganic compound 1/1000 sec. + Simple colloid 1 sec. + Protein 1 hour + Primitive protoplasm 1 month + Simplest uni-cellular organism 10 years + Flagellate 1,000 years + Mammal, including _Homo sapiens_ 1,000,000 years + +This highly speculative estimate is based on suggestive facts. A +certain amount of time is necessary for two atoms to approach one +another and form a molecule. The time required will be greater if many +atoms have to settle down together into some special arrangement. For +instance, the metal silver is normally crystalline, but if silver +vapour is condensed too quickly the atoms will not have time to +arrange themselves, and it is found that they pile up anyhow into an +amorphous mass. + +Colloidal processes require even longer periods, because great clumsy +molecules have to arrange themselves on the surface of the colloidal +particles. In elementary forms of protoplasm the molecular patterns +are still more complex, and yet more time must be necessary to get the +molecules properly adjusted. + +It is probable that only our ignorance prevents us from building up +protoplasm, but that we shall require rapidly increasing amounts of +time for each successive stage of evolution. This will certainly be +the case when we have reached organisms which can only be rendered +more complex by controlling their environment while they reproduce +themselves for many generations. A higher organism cannot be built up +directly; the molecular arrangements in its body can only be reached +through the synthesis of some simple form of life which must then be +allowed to evolve through countless generations. Organic heredity +resides in molecular patterns which can only be built up by this very +slow process of repeated reproduction. Thus it is _shortage of time_ +that our ambitious scientist is up against in his haste to create a +homunculus. Only the synthetic alchemy of time can build up organisms, +each bearing within itself a long heredity. + +The estimates given for the minimum time required in each case are +about a thousandth of the actual time taken in a laboratory experiment +or in the history of evolution as known from geological records. It may +have taken a million years or more for the first mobile cells to have +developed from inorganic materials and a thousand million years for the +mammals. Yet perhaps these processes might have gone on more quickly. +The times given are mere suggestions of a minimum time which may be +necessary under ideal conditions. We waste a lot of time adjusting +the apparatus in a laboratory experiment, and in evolution there may +have been stationary periods with little or no new development. But it +seems likely that when we know more about it we shall discover that a +certain time is required for the formation of organic systems of given +complexity. In this sense we may say that then human spermatozoon and +ovum carry within them the synthesis of at least a million years. + +Only an International Institute of Evolutionary Research under the +most stable of Leagues of Nations could hope to create an artificial +man, and even then man could hardly take the credit, for Time would +have done more than man. But with sufficient consistency of purpose +man could do this, provided he learnt how to make use of every moment +of the creative power of time, and never made a slip by which the +accumulated treasure of the years (i.e. heredity) might be broken. How +man would learn to value life, and how profoundly such an experiment +might alter his view of human beings, each one a priceless miracle, +fruit of a million years! + +In twenty years’ time scientific knowledge will be adequate for the +beginning of this giant task, and we shall be subscribing our guineas +for the foundation of the Institute. Time has created man; man may use +time to create man once more. With a million years ahead of us before +we reach the sensitive mammals, we need hardly fear criticism from the +Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. We are simply going +to allow life to evolve itself under ideal conditions with Switzerland +as the State for Evolutionary Research. + +It may happen that under such perfect conditions life will evolve more +swiftly than it did on this rough-and-ready planet. But equally well +we--or rather our descendants--may find that the Darwinian struggle for +survival is essential for evolution, and then the nations would have to +debate on the morals of reproducing the ‘cruelty of nature’ inside the +World’s Evolutionary Zoo. Perhaps a wrathful god will seek to punish +mankind for attempting to build this ladder to the secret of life, this +modern Tower of Babel, and amuse himself by watching the community of +scientists stricken by a plague of inconsistency amongst their weights +and measures. + +The possibilities of such grand schemes have to be taken seriously. We +are now highly self-conscious beings with a tremendous technique for +research. Men with genuine creative imagination who reverence life must +shoulder the responsibilities of the twentieth-century consciousness, +and use scientific technique for creative not life-destroying purposes. +One can imagine a growing fraction of the interest now given to +war, other people’s adultery, and greyhound racing, turned towards +Switzerland, whence at critical moments wireless bulletins would +announce that the first amoeba had just successfully taken nourishment. +If we wish it, the future of science can be such as to recompense for +its recent occupation with gunpowder. Governments would be powerless +to make war if the physicists refused to make the guns and the Royal +Society called upon scientists to go on strike until each war crisis +had been settled by arbitration. + +The problem of life may be seen in a new light if the speculations of +the last section are accepted and we assume that a definite period +of time is necessary for the building up of any living organism. For +if this is so the laws which govern life must involve the age of the +organism since some definite moment in its history. We might choose for +this moment the instant when the parent spermatozoon entered the ovum +in the case of a higher organism, or in the evolutionary experiment +just described the age might be reckoned from the moment when the first +elementary chemicals were combined into molecules. The point is that +this whole evolutionary process must be described by laws which take +into account the age of the system under consideration. + +Let us take a very simple, indeed the simplest possible, example. +If two hydrogen atoms having just the correct total energy for the +formation of a hydrogen molecule have approached one another and +combined, the law describing what has happened must indicate that at +a definite moment the combination was complete and the process at an +end. This is an example of an irreversible process, since the molecule +does not _spontaneously_ break up again. Moreover, the mathematical +formulation of this process must include the definite age of the system +at which the process was complete, this age being measured from some +selected initial moment. + +This process provides an interesting limitation to a principle put +forward by Maxwell as the basis of physical science. He suggested that +the laws of physics must be considered to be eternal and unchanging and +that therefore they must be expressed in a form which does not contain +the time explicitly. This means that for physical laws there can be no +difference between to-day and to-morrow. The laws are concerned with +small changes which systems undergo in small time intervals, and need +not express any fundamental distinction between one moment and another. + +Such laws cannot express the fact that anything sudden ever occurs +which makes an essential change in the system as when two systems +become one, or when one system breaks up into two. The laws of organic +growth or the evolution of individual systems must display the fact +that at a certain age of the system special things happen, such as the +combination of two hydrogen atoms, or the attainment of maturity by an +organism. Maxwell’s principle puts a limitation on the form of physical +laws which precisely eliminates the laws that would be appropriate for +organisms. But there is no reason why a broader physics should not try +to frame this new type of law that would be applicable to the history +and development of individual systems, and it is probable that if this +could be done the reversible laws of Newton, Maxwell, and Einstein +would appear as approximations which were valid when nothing of special +interest was happening, i.e. when only spatial movements were involved +without synthesis, disintegration or the emission of light. + +Laws of the Newtonian type which Maxwell had in mind assume that +one can adequately describe the present state of a system without +specifying its past history. But we cannot say anything very precise +about the inside of a living organism, and it is found far more +efficient to describe what is known of its past history. We do not try +to say