 |
 |
A Phoenix
of Human Nature
By
Sara Schechner, Curator of the collection of Historical Scientific Instruments, Harvard
University
Since ancient times,
people have marvelled at the night sky and sought answers to profound questions there.
What are the heavenly bodies? What moves them? How do they affect one another? Where
are they? And how do they affect us? These are questions of cosmology, and each age
and culture has produced its own answers.
To the modern astronomer, acceptable answers come from physics. But if I may point
my telescope not just towards deep space but also back in time, I would suggest that
modern answers continue to draw upon deep-seated cultural values.
Religion, social practices and observational astronomy have long been intertwined
in the development of cosmological beliefs. The ancient Egyptians observed the dawn
risings of key stars and from them established not only their agricultural calendar
and civil timekeeping, but also their religious rites. Two thousand years of observations
gathered by Babylonian astronomer-priests gave rise to mathematical planetary astronomy,
which Greek philosophers such as Aristotle used as the basis for their physical models
of the cosmos. Aristotle’s cosmos was structured, hierarchical, finite, and compatible
with the tenets of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. God was Prime Mover of the planets
and the unmoved foundation of a stable world system.
In the 17th century, the Aristotelian cosmos gave way to the Newtonian world view.
Looking out into an infinite universe, Isaac Newton showed how the motions of the
stars, planets, and comets were all governed by universal gravitation. Comets circulated
vital spirits and fuel to the stars, but could also slam into worlds, causing mass
extinctions and global destruction.
In 1755, Immanuel Kant offered a physical theory on the origin and evolution of the
universe. He described how universal forces of attraction and repulsion, acting on
matter diffused throughout space, gave rise to instabilities in the chaos, leading
to physical and chemical complexity. Denser regions gravitationally attracted lesser
ones, while the action of repulsive forces caused in-falling matter to swirl around
the dense centres. Over time, these vortices collapsed into stellar systems containing
suns, planets, and comets.
Creation thus spread out from a central point into the chaos and animated the whole
region of infinite space. But Kant observed, “whatever has a beginning and origin,
has the mark of its limited nature in itself; it must perish and have an end.” When
a world-system exhausted all the manifold variations that its structure could embrace,
it perished in a violent conflagration. The universe was, Kant envisioned, a “phoenix
of nature, which burns itself only in order to revive again in restored youth from
its ashes, through all the infinity of times and spaces.”
Kant’s book was one of the earliest attempts to describe the origin and evolution
of the cosmos under the influence of universal natural laws. Prior to Kant, it was
commonly held that creation was fixed and the universe was maintained in a steady
state. So where did Kant’s modern evolutionary ideas come from? From popular culture
as remade by Newton.
Until the 17th century, people believed that comets were divine signs heralding imminent
world change. Newton appropriated this popular belief when he portrayed comets as
natural agents deployed by God to create, renovate, or destroy heavenly bodies, thus
melding popular beliefs with physics. This new approach gave license to those who
held that material forces created new solar systems and the universe evolved according
to natural laws.
If popular beliefs were formative in the early development of modern cosmology, should
we be worried that they continue to sully current science? Not at all. We can still
celebrate the ways our diverse cultural heritages have shaped our scientific inquiries.
Cosmology is ultimately a human endeavour. In asking questions about the deep past
and distant future, it draws from many rich traditions and brings us closer together
as human beings. |
|
 |