In
part 1 and part 2 of this 4-part series of blog posts, I listed 25
things that science can't explain. Below is a discussion of some more
things that science cannot explain.
#26 Human memory
We
know exactly how the memory of our computers and digital devices
work. On the lowest level, all information is stored as binary bits,
sequences such as 01100111010101; and such bits are stored
magnetically on surfaces such as hard drives. But we have no such
understanding at all of how our own memory works. Try looking up
human memory on the Internet. You will get a lot of discussion that
makes quite a few points that don't add up to a substantive answer.
We have no idea whether memory is stored chemically, electrically,
through neuron connections, through some combination of the three,
or through some entirely different means. Nor do we have the
slightest idea about what kind of code or alphabet the brain might
use to store memory. A modern neuroscientist can say quite a few
things about memory, but he can't really explain it.
#27 The reincarnation research of
Stevenson
Dr.
Ian Stevenson was an University of Virginia professor and MD who was once the head of the Department of Psychiatry at the University
of Virginia. He spent decades gathering evidence for reincarnation,
and published a 2268-page two-volume work Reincarnation and
Biology, providing a
huge amount of evidence.
Stevenson's main technique was to investigate reports of children who
claimed to have memories of past lives. He produced countless cases
in which the details of the claims of the past life were verified.
In very many cases the children making these claims seemed to have
had birthmarks corresponding to the facts of the claimed previous
life. For example, a child claiming to be the reincarnation of
someone killed by a head blow might have a scar on his head.
For us to have an explanation of such research, we would
need either a parapsychological explanation involving actual
reincarnation, or some naturalistic explanation of why children might
incorrectly make such claims. Science offers us neither.
#28 The mental abilities of crows
and homing pigeons
According to the standard materialistic thinking that
intelligence is purely a function of the brain, we would not expect
that any small birds would have much intelligence. But scientific
studies involving crows show that they have astonishing mental
powers. One scientific study found that crows are as clever as
children between the age of five and seven. Homing pigeons are
pigeons that can find their way home over very large distances,
sometimes more than 1000 miles. Science offers no good explanation
for either of these capabilities.
#29 The existence of man's higher
mental capabilities
Humans have some capabilities that we can explain from
an evolutionary standpoint, such as vision, the ability to run, the
ability to grasp, and the ability to detect distant predators. We can
explain the growth of such things by saying that the more humans
developed such capabilities, the more likely they were to survive –
so natural selection caused such capabilities to grow. But there are
quite a few refined characteristics of humanity that cannot be
explained in terms of evolution and natural selection. They include
man's spiritual capacity, aesthetic appreciation, compassion,
mathematical abilities, language abilities, and the ability to
perform philosophical thinking. None of these things made a primitive
caveman more likely to survive until reproduction, so none of them
can be explained by referring to natural selection or evolution. How
did man get such capabilities? Science has no real answer.
#30 Charge conservation
Above the
subatomic level, it is true in nature that the smaller or less
massive a thing is, the more common it is. But when we come to the
subatomic level, such a principle is abandoned. Protons are 1836
times more massive than electrons, but as far as we can tell, protons
are about as common as electrons. This is a very convenient state of
affairs, as atoms require an equal number of protons and electrons.
Life would probably be incredibly difficult or impossible if
electrons were about a thousand times more common than protons, as
there would be so many excess electrical charges lying around that
people would probably kill themselves whenever they touched a rock.
A scientist might claim to explain the electrical
balance of the universe by evoking the law of the conservation of
charge, the law that when something like a high-speed particle
collision occurs, the number of stable positive charges that result
must be the same as the number of stable negative charges that
result. But scientists have no explanation for why such a law should
exist. When we consider that we have no understanding of why there
should not be a universe with zero electrical charges, or a universe
with nothing but positive electrical charges, or a universe with
nothing but negative electrical charges, it seems all the more inexplicable
that nature should have some built-in “book balancing” system
that guarantees that the total number of positive charges always
balances the total number of negative charges.
#31 Nina Kulagina
Nina Kulagina was a Soviet woman who seemed to have
astonishing psychokinetic powers. She was studied at length by
scientists who saw evidence of highly paranormal abilities, and who
could find no evidence of trickery.