where atoms are in an organism; instead we mention its species, +age, etc. Organisms might be defined as systems whose future behaviour +is more easily estimated from their past history than from what can be +known about their immediate internal structure. The most convenient +formulation of organic laws will therefore be expressed in terms of +the age of the organism and take account of how its life has been +spent. These laws are necessarily irreversible, since the assimilation +of oxygen or food is always going on in a manner which can never be +reversed. Life is like a function which must always alter in one +direction; when this development ceases life has disappeared. + +The contrast of living and dead now appears less important than the +following classification of natural processes: + + 1. Processes which are reversible and whose laws can be expressed + independently of the age of the system, e.g. gravitational and + mechanical motions which do not involve light or heat. + + 2. Processes which are irreversible, the laws being best expressed in + terms of the total time which has passed since some initial state, + e.g. chemical combination, growth, evolution, radioactivity, and all + changes involving light or heat. + +Physics has always asserted that processes of the first type were +fundamental in nature, and astronomy provided the ideal example in +planetary motion. It was this assertion that gave rise to the essential +issue behind the conflict of mechanism and vitalism. But if Born is +right, and the fundamental atomic processes are irreversible, then +the situation is completely altered. There is no longer a question +of life being an arbitrary irruption in a world of mechanical law, +since the laws of gravitation and mechanics must then be looked on as +the limiting case, when the irreversibility is vanishingly small, of +a whole series of irreversible processes which constitute the most +important examples of the fundamental order in nature. This series +would include the atomic processes connected with heat, light, and +electricity, chemical combination, colloidal effects, organic growth +and evolution, and the highly co-ordinated electrical processes which +form the physiological basis of consciousness. + +If this view is correct the atomic processes of radiation and chemical +combination should be just what the biologist needs to build up +organisms. Instead of a chaos of little particles obeying inverse +square laws, the modern physicist offers to the biologist a new kind of +atom with electrical and magnetic properties which cause it to build +up stable compounds. + +The biologist may reply: “Yes, but organisms have four chief +characteristics, their behaviour is irreversible, and displays +growth, memory, and purposiveness. If you tell me that your atoms +obey irreversible laws, so much the better, because my organisms +certainly do. But your crystals grow very differently from my cells and +organisms, and you can’t explain away the apparent purposiveness of all +life.” + +To which the physicist may answer: “Suppose that two hydrogen atoms are +some distance apart with the total energy necessary to make a molecule. +If they begin to move towards one another under some attractive +influence which they exert we display no surprise. But they are moving +towards a final end, which is an end, even though they are of course +unconscious of it; and provided that nothing interferes they will reach +one another, form a molecule, and the process will be consummated. +The atoms move under an irresistible law of attraction towards a final +condition which is unavoidable unless outside influences prevent +it. The system of the two atoms develops necessarily towards a +consummation, and the process has in this sense a teleological quality, +though this need not mean that any god or man had consciously planned +the end for these particular hydrogen atoms. + +“This quality was not present in Newton’s law of gravitation precisely +because it failed to say what happens at the end of any process, for +instance when a meteorite hits the earth. Newtonian laws avoid the +responsibility of dealing with all the exciting events, like the +wedding of the atoms or the death of the meteorite. On the other hand +it appears probable that all irreversible laws can be interpreted as +leading either from or to some critical end condition. Thus all heat +processes tend towards an approximate uniformity of temperature, and +chemical reactions also move towards a final condition. + +“Such systems as these display the rudiments of unconscious purpose. +One must imagine these systems made much more complex so that it takes +a long time and considerable nourishment before their unconscious +purpose is fulfilled, whether this be the instinctive reproduction of +their kind or any other biological function.” + +“Maybe. I like the unconscious purpose which you have revealed in +irreversible physics, because I am troubled by colleagues who see +conscious mind everywhere. + +“But if I grant that your view of the atom, and hence of molecules +and colloids, allows me two of the four features I find in life, i.e. +irreversibility and unconscious purpose, you have still to deal with +growth and organic memory.” + +“Yes. Growth and memory are things that physics has as yet little +to say about. But we have at any rate reduced the problem of life +to smaller proportions. It is no longer the question what is +life? but, how do colloidal processes build themselves up into +continuously-active, developing systems which can react to their +surroundings so that some distant condition can ultimately be attained? +This is a much less difficult question. Moreover, since the problem of +radiation underlies all the chemical processes which are associated +with the maintenance of life, we may expect considerable assistance +when physics has cleared up this crucial problem.” + + + + +CHAPTER V + +_Physics and Mind_ + + +If a psychologist who was not a behaviourist had been listening to this +conversation he might break in: + +“Does the physicist seriously propose that we should try to leave mind +out of our picture of the human organism? Even if we can eventually +explain the unconscious purposes of the lower organisms as ends towards +which they are driven by physical laws, yet man has the supreme +distinction of a conscious mind, he can select his aim, and if he likes +renounce it again for something else. You must therefore allow in your +picture for the emergence of mind at some point during the course of +evolution.” + +“Wait a moment,” replies the physicist. “Your whole outlook towards +consciousness betrays not only an anthropomorphic standpoint, but one +limited to a single stage in man’s development. There is no single +condition adequately described by the word ‘conscious’. There are in +fact a great many different states of awareness which may grade into +one another, or may form a series of distinct conditions. We do not +know much about them yet, but their variety is most striking. There +is the dim sentience as we awake from chloroform, the awareness of +the dreaming state, the passive experiencing that accompanies any +intensely rhythmic activity such as running. Again, quite different +states are known in day-dreaming, intellectual concentration and the +delicately-balanced semi-consciousness of creative thought. + +“Consider especially the states of awareness associated with love, or +with the supreme creative activities of the mind. Free-will, or the +deliberate choice of a purpose, is completely lost in a whole-natured +falling in love, as it is also in the artist’s need to follow some +dimly-conscious intuition of a task he must attempt. At these important +occasions free-will disappears before a sense of inner organic +necessity. + +“These examples seem to me to make it clear that ‘conscious purpose’ is +not in any sense the ultimate or highest criterion of human behaviour, +and that free-will need not be taken necessarily to mean the power +to over-ride any laws of nature. In my view ‘free-will’ is simply +the apparent characteristic of organic behaviour when no complete +integration of the personality has been achieved and the mind seems +to be able to oscillate from one purpose to another. We really have +to deal in human beings with a whole series of forms of behaviour +of increasing complexity and integration: reflex and instinctive +actions, deliberate activity, and finally the intuitive whole-natured +creative functioning which leads to ends which could not have been +intellectually foreseen. To each of these must correspond a certain +type of awareness, and in my view, a brain process of a definite degree +of complexity. By analogy with our own experience of different modes +of consciousness, we may be able to infer from the structure of the +central nervous system of an organism what sort of awareness it can +experience. + +“Eventually we must expect to be able to give a complete scheme of all +organic behaviour in terms of the organic processes and their laws, but +none the less it will remain a great deal more