In a recent National Geographic (thanks to Donna and Dan for the subscription), there is a fascinating article about a University of California at Sant Cruz astonomer named Stan Woolsey. Woolsey studies “The Cataclysmic Death of Stars”, supernovae and black holes. He obviously is fascinated by what he sees and discovers. The article ends with the quote form Woolsey, “It's like God built the universe just for me.”

Another one of those statements that stirs the thought processes. What other scientists might have thought the same thing? Copernicus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernicus), Galileo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo), Kepler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Kepler) would have. Hawking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking) and Einstein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein) might very well. Darwin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin) and Mendel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendel) almost definitely thought God had made all of His creations just for them. All the wonders and miracles.

In fact, when I look at my family, I think the same thing.

Today, 28 February, is the birthday of one of my very favorite chemists, Linus Pauling. He wrote the very first chemistry text I really became interested in “The Nature of the Chemical Bond”

Pauling's contributions are legend. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Pauling) He is the recipient of two unshared Nobel Prizes (in chemistry and a Nobel Peace Prize), the only person to have done this. He came close to discovering the double-helical structure of DNA before Watson and Crick. As a peace activist, he was denied a passport to a meeting in England where new xray photos were displayed which disclosed important data Pauling needed. Pauling had earlier unlocked the helical structure of proteins. “Pauling is noted as a versatile scholar for his expertise in inorganic chemistry, organic chemistry, metallurgy, immunology, anesthesiology, psychology, debate, radioactive decay, and the aftermath of nuclear warfare in addition to quantum mechanics and molecular biology.” (Wikipedia) He worked on the structure of the nucleus, the function of enzymes and the molecular causes of disease. The peace Prize was his work toward the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Paulng developed an electric automoblile and advocated a scientific approach to alternative medicine.

Wikipedia states: “Pauling's contribution to science is held by many in the utmost regard. He was included in a list of the 20 greatest scientists of all time by the British magazine 'New Scientist' with Albert Einstein being the only other scientist from the twentieth century ... one of the greatest thinkers and visionaries of the millennium, along with Galileo, Newton, and Einstein. Pauling is also notable for the diversity of his interests: quantum mechanics, inorganic chemistry, organic chemistry, protein structure, molecular biology, and medicine. In all these fields, and especially on the boundaries between them, he made decisive contributions. His work on chemical bonding marks the beginning of modern quantum chemistry, and many of his contributions like hybridization and electronegativity have become part of standard chemistry textbooks. Pauling's work on crystal structure contributed significantly to the prediction and elucidation of the structures of complex minerals and compounds. His discovery of the alpha helix and beta sheet is a fundamental foundation for the study of protein structure.
In his time, Pauling was frequently honored with the sobriquet 'Father of molecular biology'. His discovery o f sickle cell anemia as a 'molecular disease' opened the way toward examining genetically acquired mutations at a molecular level.”

A great scientist. A great man. Lift a glass to Linus Pauling.

An organization for which I do online tutoring recently asked that Wikipedia not be used as a reference. Wondered why at the time, every science hit had seemed to be accurate and well written. The premise of Wikipedia has been widely discussed and praised so I certainly know what the basis of the objections are.

The other day, a friend made a reference to the Epicureans so I Googled it and went to Wikipedia and the Encyclopedia Britannica websites to see exactly what being an Epicurean inferred. Britannica wanted money so they were out. Wikipedia had an excellent article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanism) with lots of links. As a science teacher, firm believer in The Atomic Theory and The Theory of Evolution, I thoroughly enjoyed the article and felt a kinship to good old Epicurus. One link to asceticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asceticism) had a warning about the factual accuracy being in dispute. And the epistemology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology) article notes that references and sources are not cited. It was an excellent short anecdotal experiment on Wikipedia's value and reliability.

The final judgement: Wikipedia is an excellent reference. Voters, advertisement readers, researchers and science students should know enough about data collection to sort through anything questionable or less than useful. I have no doubt that I will Wikipedia surf lots. Well done to them.

One of my earlier entries (24 June, 2006 on http://sinannblog.blogstream.com and http://sinannblog.blogspot.com/) dealt with theories in science. The Shermer - Chopra debate and many of the blog entries (http://blogsearch.google.com) expound on the Theory of Evolution. It seemed a good time to bring it back:

Long ago and far away, I was a science teacher. One of the first things that, at least in the old tried and true texts, we covered was The Scientific Method (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method). It goes back to the sixteen hundreds, Sir Francis Bacon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Francis_Bacon), Rene Descartes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rene_Descartes), et al. In a few words, it outlines the methods of a scientist: experiment, hypothesis, experiment, law, theory. An idea gets proven to the point that it always is useful and becomes a law. Newton's Law of Gravity: force equals The Gravitational Constant times the mass of the first object times the mass of the second divided by distance squared. It always works. Plug in the numbers and get the correct answer – every time. There are a lot of laws, all set up so that they always give the right answer. Laws are vital in the modern world and the result of much thought and spectacular experimentation. They are not the epitome of human brainpower, however. In a sense, your dog establishes a good set of laws. What your dog can not do, however, is theorize, wonder why. Einstein's Theory of Gravity, Dalton's Atomic Theory, Avogadro's Molecular Theory, all give exquisite explanations of how things happen and have added so much to our modern life. Because, like laws, they predict what would happen if.... And, like laws, they always work. Ditto for the Theory of Evolution. It is not a theory in the everyday sense, it is a proven and reliable Theory in the scientific sense. And it has added so much to our everyday life. Start with the food you eat. It is far from what they had in Mesopotamia five thousand years ago. We would all be starving if we did not evolve our food supply. And then there is our kids. I know mine are much better than me. They are the best example of evolution I can think of. The Theory of Evolution is a spectacular and exquisite result of human brainpower and a cornerstone of our modern lifestyle. And it always predicts correctly. I would bet that if a “nonbeliever” went to The Golden Gates, Saint Peter would say, “You did not believe in Evolution? Do you know how much work we put into that? Saint Michael, put this one on the down elevator.”

I looked for Michael Shermer through Google blog search and found some interesting stuff. This debate is among the best. He and Deepak Chopra debating the afterlife: http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/debates/afterlife.htm
http://www.intentblog.com/archives/2007/01/shermerchopra_a.html

A couple of quotes from Shermer: “The soul is the essence that breathes life into flesh, animates us, gives us our vital spirit.” and “...the neural pattern of information that is our memories and personality – our 'self' – is sensed as a soul. In this sense, the soul is an illusion”.

I like to add the “soul” being our conscious realization that God exists and we can communicate with Him. (See entry for 16 January, 2006) That brain power, “neural pattern of information” that God has given us through evolution that gives us not only awareness of our self and others, but awareness of our universe, and of Him.