|
Dear Friends
of FOTH,
Many of you
may recall from your high school chemistry
class, the story of the chemical formula
structure of Benzene. It was isolated in early
19th century, but the bond structure
of its chemical formula C6H6
could not be determined for several
decades. While working on this
problem, a German chemist, Kekule,
had a dream in which he saw a snake sitting like
a ring with its tail in its mouth. This dream
provided the chemist an inspiration to approach
the problem from yet another angle. The
influence of this experience motivated him to
think outside the box and consider what had not
be considered previously. Consequently, the
bonding structure of Benzene (and hosts of other
organic materials) was established to be of a
ring type. Which is taken to be true to this
day.
Can we say
that today’s organic chemistry is nothing but
snake science?
Rightly or
wrongly, there is also a story that Newton,
while sitting under an apple tree, saw an apple
falling to the ground. This observation
triggered Newton to think why the apples fell
down why not stay up in the air or fly off the
tree upwards. This inspired him to think about
the mutual attraction of masses that led him to
propose his law of gravitation.
An
inspiration is simply a trigger point to make
some one start thinking about what may have been
ignored in the past. An inspiration should not
be confused with apple to orange comparison
analogy. It is far from it. One can get
inspiration to think outside the box in so many
unconventional ways from so many different and
least expected sources; a historical book, a
discussion with friends, a scripture or other’s
scientific work in similar or dissimilar fields
of science and philosophy can all play a role.
The inspiration merely refers to an influence to
trigger the start of the thought process the way
one has not previously perceived. Every
inspiration or external influence does not
necessarily yield useful results. The results
yielded, still need to be assessed independently
and objectively.
It is
perfectly normal, and I do not see why should it
be unacceptable if some one is inspired by
Quranic verses on cosmology and intends to
follow through within the framework of already
established mathematical and scientific rules,
including challenging a few, based upon robust
arguments which may appear worth exploring.
Make no mistake about it, each and every
theoretical physics theorem did not originate
from a laboratory. The laboratory verification
comes into the picture much later when the
theory has been finalized with all the known
variables and boundary conditions. Einstein,
when proposed his Special theory of Relativity
was a technical clerk at the Swiss patent
office. The patent office did not have a
laboratory for him.
At the time
of this writing, there are 51 posts. Most of
these posts are nothing but Innuendos of
personal attacks, irrelevant narratives, attacks
on religion or religious scholars and newspaper
column style meaningless mumbo jumbo of word
acrobatics.
It is a sad
state of affairs, that most of the participants
on this forum are highly educated and
responsible intellectuals, and yet, most of them
are not aware of the art of carrying out a
meaningful dialog within the boundaries of the
scope of the subject under discussion. It is not
surprising why Pakistan is in the hole – its
intellectuals are busy knocking each other down
– instead of working with each other, they
prefer to work against each other.
In this FOTH
discussion, it is obvious that many have the
answer before they even know or understand the
question. Most of the posts speak of
nothing/zilch/zero that can be related to the
topic of discussion and yet, many writers
represent the cream of the society. Most
statements made are subjective without a shred
of objectivity. It is disgusting to say the
least.
Regards,
Javed I.
Chaudry
Sept 27, 09 |