convenient in some cases +to refer to what happens to human beings by using words that suggest +their conscious experience. The behaviourist denies the scientific +significance of all but the very barest elements of conscious +experience, but of course he has to start from the human perception +of light and colour. Science cannot get on without ideas which obtain +their whole meaning from the qualities of conscious experience, and +hence the extreme behaviourist position merely arises from a prejudice +which prevents clear thinking. But as a campaign to put more stress on +the direct observation of what really happens to living beings in terms +of physical movements, behaviourism can only do good by bringing more +unbiassed knowledge about life. + +“My own interpretation of the question may be put in this way. The +thing that is given in nature is a process in time. According to +its complexity and degree of co-ordination an organic process has +different degrees of awareness. There is no one condition called human +consciousness, because the human organism can function with different +degrees of co-ordination, and if we ask if an atom in absorbing light +is conscious, the question has no definite meaning. But in a few years +those who are studying the physiology of the central nervous system +will be able to indicate how many steps of synthesis and integration +occur between the simplest cell and the creative thinker, and to each +of these stages will be ascribed a mode of awareness. But below a +certain degree of organic complexity this ‘awareness’, will cease to +be anything that can be consciously imagined by man, e.g. below the +dimmest sentience one might allow an undifferentiated knowledge of mere +continuance, based in turn on the rhythmic pulsation of the elementary +cells.” + +“Your scheme is of course still rather vague, but in its main outlines +it appears satisfactory”, replies the psychologist. “But tell me +outright, can mind influence matter? If I understand you rightly, you +suggest that matter certainly influences mind.” + +“On the contrary, I do not! You are back at the meaningless questions +on which philosophers have wasted much time. To ask if mind can +influence matter does not mean anything until you know what you mean +by mind and matter, and to a scientist that means knowing the laws +they obey. Now, on the one hand, relativity and modern quantum theory +indicate that there is no matter in the old sense of particles made of +some unchanging stuff, and physical science recognizes atomic and other +_processes_ as fundamental in the place of ‘matter’. On the other hand, +you really mean by ‘mind’ one particular form of conscious activity: +the deliberate selection of a purpose. Therefore to give your question +real meaning I have to ask instead ‘Does the conscious selection of a +purpose alter the physical processes going on in the human organism?’ + +“But that is an absurd question. It is like asking: Does a dint in the +outside of a hat _cause_ an alteration in the shape of the inside of +the hat? To which the only reply is that the dint on the outside is +merely another way of describing the dint on the inside. There is no +_causing_ of the one by the other any more than if you fold a bit of +paper you can say that the crease on one side causes the crease on the +other side. They are identical and the double method of description +used in the question creates a meaningless problem. + +“‘Conscious selection of a purpose’ is one way of describing a +particular process, and after this process has occurred the brain +will be different from before. The old theories of the correlation or +interaction of mind and matter presupposed that they were separate +things in themselves. The important questions become quite different +when one realizes that mind and matter do not exist independently, +but that they are both somewhat inadequate ways of describing certain +_aspects_ of one organic process. The spatial aspect of organic +process is called the physical organism. The temporal aspect of organic +process corresponds to the content of its consciousness. The physical +body is a group of spatial characteristics. Consciousness is a system +of temporal elements; memory, anticipation, deliberate repetition, +creative longing, hope and fear are all things set in time. + +“Professor Alexander has said ‘Time is the mind of Space.’ He attempts +to explain space and time by an anthropomorphic analogy. It is a very +suggestive idea, though for the searcher whose goal is the nature of +consciousness itself it is more valuable to put it the other way round: +mind is the temporal aspect of process, body the spatial aspect. But +it is very important indeed to notice that we have not yet found the +adequate terms for describing these two aspects of process. Matter is +unsatisfactory for the spatial aspect, because there are no unchanging +particles. But nor is mind sufficient for the temporal aspect, because +there is a temporal aspect to the combination of hydrogen atoms and to +chemical and colloidal processes, and yet we must not speak of these +as having mind. When the new words for these two aspects are invented +they will form the foundation of the scientific synthesis which I am +expecting.” + +To which the psychologist may answer: “Well, at heart I have always +been a thorough-going determinist like you, at least in dealing with +my patients. Moreover I find it works, because I have always included +in my picture of the patient a life-impulse of some sort, which can be +influenced by my personality. Thus if the behaviour of my patient is +absolutely determined, the conditions which determine what happens to +him include some inner life tendency, and also the effects produced on +him by all the people he meets. + +“But if one attempts to formulate such an absolute determinism, or +to apply it to oneself, one gets into deep waters, and I haven’t the +courage to try it. It seems you must be right at bottom, but that only +a god could believe it without its upsetting his mental balance or his +sense of moral responsibility.” + +“There I agree,” replies the physicist, “as long as one does not +simultaneously revise one’s whole view of life in terms of this new +organic knowledge. That is a very big task, but I should like one +day to attempt it. Two things especially would attract me to such a +revision of human values. One is that people who ought to know better +still go about making moral judgments about their acquaintances. Now +that we know how profound is the influence on a child of the treatment +it receives during its first five years of life, moral judgments become +rather old-fashioned and only show that the person making them has +himself not yet learnt to find emotional fulfilment in healthier ways. +An analysis of human behaviour along the lines of organic determinism +might do something to show that moral condemnations, whether of +bolshevism or of the sins of one’s children, are never effective unless +immediately accompanied by positive example or creative suggestion. + +“But there is another more attractive reason why I should like to +attempt this transvaluation of values. If organic determinism is valid, +then the artist’s aspiration to create is a natural consequence of +some organic law. Creative aspiration may then be looked on as the +natural destiny of certain human beings, though they no more know +where they are going than did the two hydrogen atoms. But organic +determinism allows us to understand why it is of no importance that the +artist doesn’t know what he is going to create before he does it. It +seems that in some matters our organic body is wiser than ourselves, +or rather wiser than our very immature consciousness. When we have +developed our consciousness by the discovery of the organic laws of our +own natures we may be able to make human life more beautiful.” + + + + +CHAPTER VI + +_The Future of the Sciences_ + + +The preceding pages have very broadly indicated the way in which +current physical researches may influence the scientific outlook on +the problems of matter, life, and mind. The view has been put forward +that we are on the eve of a profound scientific synthesis of which the +main outlines are already determined. These general suggestions will +now be made more precise in order to offer to anyone who is interested +the opportunity of testing for himself some definite prophecies +regarding the future of scientific thought. The forecast made here does +not involve any supernatural reading of the future, but is based on +tendencies already inherent in the different departments of science. +For convenience it is expressed in the form of separate assertions +concerning the future of physics, biology, and psychology. + +1. Before 1940 a very remarkable simplification will be made in atomic +theory, which will indicate that in quantum processes physics has +‘touched bottom’ and that--for the time being--we may consider that +nature is not infinitely complex within the heart of the atom. The +proof of this apparent if not absolute limit to the