The question of the blind worms -- do you think science can discover all reality?

Question

I have a fun hypothetical question for all you freethinkers out there -- especially the hard scientific-positivist atheist types. ;-) Here it is:

In another solar system, there is a thick cloud-covered planet (picture Jupiter), such that the sun never penetrates to the surface, which is an ocean of opaque muddy colloid. Below the depths of this opaque ocean is a solid crust and core, much like ours, that generates heat. From this heat flux, a breed of large complex thermophilic worms evolve, along with millions of other species. Primary production is chemoautotrophic. After evolving transmorphic prolegs, with which they can build tools, they develop complex acoustic communication. Their acoustic perception is as keen as our sight, yet, with no evolutionary need to sense light, they are completely blind. These worms eventually develop mathematics, science, and complex technology.

Question: Could this species ever "discover" the spectrum of electromagnetic radiation (light)?

For those who cite our discovery of radiation wavelengths outside our perception as analogy, I'm not sure that's right. UV, infrared, or gamma radiations are simply extensions of a dimension (light) that we already perceive. The problem of heat might be more significant, but heat transfer through a solid or colloidal medium is almost exclusively through conduction, not radiation. So it's not essential for a high-tech worm to know anything about warm body radiation. To the suggestion that some forms of radiation pass through clouds and liquid, the attenuation is great enough (even on portions of the earth's crust -- deep caves) that again, it may become an insignificant footnote to their reality.

So here's another question...without an incling about light radiation, would they ever conceive an equivalent to the theory of relativity? And what dimension are we as humans utterly lacking? Perhaps in that dimension -- that thing we can never imagine -- is the key to the universe.

Answer 1

Good question. I would say yes. Part of the spectrum is infrared which we generally experience as "heat" on a day-to-day level. I'm sure if they got that sophisticated and understood "heat", they'd make some instrument that could convert the spectrum into acoustic energy to simulate it for them.

Another intersting question though, would they ever have a sense of their place in the universe? If the gravity were very strong and the sky were always cloud-covered, would they have inclination/ability to get something over the cloud cover? They would never see stars or moons for their entire existence.

It would be quite a big day if they ever did manage it.

Answer 2

We have proven atoms without seeing them. Once we have the Unified Theory of the Universe, or the Theory of Everything, refined (probably within the next 100 years), we will know everything. Science and physics will become reference - no more research will be needed.

The following by Steven Hawking;

Can there really be a unified theory of everything? Or are we just chasing a mirage? There seem to be three possibilities:

•There really is a complete unified theory, which we will someday discover if we are smart enough.

•There is no ultimate theory of the universe, just an infinite sequence of theories that describe the universe more and more accurately.

•There is no theory of the universe. Events cannot be predicted beyond a certain extent but occur in a random and arbitrary manner.

Some would argue for the third possibility on the grounds that if there were complete set of laws, that would infringe on God’s freedom to change His mind and to intervene in the world. It’s a bit like the old paradox: Can God make a stone so heavy that He can’t lift it? But the idea that God might want to change His example of the fallacy, pointed out by St. Augustine, of imagining God as a being existing in time. Time is a property only of the universe that God created. Presumably, He knew what He intended when He set it up. With the advent of quantum mechanics, we have come to realize that events cannot be predicted with complete accuracy but that there is always a degree of uncertainty. If one liked, one could ascribe this randomness to the intervention of God. But it would be a very strange kind of intervention. There is no evidence that it is directed toward any purpose. Indeed, if it were, it wouldn’t be random. In modern times, we have effectively removed the third possibility by redefining the goal of science. Our aim is to formulate a set of laws that will enable us to predict events up to the limit set by the uncertainty principle.
The second possibility, that there is an infinite sequence of more and more refined theories, is in agreement with all our experience so far. On many occasions, we have increased the sensitivity of our measurements or made a new class of observations only to discover new phenomena that were not predicted by the existing theory. To account for these, we have had to develop a more advanced theory. It would therefore not be very surprising if we find that our present grand unified theories break down when we test them on bigger and more powerful particle accelerators. Indeed, if we didn’t expect them to break down, there wouldn’t be much point in spending all that money on building more powerful machines.
However, it seems that gravity may provide a limit to this sequence of “boxes within boxes.” If one had a particle with an energy above what is called the Planck energy, 1019 GeV, its mass would be so concentrated that it would cut itself off from the rest of the universe and form a little black hole. Thus, it does seem that the sequence of more and more refined theories should have some limit as we go to higher and higher energies. There should be some ultimate theory of the universe. Of course, the Planck energy is a very long way from the energies of around a GeV, which are the most that we can produce in the laboratory at the present time. To bridge that gap would require a particle accelerator that was phenomena that were not predicted by the existing theory. To account for these, we have had to develop a more advanced theory. It would therefore not be very surprising if we find that our present grand unified theories break down when we test them on bigger and more powerful particle accelerators. Indeed, if we didn’t expect them to break down, there wouldn’t be much point in spending all that money on building more powerful machines bigger than the solar system. Such an accelerator would be unlikely to be funded in the present economic climate.
However, the very early stages of the universe are an arena where such energies must have occurred. I think that there is a good chance that the study of the early universe and the requirements of mathematical consistency will lead us to a complete unified theory by the end of the century—always presuming we don’t blow ourselves up first. What would it mean if we actually did discover the ultimate theory of the universe? It would bring to an end a long and glorious chapter in the history of our struggle to understand the universe. But it would also revolutionize the ordinary person’s understanding of the laws that govern the universe. In Newton’s time it was possible for an educated person to have a grasp of the whole of human knowledge, at least in outline. But ever since then, the pace of development of science has made this impossible. Theories were always being changed to account for new observations. They were never properly digested or simplified so that ordinary people could understand them. You had to be a specialist, and even then you could only hope to have a proper grasp of a small proportional of the scientific theories.

Answer 3

They may not, but I wouldn't doubt that they certainly could. Humans are blind to most of the electromagnetic spectrum of radiation, yet we've discovered these things.

And there certainly are some forms of radiation that would penetrate through (and beyond) the atmosphere of your hypothetical planet.

How curious your creatures are is the big question - but as they exist in your mind, you can make them as curious as you want.

Answer 4

Yes they could if they developed technology.
We know of many things because of instrumentation we developed, from atom smashers to a voltmeter. Without these instruments we would be totally ignorant of finding made therewith.

Answer 5

Yes for many reasons. But to answer your original problem, we will never know our own minds completely because of the catalog problem.