The lensing galaxy is extremely distant and massive, containing an estimated mass of 10 trillion suns – but the galaxy behind it, whose light is distorted, is so close to the time of the big bang, it shouldn’t exist. “The chance of finding such a gigantic cluster so early in the universe was less than one percent in the small area we surveyed,” one JPL team member said. “It shares an evolutionary path with some of the most massive clusters we see today, including the Coma cluster and the recently discovered El Gordo cluster.” It’s unlikely this giant cluster is unique.
The lensing galaxy is extremely distant and massive, containing an estimated mass of 10 trillion suns – but the galaxy behind it, whose light is distorted, is so close to the time of the big bang, it shouldn’t exist. “The chance of finding such a gigantic cluster so early in the universe was less than one percent in the small area we surveyed,” one JPL team member said. “It shares an evolutionary path with some of the most massive clusters we see today, including the Coma cluster and the recently discovered El Gordo cluster.” It’s unlikely this giant cluster is unique.
There are several lessons here, and one of them is not the triumphal march of scientific progress.
There are several lessons here, and one of them is not the triumphal march of scientific progress.
First, consider that all the papers written up to these discoveries are now wrong. Are they going to be corrected? Unlikely. The errors will continue to be cited, perpetuating falsehoods. The IPCC will use Greenland ice cores as proof positive of climate fluctuations in the unobservable past. The fictional Younger Dryas and Older Dryas periods will continue to be spoken of in textbooks. As we have seen with the Haeckel embryos and other undying frauds, myths are as hard to exterminate as ants in the kitchen.
Second, these revelations reveal knowns turning into unknowns, and a couple of unknown unknowns become known unknowns. But if one does not know the extent of the unknown unknowns, or the unknowable unknowns (see Evolution News & Views), there is no confidence that future revelations will not undermine today’s knowns further, showing scientific regress rather than progress. Philosophically, it is impossible in any system whose boundaries are unconstrained to account for it from within. As with Godel’s Theorem, you can’t prove arithmetic with arithmetic, or geometry with geometry. Higher-order information is needed.
Second, these revelations reveal knowns turning into unknowns, and a couple of unknown unknowns become known unknowns. But if one does not know the extent of the unknown unknowns, or the unknowable unknowns (see Evolution News & Views), there is no confidence that future revelations will not undermine today’s knowns further, showing scientific regress rather than progress. Philosophically, it is impossible in any system whose boundaries are unconstrained to account for it from within. As with Godel’s Theorem, you can’t prove arithmetic with arithmetic, or geometry with geometry. Higher-order information is needed.
Third, flexible theories contradict scientific progress. If gravitational lensing theory is correct, the observation described above has just cast serious doubt on evolutionary cosmology. The most massive galaxies should not exist so close to the big bang. Since the observation can’t be tweaked, the evolutionary story will have to give. But even if the standard model gets rescued somehow by alterations of theory, it goes to show that theories are plastic. That will have to be said of the rescued theory, and possibly other theories considered well-established today.
Third, flexible theories contradict scientific progress. If gravitational lensing theory is correct, the observation described above has just cast serious doubt on evolutionary cosmology. The most massive galaxies should not exist so close to the big bang. Since the observation can’t be tweaked, the evolutionary story will have to give. But even if the standard model gets rescued somehow by alterations of theory, it goes to show that theories are plastic. That will have to be said of the rescued theory, and possibly other theories considered well-established today.
It was cute of Carlson to sugar-coat the ice-core problem with a euphemism: “This goes to show that climate science is full of nuance” (i.e., subtle distinctions). Phonetically speaking, we can translate “nuance” to mean that what they knew once they don’t know now.
A revolution in scientific publishing may fundamentally alter the power structure over science and result in openness for all.
A revolution in scientific publishing may fundamentally alter the power structure over science and result in openness for all.
The traditional method of publishing scientific results has been the peer-reviewed journal paper. Nature, Science, and countless other journals are for-profit enterprises that justify their existence by adding value to research and providing editorial review. Printing a journal is costly; no question, but it is also a powerful position: the editors make the call on what gets published. Traditional journals took early advantage of the internet by providing online subscriptions. Universities and research institutions have to buy costly site licenses; individuals have to pay hundreds of dollars and are forced to get the print edition with the online access.
A new method is pulling the rug out from journal editors: open access publishing. These “author pays” systems allow everyone to read the paper without a subscription. The success of arXiv, Public Library of Science and other open-access sites is putting pressure on the traditional print journals to join the bandwagon or get left behind. Why pay when readers can get good science for free? Who owns research, anyway? Much research is government-funded. Why should readers pay a for-profit company to read what their tax dollars have paid for? Even if an individual author has to pay for the privilege of publication, he or she can do it, or can get the institution to do it. Government funding can still foot the bill. But now, everyone in the world can read it.