micro-structure +of nature will take the form of the discovery of simple relationships +between the fundamental constants of atomic structure, e, m, M, c, and +h. (The electronic charge and mass, the mass of the hydrogen nucleus, +the velocity of light, and Planck’s constant.) Such relations are +already known but are considered to be of no significance since they +are ruled out by the accepted theory of electrical dimensions. + +Yet this dimensional system is not based on direct observation, +and the importance of these relationships will soon be recognized +in consequence of experiments aimed at a direct determination of +an ‘electron velocity’, in a curved track. ‘Electron velocity’ as +calculated from deflection experiments will be found not to be the same +as the directly measurable cms. per sec., and in the case of straight +electron tracks, the measured velocity may be found to be always that +of light, though this does not mean much since the velocity of light in +one direction has never been measured. + +As the result of the study of individual radiation tracks, for instance +in the reflection of electrons by crystals, and particularly of +any _time_ measurements that can be made, a new system of physical +conceptions will be built up appropriate to irreversible processes, +which will be substituted for the Newtonian reversible system. The +new scheme will probably be based on the conception of the atom, +with its radiating electron tracks, as a natural clock which not +only can be used to measure out equal time intervals, but also to +yield an objective criterion of past and future. In order to make +this idea, or at least one part of it, capable of empirical test the +following hypothesis is put forward: The time-interval between any two +point-events on any electron track is a simple function of the length +and curvature of the part of the track between the two points. This +hypothesis contradicts the current interpretation of electron theory on +a point which has never yet been subjected to experimental test. + +The conceptions which will be built up on electron velocity experiments +will very quickly bring within one simple theory the facts of chemical +combination and colloidal processes. For these depend upon irreversible +effects connected with radiation and electrons, and will therefore be +amenable to treatment by the new conceptions for the very reason which +necessarily puts them beyond the scope of Newtonian laws. + +2. As the result of the alteration in physical conceptions biology +will soon cease to draw a definite line between inanimate and +living systems. The normal characters of life will be recognized +as appearing in steps as one passes up the series atom, molecule, +colloid, protoplasm, cell, and through further stages to mammal and +man. In each class of organism a central controlling process will be +discovered and its laws formulated with some precision, in terms of +irreversible electrochemical processes. The process which in each +organism represents the co-ordinating factor and is the life of the +organism considered as a unit may for instance be described in terms +of a quantity which we shall call ‘f’. ‘f’ would be such that so long +as ‘f’ keeps on increasing the organism is alive, while if ‘f’ stands +still the organism dies. The rate of increase of ‘f’ indicates the +tempo or intensity of the organism’s life. In a simple case ‘f’ might +be directly related to the intake of oxygen or food, and just as +respiration and assimilation are irreversible, so is the change in ‘f’. +‘f’ must go on increasing, or else cease to represent any quantity +in nature; as soon as it ceases to increase the process to which it +corresponds cannot be identified any longer. + +The most important factors which influence the life-function ‘f’ (i.e. +which affect the central controlling process in any organism) will be +known before about 1950, with the result that local rebellions such as +cancer will not only be controllable, but easily prevented. Harmless +methods for increasing the rate of change of ‘f’, i.e. for increasing +the _élan vital_ of the organism, will be discovered, so that, for +instance, the duration of child-birth will be reduced to a natural +minimum. If child-birth sometimes takes very long nowadays, this is +presumably because the woman’s body is tired, exhausted, or partially +poisoned by her mode of living, and by raising her vitality at the +critical moment we may expect to be able to let the process go on at +its natural speed. There must be some minimum time necessary for the +act, since a vast number of complex organic processes have to complete +themselves in a certain order, but probably this time is considerably +shorter than that during which many women in this country have to +suffer. + +It is already known that the Mendelian _genes_ which determine heredity +are related to the rates of development of special processes in the +organism, and a control over the life-tempo, or rate of increase of +‘f’ in any organism or group of cells within an organism, will provide +a new method of tackling the practical problem of heredity. It is +possible that hereditary tendencies to specific weakness or disease +will be overcome by accelerating or retarding the rate of development +of the human system at some special moment between conception and +maturity. + +Rejuvenation will soon be safe and efficient, but not as a means for +attempting immortality. It will be socially recognized as healthy and +legitimate only when undertaken to compensate for premature ageing due +to specific repressions, illness, or anxiety. + +The elimination of known diseases by a genuine science of life does not +mean that other diseases will spring up perhaps worse than before. A +theoretical science of life will know the meaning of all disease, and +will not prevent one in such a way as to give rise to another. Instead +of making campaigns against influenza or any other one disease, it will +determine the conditions in which no disease can survive, and thus +gradually eliminate all the organic diseases which attack the body. + +But this does not mean the attainment of a hygienic Utopia in which +human life necessarily fulfils itself. A balance will be made to +the disappearance of cancer and syphilis, not by the arising of +other diseases but as a result of the consequent increase in the +sensitiveness of the human brain. + +The supremely difficult task of the next hundred years will be to keep +the mind of the race healthy and stable through a period of critical +sensitiveness. We are in a transition stage of violent instability, of +intense cruelty coupled with compassion (America), of blended love of +liberty and need of discipline, of emotional religions and of wars--but +we must hope that it will lead to some mode of life with greater +inherent stability. + +3. Psychology is now occupied with the discovery that the human +response to perceptions is not additive, i.e. that the effect made by a +group of sounds or colours depends on the pattern in space and time in +which they are arranged. (_Gestalt-theorie._) For instance, the effect +made on a man by the individual notes of ‘God save the King’ when +played in the wrong order is negligible, and bears no relation to his +response when he hears the tune played in a cinema, and it reminds him +of ‘patriotism’ and the War. So far no scientific method has been found +of describing when a group of elements is to be treated as a ‘whole’ +for the purposes of psychology, and this is where the greatest advances +may be expected. + +Most scientific conceptions have been based on the method of spatial +analysis, i.e. the reduction, where possible, of a thing to its +smallest spatial elements. Physics, biology, and psychology have all +lacked the equipment to describe what makes the atom, organism, or the +pattern function as a unit, and how we are to know if some group is +a unit or not. The analytical method is fully developed, but we lack +even the basis for a synthetic treatment. This leads some hard-headed +scientists of the materialistic school who will ‘stand no nonsense’ +to assert that there is no such thing as ‘synthesis’, that this is a +mystical idea left over from primitive anthropomorphism. Yet to any +mind that is guided not by prejudice but by a simple search for truth, +the fact of synthesis is obvious, though not yet properly formulated. + +Here modern physics can supply a clue. Analysis is the method required +in a search for instantaneous spatial structure; the synthetic method +which we need must deal with the temporal history and behaviour of +systems. The fact that the human being reacts in the ways he does to a +tune as a whole is evidence of something in his history, that he has +heard the tune often under certain emotional surroundings. The unity +of any synthesis, whole, or organism is not an instantaneous fact +explicable in terms of structure, for we can recognize this unity only +from a continued observation over a period of time. + +Physics can invent one law to describe the approach of the two +hydrogen atoms to form a