Science’s Esoteric Dreams Yield to Missiles, Medicine

Particle physicists are depressed. So, too, are planetary scientists. A recent string of science budgets streaming from Washington threatens to defer their dreams of exploring both inner and outer space.

“So what?” you might ask.

The research they do is admittedly speculative, esoteric, impractical. It costs millions--sometimes billions--of dollars. Dollars that are urgently needed for the government’s wars on terrorism, cancer, drugs.

Who needs dreamers in a time of tangible terror? Far-out research when so many down-to-Earth matters need attending?

In the current climate, it’s perhaps not surprising that missions to Pluto and Jupiter’s moon Europa have been put on hold. Even though postponing the trip to Pluto means giving up a chance to visit the last unexplored planet in our solar system for at least 100 years. Even though strong evidence suggests that Europa holds an ocean under its ice--making it a good bet to yield the first sign of extraterrestrial life.

It’s also not unexpected that funding would be steadily reduced for particle physics, that branch of science that unravels the innards of atoms--the ultimate in navel gazing. In February, director of the U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy John Marburger--former head of a particle physics lab himself--called the frontiers of astronomy and particles both “remote hinterlands” that were “no longer very relevant to human affairs.”

The folks at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Ill., were aghast. “Remote hinterlands?” exclaimed Judy Jackson in the in-house paper FermiNews. “[And] these words come from a friend of particle physics.”

Reflecting Marburger’s attitudes, the 2003 science budgets are all about “missiles and medicine,” as insiders call them--with huge increases going to support research in the Department of Defense and the National Institutes of Health.

But here’s the odd thing: It’s the dreamers in their hinterlands who often come up with the most practical inventions of all: those most relevant to human affairs.

Take that terrorist with the little black mustache who committed genocide and came within an arm’s reach of taking over the world not so long ago. He might have won had he managed to develop his atomic bomb. One reason he didn’t was that nearly all the German and Austrian “dreamers” had fled to the United States.

Just look at the physicists behind the U.S. atom bomb: They were a bunch of fuzzy-headed, highfalutin intellectuals--engaged in spectacularly impractical research.

Robert Oppenheimer was a theorist who explored black holes. Albert Einstein came up with the famous theory that showed you could get energy from matter (E=mc2) while daydreaming about what it would be like to ride along on a light beam.

So much for missiles. What about medicine? One can’t begrudge funding medical research that ultimately helps everyone (well, everyone who can afford to pay). But where do PET scans and magnetic resonance imaging and laser surgery come from?

You guessed it: dreamers! Magnetic resonance sprang right from the innards of atoms, lasers from quantum mechanics; PET scans rely on antimatter. No one had practical technology in mind when these discoveries were made.

It would be unfair to stop with fuzzy-headed physicists. There are fuzzy-headed biologists doing the same sort of work. Tramping around the jungles looking for new species no one will ever keep as pets or use for food or carrying loads. Most of their discoveries are tiny insects and obscure plants.

Surprisingly often, these finds from the “remote hinterlands” of biology lead directly to new medicines or new understanding of disease.

This particular lesson was brought home in a big way last week when Japanese computer scientists left their U.S. counterparts in their dust.

According to the New York Times, the Japanese have produced a computer more powerful than the 20 fastest U.S. computers combined. They developed it while trying to understand climate change, modeling weather and earthquakes and global warming.

The United States, meanwhile, has been developing computer power primarily to model weapons. And look what happened.

“These guys are blowing us out of the water,” one U.S. scientist said. Another called the situation “Computenik”--referring to the astonished American response when the Soviets launched Sputnik in 1957. Back then, tremendous resources were suddenly poured into science education. Not this time. Instead, millions of dollars previously earmarked for math and science education have recently been stripped from a federal education bill.

It is part of our Puritan ethic that work should have a clear purpose. Journeys should have destinations, efforts clear ends. There’s no room for leisurely wandering, pointless wondering: What would happen if ... ? What’s out there? In here?

Alas, this ethic simply does not serve science, where seemingly aimless exploration is often the most fruitful of all.

Puritan ethic or no, there’s nothing idle about scientific curiosity.

K.C. Cole can be reached at kc.cole@latimes.com.