In astronomy, the recent observational discoveries show the continuing strangeness of the cosmos in the variety of different types of stars, of conglomerations of stars, of clusters, galaxies, and strange new objects. These include neutron stars, black holes, and other very peculiar and until recently unsuspected properties of assemblies of matter, and enormous clouds of molecules, some of them "pre-organic" in the interstellar space. Again this is an indication of the strangeness of the universe relative to our conceptions, which were acquired by previous sets of observations and under previous canons of learning and knowledge.
In physics one gets surprises, too, frequently now in the more technological or practical consequences of some physical discoveries. For example, the applications of the conception and development of holograms and their uses are very perplexing at first. Similarly, the new laser techniques are in general very impressive.
The recent discoveries in biology, revolutionary and promising as they are in their introduction of fantastic new vistas of the future change of the mode of life on our earth, have a different epistemological character. I am struck by the "reasonableness" of the arrangements on which life has been shown to be based. The discoveries of the way living matter replicates, everything that followed from Crick's and Watson's models, the nature of the biological code and "tout ce qui s'y rattache," as the French say, show on the contrary a sort of very comprehensible and almost nineteenth-century type of mechanical arrangements which do not require basic physics for the understanding of how they operate. Quantum theory is important for the explanation of the phenomena of the basic molecular reaction, the basis of the arrangement, but the arrangements themselves seem to be quasi-mechanical or almost quasi-engineering in the way they involve the very fabric of the life processes.
One could ask why is this so? Why is it that our understanding of the physical world and perhaps the world of living matter or ourselves or the pattern of our thoughts, does not seem to proceed or accrue continuously? Instead of a logical development of' steady growth we observe discrete quantum stages. Is it that the world is really simple in its ineffable structure, but that the apparatus of the nervous system which brings it to consciousness or renders its understanding communicable must, of necessity, be complicated?
Is it that the structure of our brain with all its neurons and connections, an admittedly very complicated arrangement, is not best suited to a direct description of the universe? Or perhaps the other way round, reality is on some very complicated objective scale which we do not yet even conceive and we, in our simpleminded way, try to glean it and describe it by simple steps in successive approximations as Descartes prescribed in his Discours de la Méthode?
(For a more detailed consideration of the possibilities of a future role of mathematics in biological research, I refer the reader to an article I wrote entitled "Some Ideas and Prospects in Biomathematics." The technical aspect of the article is somewhat beyond the scope of these general remarks, but interested readers may like to look at it.)
In social sciences, a layman like myself feels that there is no theory or deeper knowledge at the present time. Perhaps this is due to my ignorance but I often have the feeling that by just observing the scene or reading, say, The New York Times, one can have as much foresight or knowledge in economics as the great experts. I don't think that for the present they have the slightest idea what causes the major economic or socio-political phenomena except for the trivialities everyone should know.
A development whose effect we cannot even estimate and which would have an impact greater by far, I think, than any of the established religions, will be the discovery of the existence of other intelligences in the universe — perhaps thousands of light-years away from the solar system. It is entirely possible that there are waves which have traveled for a long time which we could suddenly decipher. An inkling or a proof of existence without the possibility of communicating two ways would have an overwhelming effect on humanity. This could happen very soon, and it might create panic or, on the contrary, a new type of religion.
We have all read about flying saucers and other unidentified flying objects. Edward U. Condon directed a very thorough study of the subject. Most cases were easily proved to be either illusions, optical or otherwise, or natural atmospheric phenomena, but there remain a few cases of authenticated UFO's which are most puzzling. Take the group of Mount Wilson astronomers who were on a walk and saw a very strange meteoric object, and when they returned to the observatory saw indications of high peaks of radioactivity. There are also a few cases of objects which were simultaneously followed visually, by plane and by radar, which have never been explained.
Fermi used to ask: "Where is everybody? Where are the signs of other life?"
In my opinion, more than anything else it is the new biology which will change the way of life in our world during the next ten or fifteen years. Discoveries which at first seemed rather ordinary have already had more effect on the composition of the world than even big wars: new drugs like penicillin on the one hand, contraceptives on the other, have changed the balance of population.
To illustrate the fast pace of discoveries in biology, I recently heard of two important developments in cancer studies in the space of one week. One is that a Michigan scientist has discovered a virus in the human breast cancer cell. The other is that an experiment which was actually performed in Boulder, where there is a very good electron microscope, resulted in a surprising new technique. Keith Porter and his associates were able to produce cells from which the nuclei could be extracted. These undamaged nuclei can be transferred to other denucleized cells, so in effect it is an exchange of nuclei between cells. For example, a cancerous cell can have its nucleus removed and put into a healthy cell. Then the new cell may become normal. This is most remarkable and shows that some instructions may be coming not from the nucleus, as was believed, but from the cytoplasm.
In the future, new ways to produce or replace food will have much more influence on the shape and mode of human life here on earth than any politico-socio-economic developments in the present sense of the words. All this may be obvious, but sometimes obvious things need to be repeated over and over before they are realized. The world will be so different. I am reminded of a book which was published not so long ago under the title The Next Million Years. What lack of imagination it shows!
Gamow's interests, von Neumann's foresight, Banach's and Fermi's work, among others, have all contributed to enlarge the aspect of today's science, and enormously widen the perspectives of physics and mathematics. It is a marvel that so many new vistas and achievements are due to such a fortuitous and fortunate confluence of all the divisions of science.
Illustrations
S. M. Ulam, 1938. Pencil sketch by Zygmund Menkès
Stefan Banach, Poland, ca 1945
Polish mathematics students convention, Lwów, 1930