Imagination in Science

DrRocket · Aug 16, 2008

There seems to be in some quarters in these forums a misconception regarding the role of imagination in science.  I thought I would start a thread to address the subject. My thoughts below are directed at the hard sciences, mathematics and engineering, and when the term “science” is used it connotes those disciplines.Imagination is critical to science.  It is not the imagination of science fiction, of abstract art, of the cinema, of comedy, or of any works of fiction whatever.  Imagination in those pursuits is valuable, and entertaining, but it is of a different sort than is appropriate in science.  Imagination in science is distinct from foolishness.  Foolishness has a place.  That place is not in science.Science is constrained by a set of principles that have been the result of a great deal of imagination, but also have been demonstrated to have a tight logical construction and have been supported by a large body of experimental evidence.  The basic laws of science are known to provide extremely accurate predictions of natural processes over a very wide range of circumstances.  Those circumstances in which the laws provide such predictions are well known and constitute a domain of validity for the laws of physics and the principles of science governed by those laws.  Within that domain of validity the laws of physics can be considered to be “true” unless and until extremely convincing evidence to the contrary is found.  The history of science suggests that the fundamental laws of physics are never demonstrated to be totally wrong and inapplicable but rather are found to be limited to a particular domain of validity and may require revision to extend that domain.  Such was the case when general relativity replaced Newton’s law of universal gravitation, and when quantum theory replaced Newtonian mechanics and Maxwellian electrodynamics.  It was required when Newtonian mechanics and Maxwellian electrodynamics were formulated.  The development of these theories required imagination of the highest order on the part of the scientists involved.It is imagination of the sort exhibited by Maxwell, Newton, Einstein, Feynman and many others that drives science.  It is a disciplined imagination.  It requires the formulation of new principles and concepts that simultaneously agree with earlier principles in that domain in which they are known to provide accurate predictions and extends a predictive capability to a broader context.  It is an imagination that produces concepts that are defensible with experiment, that are mathematically consistent and that provide a basis for mathematical models with a high degree of accuracy.  It is an imagination that is constrained on the one hand by known science and unfettered on the other in order to extend that knowledge to new frontiers.  It is imagination that must produce principles that are consistent with ALL valid experimental data, and not just some of it.  It is an imagination that produces principles that are in agreement with mathematical models and not just simple pictures and cartoons.  It is imagination and intellect of the highest order.Engineering imagination is similar, but is directed at the production of systems that must actually work in and uncertain world and are of economic value.  Engineers are constrained by the laws of science, and also by the uncertainties that come with the complex systems with which they work.  They must be imaginative, but also must be constrained by science, economics, and practicality.  What scientific imagination is not is as important to understand as what it is.  It is not nonsensical promotion of ideas that are known to be false.  It is not the result of a failure to recognize that a proposal is silly and to continue to advocate demonstrable nonsense.  It is not a rejection of known principles in favor of unsubstantiated flights of fancy.  It is not becoming an advocate for a notion that seems to explain some of the date while clearly being in conflict with the complete body of available data. The requirement for a Ph.D. in science, the only hard and fast requirement, is the production of an acceptable doctoral dissertation.  That dissertation is required to be a significant original contribution to the discipline.  Imagination is actually a requirement for the degree.  To think that science does not value imagination is therefore demonstrably absurd.  But it must be imagination of the disciplined scientific variety.Everyone has bad ideas as well as good ones.  Scientists have bad ideas, lots of them.  But they come to quickly recognize them, usually on their own and do not promote those ideas constantly and publicly.  One way, a good way, to have few ideas is to have lots of ideas.  Then you pick the good ones.  But it is important to know the difference, and to cull the bad ones out quickly – usually on your own.  There is nothing stupid about having stupid ideas.  But it is stupid to promote them.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

arkady · Aug 17, 2008

Just finished my Einstein biography. Struck me how important imagination was in his life. The ability to form mental experiments and considerations was central in his work. Much of his succes stems from disregard of conventional wisdom and the ability to question authorities. To be intrigued by mysteries that others find trivial. It actually gave me a lot of comfort in my delvings into physics. All the seemingly simple and childish questions is perfectly reasonable to consider in order to really form an understanding of the world.  "To punish my contempt for authority, destiny has made me into an authority myself" - Albert Einstein"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Albert Einstein   <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "The choice is the Universe, or nothing ... " - H.G Wells </div>

Search

Imagination in Science

DrRocket

Guest

arkady

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page