molecule, and in doing so treats the two +together as a unit. This suggests that the fact of organic unity is to +be defined and formulated in terms of an irreversible law which governs +the system as a whole. Thus a group of atoms, cells, or any other +elements is to be called a unit when, and only when, one irreversible +law can be found which expresses the behaviour of the different +elements as contributing towards some common end, like the formation of +the molecule in the case of the hydrogen atoms. + +We can now draw a practical conclusion for the future of psychology, +which is in great need of a moral principle to guide its treatment of +disintegrated human personality. On the analogy of the two atoms, a +human being is to be considered as a unity when his whole behaviour +displays continuous co-ordination towards some end. But there is an +important difference in the two cases: the atoms move towards an end +which we know because it has already happened in history, whereas +man’s development is creative, that is it proceeds towards an end we +cannot know exactly before it comes into being. Thus the parent or +psychologist need not trouble if he cannot understand what his child or +subject is aiming towards: so long as some consistency and harmony of +functioning is apparent, the ‘end’ can be left to nature to look after, +because such harmony _means_ that the organism is tending towards some +ultimate condition. + +The psychologists of the future will therefore have to follow some +principle such as this: their only legitimate aim is the maintenance +and restoration of harmonious co-ordination of all the human functions, +and no concern need be paid to ultimate intellectual or spiritual +ideals. Of course if the person considered is apparently tending +towards some degenerate condition, that is known to the onlooker +because it is _not_ new but a repetition of what many human beings +have done before, then this tendency can be altered. At least, it can +be altered if the onlooker can use his intuition to discover signs +of repressed conflict which show that the immediate tendency is not +whole-natured, but based on the repression of some more profound +aspiration or desire. Then by bringing this repressed aspiration back +into consciousness the degenerate tendency may be arrested. But this +control over the lives of others can only be effectively exercised +by the intuitive discovery that their present tendencies are not +whole-natured. + + * * * * * + +Prophecy can never be scientific, and forecasting in the realm of +science is perhaps the most dangerous form of intellectual acrobatics. +Science must be thorough, and all vague speculation is its enemy. +But there are moments when a profound revision is necessary, and +amidst the responsibilities and rich appeal of daily life no one will +undertake this task who does not believe that it offers an adequate +reward to science and to man. To-day prophecy can call attention to +unjustified limitations inherent in current scientific thought, and +encourage the students of matter and of life to get together and try to +discover the single system of natural law which we must believe covers +both realms. It may even help them to find crucial experiments by which +to guide their search. + +The reward is certainly great. The indifference to the destruction of +life which has marked recent years is no cause either for surprise or +for despair after an epoch of orthodox and insincere religion coupled +with an abstract science of matter. One thing only can guide humanity +to a saner and richer life: the recognition and valuation of life. +This can be assisted by science and art both revealing life in all its +significant forms. But the roots of art have been destroyed by the +domination of a science which had not recognized the significance of +life within the realm of natural law. For great art can only arise from +a profound reverence for life, whereas to the scientific mood of this +period life appeared as an arbitrary impulse in continual conflict with +the laws of matter. + +Physics is now studying light. The radiant influence of light nourishes +life and within human body forms the fabric of consciousness. We are +alive and conscious, but our consciousness is immature for we do not +yet know the laws that govern our own lives and thoughts. Yet it is +certain that light, life, and consciousness are bound together by some +undiscovered law. This secret of nature’s alchemy is still hidden from +us within our own bodies. By revealing it physics will create a new +hope for man. + + + + +NOTES + + +[1] Whitehead, _Science and the Modern World_. Eddington comes near +to the same idea in an essay in _Science, Religion, and Reality_, +1925. See also Weyl, _Was ist Materie?_ 1924, p. 84. It has also been +expressed by others quite independently, though I do not know of other +published references. + +[2] E.g. the irreversible motion of an electron in the field of a bar +magnet is rendered formally reversible by the assumption that the +magnetic field is due to moving electrons. Yet this assumption is +highly artificial since it postulates electronic movements that have +never been observed. In other cases irreversibility is eliminated by +the choice of special co-ordinate systems. Some physicists now hold the +view that irreversibility may be inherent in atomic as it is in organic +processes. + +[3] _Internal Constitution of the Stars_, 1926, p. 56. Compare note on +p. 44. + +It may be convenient here to summarize the processes that give at any +rate superficial evidence of their irreversibility: processes involving +heat changes, or the radiation of light, or mass; the production of +energy in a star, the motions of electrons in magnetic fields, certain +types of atom-ion collision in mixed gases, processes dependent on +retarded potentials, radioactivity, organic growth and evolution, +and consciousness itself. Eddington deals only with the case of the +emission and absorption of light, but suggests that the direction +of time can only be deduced from statistical processes. This is the +orthodox view, though it is very doubtful if it is valid now that the +quantum processes are receiving formulation. In this connection, see +note 4. + +[4] Einstein. Berlin Akad., _Sitzungsberichte_, 1925, p. 418. But +Einstein’s view must be revised in view of recent experimental results +(e.g. Harnwell, _Phys. Rev._, vol. 29, 1927, pp. 683 and 831), if these +have been correctly interpreted. See Born, _Zeitschr für Physik_, vol. +40, pp. 177-8; and Jordan, _Naturw._ 1927, p. 792. + +[5] The idea that time may be an active factor in causation has the +mathematical significance that ‘t’ (for the system in question) must +appear explicitly in the formulation of the law, and not merely as the +square of a time-differential found convenient for the correlation of +a standard clock with a reversible process which is being observed. +A law whose mathematical formulation involves ‘t’ measured from some +moment in the history of the system, gives an entirely new meaning +to ‘t’, though one consistent with the properties of the reversible +Newtonian differential ‘dt’. Such a law may claim to express the fact +of historic, irreversible, duration, a feature in nature which is +neglected by laws involving only ‘dt’ squared. + +[6] Einstein, _Annalen der Physik_, vol. 49, pp. 776-7, 1916. + + + + + +_SIXTY VOLUMES ARE NOW PUBLISHED_ + +TO-DAY AND TO-MORROW + +_Each, pott 8vo, boards, 2/6 net_ + + +This series of books, by some of the most distinguished English +thinkers, scientists, philosophers, doctors, critics, and artists, was +at once recognized as a noteworthy event. Written from various points +of view, one book frequently opposing the argument of another, they +provide the reader with a stimulating survey of the most modern thought +in many departments of life. Several volumes are devoted to the future +trend of Civilization, conceived as a whole; while others deal with +particular provinces. It is interesting to see in these neat little +volumes, issued at a low price, the revival of a form of literature, +the Pamphlet, which has been in disuse for many years. + + + _Published by_ + KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., LTD. + Broadway House: 68-74 Carter Lane, London, E.C.4 + + +_FROM THE REVIEWS_ + + _Times Literary Supplement_: “An entertaining series of vivacious and + stimulating studies of modern tendencies.” + + _Spectator_: “Scintillating monographs ... that very lively and + courageous series.” + + _Observer_: “There seems no reason why the brilliant To-day and + To-morrow Series should come to an end for a century of to-morrows. + At first it seemed impossible for the publishers to keep up the + sport through a dozen volumes, but the series already runs to more + than two score. A remarkable series....” + + _Daily Telegraph_: “This admirable series of essays, provocative and + brilliant.” + + _Nation_: “We are able to peer into the future by means of that + brilliant series [which] will constitute a precious document upon + the present time.”