In the video below we see Kulagina apparently moving
small objects such as match sticks in some paranormal way, even if
the objects are enclosed in a transparent container (which should
have prevented any possibility of fraud). Science has no explanation
for this anomaly.
#32 The tether incident on STS-75
On the 75th space shuttle mission (STS-75),
astronauts deployed into space an object with a thin tether that was
supposed to stretch to a length of 12 miles. The tether broke, and
astronauts filmed its appearance in space. The video showed an
extremely strange event in which what looked like a swarm of objects
floated around the tether. Although later dismissed as mere dust
particles near the camera, most people watching the video get an
impression of something totally different. The objects floating
around the tether wiggle around like microbes
seen under a microscope. Moreover, many of the objects look very
similar, appearing to have some kind of hole in the middle. Some of
the objects are seen moving behind the far end of the very distant tether,
something completely incompatible with an explanation of nearby dust
particles.
Science offers no good explanation for this amazing
event, which seems to point towards some reality entirely beyond our
understanding. The objects photographed could be some kind of
objects of alien manufacture, or perhaps some totally different
paranormal phenomenon having nothing to do with extraterrestrials.
#33 The improbable smoothness of
the Big Bang
We know that
the early universe was incredibly smooth. About 380,000 years after
the Big Bang, the universe was uniform to 1 part in 100,000. We know
that from the cosmic background radiation, which has no lumps greater
than 1 part in 100,000. You may get the wrong idea by looking at one
of those maps of the cosmic background radiation that show different
colors. Those maps are amplifying differences of only 1 part in
100,000. A map of the cosmic background radiation that does not use
such an amplification would consist of a single color.
But such
almost perfect smoothness, physicist Sean Carroll has pointed out,
would not occur in more than the tiniest fraction of the trajectories
that the universe might have had after an event such as the Big Bang.
How small is that fraction? On page 21 of a scientific paper Carroll
estimates that “the total fraction of the trajectories that are
smooth at early times” is very roughly 1 in 10 to the 66
millionth power. That's a fraction equal to 1 in x, where
x is 10 followed by 66 million zeroes.
How come
nature landed this “hole in one”? How did nature's arrow hit this
very distant bullseye? Science has no explanation. As Carroll points
out in his paper, a theory of cosmic inflation does not solve the
problem:
Inflation,
therefore, cannot solve this problem all by itself. Indeed, the
measure reinforces the argument made by Penrose, that the initial
conditions necessary for getting inflation to start are extremely
fine-tuned, more so than those of the conventional Big Bang model it
was meant to help fix.
#34 The careers of Leonora Piper
and Gladys Osborne Leonard
Mediums often
seem to have knowledge acquired by paranormal means. The standard
skeptical explanation for such mediums is that they either engage in
fraud, or engage in an information-fishing technique called cold
reading. But such explanations fail to explain the cases of Leonora
Piper and Gladys Osborne Leonard.
Leonora Piper
was a medium investigated for years by scientists and skeptics. She
was investigated by an extreme skeptic named Richard Hodgson, who set
out with the goal of debunking her, and even had her trailed by
detectives. After a long study of her, Hodgson became convinced she
was obtaining information by paranormal means. The same conclusion
was reached by the eminent psychologist William James, who also
investigated her. Piper was never found cheating.
A similar
case was that of Gladys Obsborne Leonard, who was the subject of more
than 35 articles and papers published in the Society for Psychical
Research and the American Society for Psychical Research. Leonard
excelled in what are known as book and newspaper tests, a type of
test that would seem to offer no possibility of fraud, and in which
there is no possibility of success through cold reading. Like Piper,
Leonard was never found guilty of cheating or fraud.
#35 Atomic quantization
The
subatomic level does not allow a continuous range of values. Instead
only certain values are allowed. Electrons are not allowed to have
any old energy level within an atom (and if this were allowed,
electrons would fall into the nucleus, and atoms would not be
stable). Instead electrons can have only a certain relatively small
number of possible energy levels within an atom. It's rather like a
school that only allows students who weigh 70 pounds, 85 pounds or 93
pounds. Why does this restriction exist? Science cannot tell us. The
restriction seems all the more remarkable when we consider that
outside of an atom, electrons can have any degree of energy.
#36 Dreams
Dreams seem
to serve no purpose, so why should we have them? Science has no real
answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment