Paradoxes

Paradoxes represent the unknown places that science can take us. Think of them as "boldly going where no one has gone before" on the USS Enterprise, only the mission has lasted longer than five years and warp nacelles aren't necessary to get there… yet.

Grandfather Time

One of Markham and Renfrew's major concerns over the time transmission experiment is the creation of a paradox. When Markham discusses this concern with Peterson, both men make reference to the grandfather paradox. In its simplest form, it goes a little something like this:

A man—let's call him Sebastian—travels back in time to before his grandfather met his grandmother. In the past, Sebastian kills his grandfather for reasons that aren't important to the thought experiment (needless to say, there's some bad blood there). However, since Sebastian kills his grandfather before the old codger meets his grandmother, his father is never born. If Dad is never born, then Sebastian can't be either. And if he is never born, then how is he able to go back in time to kill his grandfather? And now we have a paradox—a statement or argument that contains its own self-contradiction.

The grandfather paradox can be reworked to fit Markham and Renfrew's concerns over their experiment. Renfrew sends a message back in time containing the information necessary to prevent the algae blooms and other ecological problems. Someone in the past receives the messages and uses the information to prevent the disasters from happening before they even start.

But if they never happen, then what reason does Renfrew have for sending the messages back in the first place? Boom—paradox.

To Boldly Go

Markham has a theoretical answer for avoiding paradoxes. As he tells Peterson, "Right. So you can change the past, but only if you don't try to make a paradox. If you try, the experiment hangs up in that stuck-in-between state" (9.199). Essentially, this means that Renfrew is trying the soft-handed approach, changing the past just enough to fix the future but not enough that the reason for him to send the message is erased. By doing so, they avoid the paradox.

That's all well and good in theory, but it is only a hypothesis. As Markham points out, nobody has ever tried sending a message back in time before—so nobody knows what will happen.

Later in the novel, Peterson receives a note from the past confirming the tachyon transmissions are being received way back when. Learning Renfrew hasn't yet sent back the message requesting the note, Peterson suggests they not send it, create a paradox, and see what will happen (15.9). Peterson is clearly a cross-the-streams-and-see-what-happens kind of guy.

Markham convinces him the move would be unwise, though, and later thinks:

Peterson's suggestion this morning, about not sending the message about the bank, had disturbed Markham more than he had wanted to show. The trouble with the whole tachyon theory was that the casual loop idea didn't fit our own perception of time as moving forward. What if they didn't send the bank message? The neat little loop, with arrows passing from future to past and back again, was flawed. It didn't have any human beings in it. (15.81)

Although Markham has a hypothesis claiming that they can avoid paradoxes, he can't be sure things will work out once the experiment is taken from mental exercise into the real world. There are too many variables to consider, not the least of which is human free will (assuming, of course, free will is a thing, but that's a conversation for another day). The mathematics says it should be able to work, but mathematics cannot hold up against the whims of people, especially if by people, you mean a bloke like Peterson.

The simple fact is that nobody has ever sent a message back in time and so nobody can say how things will turn out. The consequences—as symbolized by the possibility of a paradox—are unknown. Science has taken Markham and Renfrew—and with them, the world—into completely unknown territory.

Bringing It Down to Earth

Paradoxes are pretty high-minded and abstract, but Benford also provides an excellent down-to-earth example of why it is important to understand the consequences of scientific advancement: the ecological disasters of 1998.

The diatom blooms originated from fungicides and herbicides finding their way into the ocean and messing with plankton's natural lifecycle. In addition to this algae nastiness, the novel also clearly states that the need for agriculture resulted in the deforestation of the Amazon rainforest, meaning there were fewer plants able to process natural and unnatural carbon dioxide.

In both cases, notice how scientific advancements played a hand: Herbicides and fungicides were created by companies looking to increase crop yields, and deforestation on such a scale is possible thanks to the invention of the huge logging machines, not to mention the ones required to farm the ground once it is cleared. Scientific advancement has definitely played its part in the deterioration of life.

Giving the chemists and inventors the benefit of the doubt, they likely pursued these advancements with good intentions. After all, more agriculture means more jobs, and more crops means more food for more people. However, the unknown consequences—like the algae blooms in the oceans—eventually come back to bite the entire world in the butt.

Does this mean the novel is suggesting science is dangerous? Something to be avoided so humanity can be safe? Not at all.

As Renfrew notes in the novel's beginning, science may have gotten the world into this mess, but it also the only force that can tidy the place up (1.16-17). It seems to us the novel is suggesting is that science takes us to unknown places, and in the modern world, it can take us there faster than at any point in human history.

As such, we need to understand science: how it works, what it does, and what the potential consequences of its practical application can be. But it isn't only scientists who need to wrap their brains around this. These consequences don't only affect the scientist characters in the novel, but instead impact the entire world—so everyone needs to pursue an understanding of science as part of their everyday lives.

Reading for the Ridiculously Curious

Of course, this brief discussion we've had here only touches upon some pretty deep issues. For those of you who are super interested in this kind of stuff and want to pursue it further, here are a couple of resources to help you begin your exploration:

• Click here to dig deeper into the Grandfather Paradox.
• Read this article to explore a potential resolution to the paradox.
• Curious about paradoxes in general? Look no further.