--_T. S. Eliot._ + + _Manchester Dispatch_: “The more one reads of these pamphlets, the + more avid becomes the appetite. We hope the list is endless.” + + _Irish Statesman_: “Full of lively controversy.” + + _Daily Herald_: “This series has given us many monographs of + brilliance and discernment.... The stylistic excellencies of this + provocative series.” + + _Field_: “We have long desired to express the deep admiration felt by + every thinking scholar and worker at the present day for this + series. We must pay tribute to the high standard of thought and + expression they maintain. As small gift-books, austerely yet + prettily produced, they remain unequalled of their kind. We can give + but the briefest suggestions of their value to the student, the + politician, and the voter....” + + _New York World_: “Holds the palm in the speculative and + interpretative thought of the age.” + + +VOLUMES READY + + =Daedalus=, or Science and the Future. By J. B. S. HALDANE, Reader in + Biochemistry, University of Cambridge. _Seventh impression._ + + “A fascinating and daring little book.”--_Westminster Gazette._ + “The essay is brilliant, sparkling with wit and bristling with + challenges.”--_British Medical Journal._ + + “Predicts the most startling changes.”--_Morning Post._ + + =Callinicus=, a Defence of Chemical Warfare. By J. B. S. HALDANE. + _Second impression._ + + “Mr Haldane’s brilliant study.”--_Times Leading Article._ “A book + to be read by every intelligent adult.”--_Spectator._ “This + brilliant little monograph.”--_Daily News._ + + =Icarus=, or the Future of Science. By BERTRAND RUSSELL, F.R.S. + _Fourth impression._ + + “Utter pessimism.”--_Observer._ “Mr Russell refuses to believe that + the progress of Science must be a boon to mankind.”--_Morning Post._ + “A stimulating book, that leaves one not at all + discouraged.”--_Daily Herald._ + + =What I Believe.= By BERTRAND RUSSELL, F.R.S. _Third impression._ + + “One of the most brilliant and thought-stimulating little books I + have read--a better book even than _Icarus_.”--_Nation._ “Simply and + brilliantly written.”--_Nature._ “In stabbing sentences he punctures + the bubble of cruelty, envy, narrowness, and ill-will which those in + authority call their morals.”--_New Leader._ + + =Tantalus=, or the Future of Man. By F. C. S. SCHILLER, D.SC., Fellow + of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. _Second impression._ + + “They are all (_Daedalus_, _Icarus_, and _Tantalus_) brilliantly + clever, and they supplement or correct one another.”--_Dean Inge_, + in _Morning Post_. “Immensely valuable and infinitely + readable.”--_Daily News._ “The book of the week.”--_Spectator._ + + =Cassandra=, or the Future of the British Empire. By F. C. S. + SCHILLER, D.SC. + + “We commend it to the complacent of all parties.”--_Saturday + Review._ “The book is small, but very, very weighty; brilliantly + written, it ought to be read by all shades of politicians and + students of politics.”--_Yorkshire Post._ “Yet another addition to + that bright constellation of pamphlets.”--_Spectator._ + + =Quo Vadimus?= Glimpses of the Future. By E. E. FOURNIER D’ALBE, D.SC. + _Second Impression._ + + “A wonderful vision of the future. A book that will be talked + about.”--_Daily Graphic._ “A remarkable contribution to a + remarkable series.”--_Manchester Dispatch._ “Interesting and + singularly plausible.”--_Daily Telegraph._ + + =Thrasymachus=, the Future of Morals. By C. E. M. JOAD, author of “The + Babbitt Warren,” etc. _Second impression._ + + “His provocative book.”--_Graphic._ “Written in a style of + deliberate brilliance.”--_Times Literary Supplement._ “As outspoken + and unequivocal a contribution as could well be imagined. Even those + readers who dissent will be forced to recognize the admirable + clarity with which he states his case. A book that will + startle.”--_Daily Chronicle._ + + =Lysistrata=, or Woman’s Future and Future Woman. By ANTHONY M. + LUDOVICI, author of “A Defence of Aristocracy,” etc. _Second + Impression._ + + “A stimulating book. Volumes would be needed to deal, in the + fullness his work provokes, with all the problems raised.”--_Sunday + Times._ “Pro-feminine but anti-feministic.”--_Scotsman._ “Full of + brilliant common-sense.”--_Observer._ + + =Hypatia=, or Woman and Knowledge. By MRS BERTRAND RUSSEL. With a + frontispiece. _Third impression._ + + An answer to _Lysistrata_. “A passionate vindication of the rights + of woman.”--_Manchester Guardian._ “Says a number of things that + sensible women have been wanting publicly said for a long + time.”--_Daily Herald._ + + =Hephaestus=, the Soul of the Machine. By E. E. FOURNIER D’ALBE, D.SC. + + “A worthy contribution to this interesting series. A delightful + and thought-provoking essay.”--_Birmingham Post._ “There is a + special pleasure in meeting with a book like _Hephaestus_. The + author has the merit of really understanding what he is talking + about.”--_Engineering._ “An exceedingly clever defence of + machinery.”--_Architects’ Journal._ + + =The Passing of the Phantoms=: a Study of Evolutionary Psychology and + Morals. By C. J. PATTEN, Professor of Anatomy, Sheffield University. + With 4 Plates. + + “Readers of _Daedalus_, _Icarus_ and _Tantalus_, will be grateful + for an excellent presentation of yet another point of + view.”--_Yorkshire Post._ “This bright and bracing little + book.”--_Literary Guide._ “Interesting and original.”--_Medical + Times._ + + =The Mongol in our Midst=: a Study of Man and his Three Faces. By + F. G. CROOKSHANK, M.D., F.R.C.P. With 28 Plates. _Second Edition, + revised._ + + “A brilliant piece of speculative induction.”--_Saturday Review._ + “An extremely interesting and suggestive book, which will reward + careful reading.”--_Sunday Times._ “The pictures carry fearful + conviction.”--_Daily Herald._ + + =The Conquest of Cancer.= By H. W. S. WRIGHT, M.S., F.R.C.S. + Introduction by F. G. CROOKSHANK, M.D. + + “Eminently suitable for general reading. The problem is fairly and + lucidly presented. One merit of Mr Wright’s plan is that he tells + people what, in his judgment, they can best do, _here and + now_.”--From the _Introduction_. + + =Pygmalion=, or the Doctor of the Future. By R. MCNAIR WILSON, M.B. + + “Dr Wilson has added a brilliant essay to this series.”--_Times + Literary Supplement._ “This is a very little book, but there is much + wisdom in it.”--_Evening Standard._ “No doctor worth his salt would + venture to say that Dr Wilson was wrong.”--_Daily Herald._ + + =Prometheus=, or Biology and the Advancement of Man. By H. S. + JENNINGS, Professor of Zoology, Johns Hopkins University. _Second + Impression._ + + “This volume is one of the most remarkable that has yet appeared in + this series. Certainly the information it contains will be new to + most educated laymen. It is essentially a discussion of ... heredity + and environment, and it clearly establishes the fact that the + current use of these terms has no scientific justification.”--_Times + Literary Supplement._ “An exceedingly brilliant book.”--_New + Leader._ + + =Narcissus=: an Anatomy of Clothes. By GERALD HEARD. With 19 + illustrations. + + “A most suggestive book.”--_Nation._ “Irresistible. Reading it + is like a switchback journey. Starting from prehistoric times we + rocket down the ages.”--_Daily News._ “Interesting, provocative, and + entertaining.”--_Queen._ + + =Thamyris=, or Is There a Future for Poetry? By R. C. TREVELYAN. + + “Learned, sensible, and very well-written.”--_Affable Hawk_, in _New + Statesman_. “Very suggestive.”--_J. C. Squire_, in _Observer_. “A + very charming piece of work, I agree with all, or at any rate, + almost all its conclusions.”--_J. St Loe Strachey_, in _Spectator_. + + =Proteus=, or the Future of Intelligence. By VERNON LEE, author of + “Satan the Waster,” etc. + + “We should like to follow the author’s suggestions as to the + effect of intelligence on the future of Ethics, Aesthetics, + and Manners. Her book is profoundly stimulating and should be + read by everyone.”--_Outlook._ “A concise, suggestive piece of + work.”--_Saturday Review._ + + =Timotheus=, the Future of the Theatre. By BONAMY DOBRÉE, author of + “Restoration Drama,” etc. + + “A witty, mischievous little book, to be read with + delight.”--_Times Literary Supplement._ “This is a delightfully + witty book.”--_Scotsman._ “In a subtly satirical vein he visualizes + various kinds of theatres in 200 years’ time. His gay little book + makes delightful reading.”--_Nation._ + + =Paris=, or the Future of War. By Captain B. H. LIDDELL HART. + + “A companion volume to _Callinicus_. A gem of close thinking and + deduction.”--_Observer._ “A noteworthy contribution to a problem of + concern to every citizen in this country.”--_Daily + Chronicle._ “There is some lively thinking about the future of war + in _Paris_, just added to this set of live-wire pamphlets on big + subjects.”--_Manchester Guardian._ + + =Wireless Possibilities.= By Professor A. M. LOW. With 4 diagrams. + + “As might be expected from an inventor who is always so fresh, he + has many interesting things to say.”