No tags yet.
I feel that this essay needs a backstory. I was swimming in a rooftop pool when I suddenly stopped, turned to my dad and asked him the very question I am attempting to answer today. Neither of us had to concrete answer. Later that same day I happened to pick up the a book on quantum physics titled Reality Is Not What It Seems by Carlo Rovelli. As I started to read, my question was the first it answered other than what the book is going to be about. So, this essay is being written or at least started in the notes section of my phone on a plane.
As I said in my essay “What Is Pi: Discovering Pi” it is such a crazy idea that itʼs hard to imagine someone having to come up with it. Itʼs hard to imagine creating an idea like that. As Iʼve said many a-time before: first, weʼll need to
know what atoms are. We need to understand atoms to understand what people tried to understand when they ended up understanding atoms. Basically, weʼll need a science class.
Atoms are everything. Atoms have a nucleus filled with neutrons and protons and electrons on a circular track around it. Then number of protons and electrons (there is an equal amount) determines what the atom is. That atom will find others and theyʼll connect. Theyʼre arrangement will determine what they make up. Think of a tv screen where you can see the pixels. Colors in a grid, making a picture.
I went deeper than I will in this essay in to the structure in my essay What Are Atoms: Why I Believe I Can Fly. And deeper into their job in What Is The Periodic Table: Is It Correct? Now that we have a rudimentary lesson behind us, we can really answer the question of discovering atoms. Allegedly a man traveled from Miletus a early powerhouse Greek city to Abdera another Greek city. He started a philosophy school and there the question of “what is it?” first arises.
A collective group of philosophers, including Domectrius who was the most famous of the bunch, first started questioning gods and goddesses stories supplementing their queries of creation. They practically started scientific thinking, the understanding that they donʼt understand everything and acceptance of correction. Eventually they considered the idea of what we know today as atoms and that they are indivisible. That combinations of atoms make different substances. That everything is atoms. Light and animals, cities and seas, even stars are atoms.
But not everything they thought was correct.
For example, we now know that light isn't made of atoms. That atoms are in different arrangements. And thanks to Ernest Rutherford, James Chadwick and J.J. Thomson we learned that atoms are divisible into even more subgroups. In 1897 J.J. Thomson discovered electrons, negative charged particles. Next, in 1911 Ernest Rutherford discovered protons, positive charged particles. Finally, in 1932 James Chadwick discovered nuetrons. For a more detailed story go to http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=408. It's not really an article, so I don't know how else to site it. The main problem in my problem was their understanding of the structure. The problem is Domectrius's works were destroyed by Christians who believed it was atheist and anti-religious. However, someone similar, I believe a student of a student of Domectrius's records remained miraculously. In one of his epics he cited the specs you see when sunlight streams into a building as proof of atoms, which as hopefully you know by now is incorrect. Though it wasn't correct, this information may have guided a lowly scientist, that is not well known by the name of Albert Einstein to study the movement of atoms, helping him measure the size. Again, if you want to learn more about that process I suggest the book Reality Is Not What It Seems by Carlo Rovelli.
When someone suggested that we live in a world on a grid where nothing is solid, how did others react? Or, when someone said "we're not the center of the universe", what about the concept of gravity? Possibly more importantly: how will we react to the next idea? Next time we hear of a new discovery backed up by evidence, we should question, but accept it. Most importantly of all right now, is continuing acceptance of scientific fact. When a study has been proven over and over we should believe scientists and not someone ripped if his medical license *ahem* non-doctor Andrew Wakefield. What's important is we trust the correct people, the ones trying to lead us to being healthier and helping us to improve our world.