laser june 10 2009 art, science and the limits of curiosity roger malina o observatoire astronomique...
Post on 23-Dec-2015
214 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
LASER June 10 2009
• Art, Science and the Limits of Curiosity
• Roger Malinao Observatoire Astronomique de Marseille Provenceo Leonardo/ISAST/OLATSo IMERA: Institut Mediterraneen de Recherche Avancee
• Motivators : o Curiosityo Doubto Meaningo Engineering…
• Curiosity:o Necessity: All knowledge is
conditioned by the structure of the knower (Varela)
o Ethics: “the nature of the task of
the “ought’ is the other-directedness of the “is”
• Sundar Sarukkai: Science and the Ethics of Curiosity. 2009
Outline
• My own experience in scientific collaboration• Types of Art- Science Collaboration• Ethics of Curiosity• Limits to Curiosity• Towards Ethics of Art-Science Collaboration
What is the universe made of ?
• Analysis of images like this tell us that 95% of the content of this image is “dark”
• Does not emit light of any kind.
• 30% ‘dark matter” that holds galaxies together
• 60% ‘dark energy” that is a pressure driving the expansion of the universe
Curiosity:D’ou venons nous ?Que Sommes Nous ?Ou Allons Nous ?
Three linked approaches within the scientific method that stop curiosity
• Exlanation through New Physical « Laws »:o Compact Descriptions of the Worldo Experiments on the worldo Modified Gravity, Quintessence
• Simulations: o Virtual Worlds that mimic our Worldo Retrodiction vs Prediction
• Pattern Recognition:o « Petabyte » era, Massive Cataloguing, Virtual Observatorieso Doing experiments on data about the worldo Extrapolation vs Explanation…The End of Theory…
A satellite to study dark energy and dark matter
• Massive collection of data• A international scientific
collaboration• Total End to End cost: 1 billion
dollars• Womb to Tomb schedule:
1998- 2018 ? 25 years…• Ten different research labs and
universities• 80 person core collaboration
already..hundreds
Some Challenges of a large scientific collaborations
• Defining Success: o Scientific vs Institutionalo Individual vs Collective
• Reconciling differing cultures:o Physicists and Astronomers: Experiments vs Observationso Engineers and Scientists:
Fixed vs Evolving requirements, Convergent vs Divergent Different Funding Agencies: decision methods, employment status
o Ground Based vs Space Based: Risk aversion• Partial Buy In:
o Many collaborators will participate in only part of the project• Trust:
o Confidentiality during competive phaseso Interlocking projects, Intellectual Property, Recognition
mechanisms,
Some Modes of Art-Science and Art-Technology Collaboration
• Creative Friction: flow of ideas, metaphors
• Collaborative teams: Shared resources for common outcomeo eg E.A.T, cf Special Effects/Animation/Games
• Consortia:o Shared resources for multiple outcomeso eg EMobilart as a consortium of collaborative teams
• Collectives:o Shared access to resources
eg L Smarr, UCSD Supercomputing Center• New Leonardos/ Renaissance Teams:
o Explicit Art, Science, Innovation outcomes
When does one stop looking ?
• What is the limit of curiosity ?o Scientist: When one has a tested explanation that makes senseo Artist: When one has generated an experience that creates
meaning/changes perception/realised self expression• What kinds of explanations/meanings make sense ?
o Scientist: When we are dealing with epistemologies/ontologies that are commensurate with ourcurrent science
o Artist: When it is relevant to the human condition and experience. Individual and shared
• Is there an ethics of curiosity ?o See Science and the Ethics of Curiosity, Sundar Sarukkai, 2009o Most Scientists would say: Noo Most Artists would say: Yes
Scientific Curiosity
• Scientific curiosity is ‘pure’, driven by a child like desire to understand ourselves and the world around uso Pure Science vs Applied Scienceo Note: Fine Art vs Applied Art
• Curiosity does not accept authority, but relies on confrontation of hypotheses/meanings with experiments/experience.o No function of ‘science critic’ cf ‘art critic”
Ethos of Scientific Curiositycf Bunge 2006, Morton
• Intellectual Honesty• Integrity• Epistemic Communism• Organized skepticism• Dis-interestedness• Impersonality• Universality
Towards an Ethics of Curiositycf Sundar Sarukkai: Science and the Ethics of Curiosity 2009
• Curiosity is embodied• Curiosity is enacted• Curiosity is cultural• Curiosity is social• Curiosity is collective
• The claimed distinction between “pure” and “applied” science is not sustainable
• In some cultures, eg India, doubt rather than curiosity is a dominant driver inquiry ( cf Descartes)
• “Beware of binary oppositions” !
Curiosity is embodied:Varela: All knowledge is conditioned by the structure of the knower
Stelarc Char Davies
Curiosity is enactiveeg Marcel.li Antunez RocaRichard Feynman: What I cannot create, I cannot understand
Curiosity is SocialMarco Peljham and Makrolab
Curiosity is CulturalSaint Augustine: It was curiosity led me along the false trails before submitting tochristian baptismsFrancis Bacon: It is Charity that must motivate the knower, not curiosity
Donna Cox Ruth WestWeather Data Bases Protein Sequence Data
Curiosity is collective:Alan Lightman: Individual scientists are not emotionally detached from their work, it is through their collective activity that objectivity emergesFrank Malina/WAC corporal team: first man man object in space 1947
Limits to Curiosity
• 3 contingencies that drive what we will know in 50 years:
• What we WANT to know• What we CAN know• WHO we think we will become
What we CAN know
• Technological• Conceptual
EpistomologyLanguageIntuition• Methodological
Evolution of the scientific method
What we WANT to know
Myopias:
• Social• Cultural• Political
Who we think we will become
• Contingencies from who we are
• Time ScaleLong, Short• Physical Size
Large, Small• Nature of our beings
Carbon based life6 billion networked individuals
Living in New Scales cf Cheese Diagram Guardans, Czegledy
SLOW........................................................................................................
• FAST• SMALL OUR SIZE LARGE
New Senses:Gravitational Wave Observatories
LIGO in USA VIRGO in Italy
New senses: The Antares Neutrino Observatory under the Mediterranean
Limits of Curiosity in Collaboration
• Ethics: • Values:
o Fear of Misuseo Intellectual Propertyo Social Modelo Trust
Who is funding• Cost :( Time, Resources)• Strategic Alliance Expertise
o Trainingo Experience
Modern Science doesn’t make common sense
• New scientific knowledge comes through the use of instruments that have contact with a world that is not our worldo Our languages, metaphors, descriptions are
disconnected from these worldso We are trained on the wrong data set for survival
• Einstein:” The universe of ideas is just as independent of the nature of our experience as clothes are of the form of the human body”
• Science has become a cargo cult
The Scientific Method as a Terrain for Art-Science Collaboration
• Forming intuition on mediated sensory data
• Designing/Interacting with simulated systems
• Making sense/meaning of dense data, petabyte era
• Making Science Intimate• Peoples Science• Micro Science
• New Ontologies, New Intuitions,New Sensuality
Mediated Sensuality1904 2004 Cezanne: Mont St Victoire.........Sabine Raaf: Translator II
• “Moist” Curiosity: o Making explicit the ethical
conditions and the limits to our curiosity
• Curiosity:o Necessity: All knowledge is
conditioned by the structure of the knower (Varela)
o Ethics: “the nature of the task of
the “ought’ is the other-directedness of the “is”
• Sundar Sarukkai: Science and the Ethics of Curiosity
top related