Taking up an STS (Science, Technology, and Society) course in college has a profound effect on my life. Not only was I able to learn many new things about science, I learned to appreciate the role of science in our everyday life. STS let me see that science indeed plays a vital role in addressing the problems the world faces today. In highschool, I used to think of science as the reason why everything got extra complicated in this world. The advent of new technologies contributed to increasing social fragmentation, not to mention destruction of the environment. But the very reason why I shunned science was because I really didn't believe anything I learned in high school- I always thought something was amiss, like all those theories do not really mirror phenomena in reality. So in college, while I considered to take up Mathematics, I decided to pursue foreign languages instead, with my love for literature and etymologies prevailed over mathematical abstractions. (Or perhaps blame it to the fact that I wasn't much informed about possible careers after studying Mathematics in college... It came too late.)
In STS class, which I took three years ago, the students are lucky to listen to lectures by different professionals, from engineers and scientists to historians, forensic experts, and archaeologists. The topics are diverse but the main point is that one cannot escape science as it pervades every aspect of our reality. In particular, I was very much inspired by the lecture given by Amador Muriel. He talked about turbulence and quantum theory, though mostly he just talked about himself which made me view him as an egocentric, self-centered old man who keeps on enumerating his achievements and how he survived in the West although he came from a poor family in a Third World Country. Despite my aversion to all those self-praise talk, I must say that I honestly admire this man for his struggles, how he made it big despite his poor origins. Another is that in enumerating his numerous mentors, one can say that he takes pride in his academic pedigree and as such gives credit to and rightly acknowledges the people who have contributed to who he is now.
Back in college, my friends know me as a spendthrift who only buys books from Booksale and who seldom gets the required readings. But when he announced that his book is now available, I didn't think twice. I just had to have the book. The book isn't that expensive, which is a good thing, and students could get autographs right then and there. I bought his book "
Folding Water: The Search for a Quantum Theory of Turbulence" which was co-authored by Ninotchka Rosca. I almost never had the book autographed because of students suddenly flocked to him like moths to a flame. I braved the crowd. He asked me what I am studying and I answered, "European Languages." He wrote a short note on the first page of the book:
"Melo:
Look up to the
allusions to
Europe.
A. Muriel"
It was the first time I got a book signed by the author. It instantly became one of my prized books. And when I read it from cover to cover, I was more than sure that never shall this book go out of my collection. It's more detailed compared to the lecture and I wasn't at all surprised that this book is also a memoir in addition to its being a book on quantum mechanics meant for the layperson.
Not long after, I got interested in
chaos theory. Reading short articles online increased my appetite for chaos. At that time, I described my life as chaotic. I was a lost kid in a jungle of civilization. Suddenly everything I know crumbles, it feels like being a witness to widescale destruction a la
Inception (yes, that movie by Christopher Nolan where scenes of crumbling edifices are many) and I didn't know where to start from.
One day as if by chance, I found a book at Booksale which costs just P75. The title of the book is "
Chaos: Making a New Science", authored by James Gleick. I knew I had to buy it. As soon as I got home, I read the book and was enlightened as to why I became averse to science in high school. In high school, we were taught that this happens
assuming this is the case. In short, it was highly idealistic. But chaos, as Gleick writes, "
poses problems that defy accepted ways of working in science." Moreover, high school science lacked the interdependence of disciplines and thus provided an unrealistic view of phenomena. Physics for example was isolated from biology and chemistry. Each subject was compartmentalized. Chaos on the other hand, brings together different disciplines in an attempt to investigate global nature of systems. When a child, who yearns to make sense of the world around her and who sees the intricate web of relations of things, is made to study a subject without reference to other disciplines, she quickly loses interest. I do not know if this holds true to others but it does to me.
Gleick's book is meant for the layperson. It traces the beginnings of the study of chaotic systems and chaos itself. It narrates the development of such subject as other disciplines like mathematics, physics, chemistry, and biology advanced, or the other way around. Gleick also briefly sketched the important contributors to chaotology (study of chaos), from Lorenz to Mandelbrot, to Feigenbaum and Libchaber, to the scholars of Santa Cruz. I also appreciated how the book attempts to enumerate the many applications and relations of chaotology in other dsiciplines including economics, philosophy, art, and literature.
Reading the book made me wonder what if I took up Mathematics instead of foreign languages. Then maybe I would be very good at working with computers. Then maybe I would be dabbling in chaos. Then maybe I would be able to offer an explanation as to why my life is chaotic.