--_Evening Standard._ “The + mantle of Blake has fallen upon the physicists. To them we look for + visions, and we find them in this book.”--_New Statesman._ + + =Perseus=: of Dragons. By H. F. SCOTT STOKES. With 2 illustrations. + + “A diverting little book, chock-full of ideas. Mr Stokes’ + dragon-lore is both quaint and various.”--_Morning Post._ “Very + amusingly written, and a mine of curious knowledge for which the + discerning reader will find many uses.”--_Glasgow Herald._ + + =Lycurgus=, or the Future of Law. By E. S. P. HAYNES, author of + “Concerning Solicitors,” etc. + + “An interesting and concisely written book.”--_Yorkshire Post._ “He + roundly declares that English criminal law is a blend of barbaric + violence, medieval prejudices and modern fallacies.... A humane + and conscientious investigation.”--_T.P.’s Weekly._ “A thoughtful + book--deserves careful reading.”--_Law Times._ + + =Euterpe=, or the Future of Art. By LIONEL R. MCCOLVIN, author of “The + Theory of Book-Selection.” + + “Discusses briefly, but very suggestively, the problem of the future + of art in relation to the public.”--_Saturday Review._ “Another + indictment of machinery as a soul-destroyer ... Mr McColvin has the + courage to suggest solutions.”--_Westminster Gazette._ “This is + altogether a much-needed book.”--_New Leader._ + + =Pegasus=, or Problems of Transport. By Colonel J. F. C. FULLER, + author of “The Reformation of War,” etc. With 8 Plates. + + “The foremost military prophet of the day propounds a solution for + industrial and unemployment problems. It is a bold essay ... and + calls for the attention of all concerned with imperial + problems.”--_Daily Telegraph._ “Practical, timely, very interesting + and very important.”--_J. St Loe Strachey_, in _Spectator_. + + =Atlantis=, or America and the Future. By Colonel J. F. C. FULLER. + + “Candid and caustic.”--_Observer._ “Many hard things have been + said about America, but few quite so bitter and caustic as + these.”--_Daily Sketch._ “He can conjure up possibilities of a new + Atlantis.”--_Clarion._ + + =Midas=, or the United States and the Future. By C. H. BRETHERTON, + author of “The Real Ireland,” etc. + + A companion volume to _Atlantis_. “Full of astute observations and + acute reflections ... this wise and witty pamphlet, a provocation to + the thought that is creative.”--_Morning Post._ “A punch in every + paragraph. One could hardly ask for more ‘meat.’”--_Spectator._ + + =Nuntius=, or Advertising and its Future. By GILBERT RUSSELL. + + “Expresses the philosophy of advertising concisely and + well.”--_Observer._ “It is doubtful if a more straightforward + exposition of the part advertising plays in our public and private + life has been written.”--_Manchester Guardian._ + + =Birth Control and the State=: a Plea and a Forecast. By C. P. + BLACKER, _M.C._, M.A., M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P. + + “A very careful summary.”--_Times Literary Supplement._ “A + temperate and scholarly survey of the arguments for and against the + encouragement of the practice of birth control.”--_Lancet._ “He + writes lucidly, moderately, and from wide knowledge; his book + undoubtedly gives a better understanding of the subject than any + other brief account we know. It also suggests a policy.”--_Saturday + Review._ + + =Ouroboros=, or the Mechanical Extension of Mankind. By GARET GARRETT. + + “This brilliant and provoking little book.”--_Observer._ “A + significant and thoughtful essay, calculated in parts to make our + flesh creep.”--_Spectator._ “A brilliant writer, Mr Garrett is a + remarkable man. He explains something of the enormous change the + machine has made in life.”--_Daily Express._ + + =Artifex=, or the Future of Craftsmanship. By JOHN GLOAG, author of + “Time, Taste, and Furniture.” + + “An able and interesting summary of the history of craftsmanship + in the past, a direct criticism of the present, and at the end his + hopes for the future. Mr Gloag’s real contribution to the future of + craftsmanship is his discussion of the uses of machinery.”--_Times + Literary Supplement._ + + =Plato’s American Republic.= By J. DOUGLAS WOODRUFF. _Fourth + impression._ + + “Uses the form of the Socratic dialogue with devastating success. A + gently malicious wit sparkles in every page.”--_Sunday Times._ + “Having deliberately set himself an almost impossible task, has + succeeded beyond belief.”--_Saturday Review._ “Quite the liveliest + even of this spirited series.”--_Observer._ + + =Orpheus=, or the Music of the Future. By W. J. TURNER, author of + “Music and Life.” _Second impression._ + + “A book on music that we can read not merely once, but twice or + thrice. Mr Turner has given us some of the finest thinking upon + Beethoven that I have ever met with.”--_Ernest Newman_ in _Sunday + Times_. “A brilliant essay in contemporary philosophy.”--_Outlook._ + “The fruit of real knowledge and understanding.”--_New Statesman._ + + =Terpander=, or Music and the Future. By E. J. DENT, author of + “Mozart’s Operas.” + + “In _Orpheus_ Mr Turner made a brilliant voyage in search of first + principles. Mr Dent’s book is a skilful review of the development of + music. It is the most succinct and stimulating essay on music I have + found....”--_Musical News._ “Remarkably able and + stimulating.”--_Times Literary Supplement._ “There is hardly another + critic alive who could sum up contemporary tendencies so + neatly.”--_Spectator._ + + =Sibylla=, or the Revival of Prophecy. By C. A. MACE, University of + St. Andrew’s. + + “An entertaining and instructive pamphlet.”--_Morning Post._ “Places + a nightmare before us very ably and wittily.”--_Spectator._ + “Passages in it are excellent satire, but on the whole Mr Mace’s + speculations may be taken as a trustworthy guide ... to modern + scientific thought.”--_Birmingham Post._ + + =Lucullus=, or the Food of the Future. By OLGA HARTLEY and MRS C. F. + LEYEL, authors of “The Gentle Art of Cookery.” + + “This is a clever and witty little volume in an entertaining series, + and it makes enchanting reading.”--_Times Literary Supplement._ + “Opens with a brilliant picture of modern man, living in a + vacuum-cleaned, steam-heated, credit-furnished suburban mansion + ‘with a wolf in the basement’--the wolf of hunger. This banquet of + epigrams.”--_Spectator._ + + =Procrustes=, or the Future of English Education. By M. ALDERTON PINK. + + “Undoubtedly he makes out a very good case.”--_Daily Herald._ “This + interesting addition to the series.”--_Times Educational + Supplement._ “Intends to be challenging and succeeds in being so. + All fit readers will find it stimulating.”--_Northern Echo._ + + =The Future of Futurism.= By JOHN RODKER. + + “Mr Rodker is up-to-the-minute, and he has accomplished a + considerable feat in writing on such a vague subject, 92 extremely + interesting pages.”--_T. S. Eliot_, in _Nation_. “There are a good + many things in this book which are of interest.”--_Times Literary + Supplement._ + + =Pomona=, or the Future of English. By BASIL DE SÉLINCOURT, author of + “The English Secret”, etc. + + “The future of English is discussed fully and with fascinating + interest.”--_Morning Post._ “Full of wise thoughts and happy + words.”--_Times Literary Supplement._ “His later pages must stir + the blood of any man who loves his country and her poetry.”--_J. C. + Squire_, in _Observer_. “His finely-conceived essay.”--_Manchester + Guardian._ + + =Balbus=, or the Future of Architecture. By CHRISTIAN BARMAN. + + “A really brilliant addition to this already distinguished series. + The reading of _Balbus_ will give much data for intelligent + prophecy, and incidentally, an hour or so of excellent + entertainment.”--_Spectator._ “Most readable and reasonable. We can + recommend it warmly.”--_New Statesman._ “This intriguing little + book.”--_Connoisseur._ + + =Apella=, or the Future of the Jews. By A QUARTERLY REVIEWER. + + “Cogent, because of brevity and a magnificent prose style, this book + wins our quiet praise. It is a fine pamphlet, adding to the value + of the series, and should not be missed.”--_Spectator._ “A notable + addition to this excellent series. His arguments are a provocation + to fruitful thinking.”--_Morning Post._ + + =The Dance of Çiva=, or Life’s Unity and Rhythm. By COLLUM. + + “It has substance and thought in it. The author is very much alive + and responsive to the movements of to-day.”--_Spectator._ “A very + interesting account of the work of Sir Jagadis Bose.”--_Oxford + Magazine._ “Has caught the spirit of the Eastern conception of world + movements.”--_Calcutta Statesman._ + + =Lars Porsena=, or the Future of Swearing and Improper Language. By + ROBERT GRAVES. _Third impression._ + + “Goes uncommonly well, and deserves to.”--_Observer._ “Not for + squeamish readers.”--_Spectator._ “No more amusingly unexpected + contribution has been made to this series. A deliciously ironical + affair.”--_Bystander._ “His highly entertaining essay is as full + as the current standard of printers and police will allow.”--_New + Statesman._ “Humour and style are beyond criticism.”