The limits of science: Martin Rees
Astronomer Royal
By Martin Rees Published 02 May 2012
Einstein averred that “the most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible”. He was right to be astonished. It seems surprising that our minds, which evolved to cope with life on the African savannah and haven’t changed much in 10,000 years, can make sense of phenomena far from our everyday intuitions: the microworld of atoms and the vastness of the cosmos. But our comprehension could one day “hit the buffers”. A monkey is unaware that atoms exist. Likewise, our brainpower may not stretch to the deepest aspects of reality. The bedrock nature of space and time, and the structure of our entire universe, may remain “open frontiers” beyond human grasp. Indeed, our everyday world presents intellectual challenges just as daunting as those of the cosmos and the quantum, and that is where 99 per cent of scientists focus their efforts. Even the smallest insect, with its intricate structure, is far more complex than either an atom or a star.
Everything, however complicated – breaking waves, migrating birds, or tropical forests – is made up of atoms and obeys the equations of quantum physics. That, at least, is what most scientists believe, and there is no reason to doubt it. Yet there are inherent limits to science’s predictive power. Some things, like the orbits of the planets, can be calculated far into the future. But that’s atypical. In most contexts, there is a limit. Even the most fine-grained computation can only forecast British weather a few days ahead. There are limits to what can ever be learned about the future, however powerful computers become. And even if we could build a computer with hugely superhuman processing power, which could offer an accurate simulation, that doesn’t mean that we will have the insight to understand it. Some of the “aha” insights that scientists strive for may have to await the emergence of post-human intellects.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists


2 comments
Once again we are being told about technology in the Civilian Sector that has been in existance within the military sector, 10 to 20 years before it has been openly publicized, within the civilian sector. We are talking about the UKUSA agreement and TTCP agreements, Porton Down (QinetiQ - DSTL - DERA), RSRE (Worcestershire), and DARPA, NASA and CIA-DST. This technology is way passed its' study/experimental stage, and is in full implementation, being used activily on a procedural level, with consent and without consent. If you refer to some of the illegal programs that were being occustrated in the 50s, 60s and 70s, under ARTICHOKE, MKULTRA stemming from 'Operation PaperClip', you can gain an insight to the level of depravity that the medicial, scientific research, intelligence and military establishments were willing to go to, and how there is a huge deception on how these technologies and programs are now being presented to the public audience: William Sargant, St Thomas's Hospital, Donald Ewan Cameron, Harry Bailey and Galbraith, amongs others ... The Radio Telemetry Laboratory, and Military Radiations Signals Intelligence, Neural Oscillations, and the Central Nervous System, with ELF or VLF manipulation; under the subject heading Brain Computer Interface (BCI), Remote Neural Monitoring (RNM) and Synthetic Telepathy. Nano-Medicines have hugely allowed this early pioneering 'torture' experimentation to be unimaginably enhanced beyond all scientific expectations, for manipulation of test subjects/live subjects, 'Unethical Human Experimentation' - in the ten of thousands (every living organism has a unique 'Bioelectric Field').
I don't doubt that our brainpower will "stretch to the deepest aspects of reality" if "stretch" includes the same sort of relationship as exists between a popular science book and an educated but non-professional reader. But if you define "stretch" more rigorously, which I think you are doing here, it seems way more likely than not that our brains will run into limits. I wouldn't even use qualifications like "may" as you do. How could our brains not run into limits? Wouldn't that be close to miraculous??