--_Irish + Statesman._ + + =Socrates=, or the Emancipation of Mankind. By H. F. CARLILL. + + “Devotes a specially lively section to the herd instinct.”--_Times._ + “Clearly, and with a balance that is almost Aristotelian, he + reveals what modern psychology is going to accomplish.”--_New + Statesman._ “One of the most brilliant and important of a remarkable + series.”--_Westminster Gazette._ + + =Delphos=, or the Future of International Language. By E. SYLVIA + PANKHURST. + + “Equal to anything yet produced in this brilliant series. Miss + Pankhurst states very clearly what all thinking people must soon + come to believe, that an international language would be one of the + greatest assets of civilization.”--_Spectator._ “A most readable + book, full of enthusiasm, an important contribution to this + subject.”--_International Language._ + + =Gallio=, or the Tyranny of Science. By J. W. N. SULLIVAN, author of + “A History of Mathematics.” + + “So packed with ideas that it is not possible to give any adequate + _résumé_ of its contents.”--_Times Literary Supplement._ “His + remarkable monograph, his devastating summary of materialism, this + pocket _Novum Organum_.”--_Spectator._ “Possesses a real distinction + of thought and manner. It must be read.”--_New Statesman._ + + =Apollonius=, or the Future of Psychical Research. By E. N. BENNETT, + author of “Problems of Village Life,” etc. + + “A sane, temperate and suggestive survey of a field of inquiry + which is slowly but surely pushing to the front.”--_Times Literary + Supplement._ “His exposition of the case for psychic research is + lucid and interesting.”--_Scotsman._ “Displays the right temper, + admirably conceived, skilfully executed.”--_Liverpool Post._ + + =Aeolus=, or the Future of the Flying Machine. By OLIVER STEWART. + + “Both his wit and his expertness save him from the + nonsensical-fantastic. There is nothing vague or sloppy in these + imaginative forecasts.”--_Daily News._ “He is to be congratulated. + His book is small, but it is so delightfully funny that it is well + worth the price, and there really are sensible ideas behind the + jesting.”--_Aeroplane._ + + =Stentor=, or the Press of To-Day and To-Morrow. By DAVID OCKHAM. + + “A valuable and exceedingly interesting commentary on a vital phase + of modern development.”--_Daily Herald._ “Vigorous and well-written, + eminently readable.”--_Yorkshire Post._ “He has said what one + expects any sensible person to say about the ‘trustification’ of the + Press.”--_Spectator._ + + =Rusticus=, or the Future of the Countryside. By MARTIN S. BRIGGS, + F.R.I.B.A. + + “Few of the 50 volumes, provocative and brilliant as most of them + have been, capture our imagination as does this one.”--_Daily + Telegraph._ “The historical part is as brilliant a piece of packed + writing as could be desired.”--_Daily Herald._ “Serves a national + end. The book is in essence a pamphlet, though it has the form and + charm of a book.”--_Spectator._ + + =Janus=, or the Conquest of War. By WILLIAM MCDOUGALL, M.B., F.R.S. + + “Among all the booklets of this brilliant series, none, I think is + so weighty and impressive as this. It contains thrice as much matter + as the other volumes and is profoundly serious.”--Dean Inge, in + _Evening Standard_. “A deeply interesting and fair-minded study of + the causes of war and the possibilities of their prevention. Every + word is sound.”--_Spectator._ + + =Vulcan=, or the Future of Labour. By CECIL CHISHOLM. + + “Of absorbing interest.”--_Daily Herald._ “No one, perhaps, has ever + condensed so many hard facts into the appearance of agreeable + fiction, nor held the balance so nicely between technicalities and + flights of fancy, as the author of this excellent book in a + brilliant series. _Vulcan_ is a little book, but between its covers + knowledge and vision are pressed down and brimming + over.”--_Spectator._ + + =Hymen=, or the Future of Marriage. By NORMAN HAIRE. + + This candid and unprejudiced survey inquires why the majority + of marriages to-day seem to be so unsatisfactory, and finds the + answer in the sexual ethic of our civilization which is ill adapted + to our social and economic needs. The problems of sex-morality, + sex-education, prostitution, in-breeding, birth-control, + trial-marriage, and polygamy are all touched upon. + + =The Next Chapter=: the War against the Moon. By ANDRÉ MAUROIS, author + of ‘Ariel’, etc. + + This imaginary chapter of world-history (1951-64) from the pen of + one of the most brilliant living French authors mixes satire and + fancy in just proportions. It tells how the press of the world is + controlled by five men, how world interest is focussed on an attack + on the moon, how thus the threat of world-war is averted. But when + the moon retaliates.... + + =Galatea=, or the Future of Darwinism. By W. RUSSELL BRAIN. + + This non-technical but closely-reasoned book is a challenge to the + orthodox teaching on evolution known as Neo-Darwinism. The author + claims that, although Neo-Darwinian theories can possibly account + for the evolution of forms, they are quite inadequate to explain the + evolution of functions. + + =Scheherazade=, or the Future of the English Novel. By JOHN CARRUTHERS. + + A survey of contemporary fiction in England and America lends to the + conclusion that the literary and scientific influences of the last + fifty years have combined to make the novel of to-day predominantly + analytic. It has thus gained in psychological subtlety, but lost its + form. How this may be regained is put forward in the conclusion. + + =Caledonia=, or the Future of the Scots. By G. M. THOMSON. + + Exit the Scot! Under this heading the Scottish people are revealed + as a leaderless mob in whom national pride has been strangled. They + regard, unmoved, the spectacle of their monstrous slum-evil, the + decay of their industries, the devastation of their countryside. + This is the most compact and mordant indictment of Scottish policy + that has yet been written. + + =Albyn=, or Scotland and the Future. By C. M. GRIEVE, author of + ‘Contemporary Scottish Studies’, etc. + + A vigorous answer, explicit and implicit, to _Caledonia_, tracing + the movements of a real Scottish revival, in music, art, literature, + and politics, and coming to the conclusion that there is a chance + even now for the regeneration of the Scottish people. + + =Lares et Penates=, or the Future of the Home. By H. J. BIRNSTINGL. + + All the many forces at work to-day are influencing the planning, + appearance, and equipment of the home. This is the main thesis of + this stimulating volume, which considers also the labour-saving + movement, the ‘ideal’ house, the influence of women, the servant + problem, and the relegation of aesthetic considerations to the + background. Disconcerting prognostications follow. + + +_NEARLY READY_ + + =Archon=, or the Future of Government. By HAMILTON FYFE. + + A survey of the methods of government in the past leads the author + to a consideration of conditions in the world of to-day. He then + indicates the lines along which progress may develop. + + =Hermes=, or the Future of Chemistry. By T. W. JONES, B.Sc., F.C.S. + + Chemistry as the means of human emancipation is the subject of this + book. To-day chemistry is one of the master factors of our + existence; to-morrow it will dominate every phase of life, winning + for man the goal of all his endeavour, economic freedom. It may also + effect a startling change in man himself. + + =The Future of Physics.= By L. L. WHYTE. + + The last few years have been a critical period in the development + of physics. We stand on the eve of a new epoch. Physics, biology, + and psychology are converging towards a scientific synthesis of + unprecedented importance whose influence on thought and social + custom will be so profound as to mark a stage in human evolution. + This book interprets these events and should be read in connexion + with _Gallio_, by J. W. N. Sullivan, in this series. + + =Ikonoclastes=, or the Future of Shakespeare. By HUBERT GRIFFITHS. + + Taking as text the recent productions of classical plays in modern + dress, the author, a distinguished dramatic critic, suggests that + this is the proper way of reviving Shakespeare and other great + dramatists of the past, and that their successful revival in modern + dress may perhaps be taken as an indication of their value. + + +_IN PREPARATION_ + + =Bacchus=, or the Future of Wine. By P. MORTON SHAND. + + =Mercurius=, or the World on Wings. By C. THOMPSON WALKER. + + =The Future of Sport.= By G. S. SANDILANDS. + + =The Future of India.= By T. EARLE WELBY. + + =The Future of Films.= By ERNEST BETTS. + + * * * * * + + + + +Transcriber’s note + + +Minor punctuation errors have been changed without notice. + +Other spelling has been retained as originally published except +for the changes below. + + Page 92: “be effectively exercized” “be effectively exercised” + Page 105: “Mr Colvin has the” “Mr McColvin has the” + Page 113: “their montrous slum-evil” “their monstrous slum-evil” + + + +*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 75452 *** |