It was Memorial Day weekend of 1996, in the middle of what turned out to
be one of New Mexico's worst droughts of the century. The seemingly
endless dry spell reminded many of the climatic disaster said to have
driven the Anasazi, the original inhabitants of this land, from their
stone settlements around Mesa Verde, causing the collapse of a
civilization. To escape the heat, I left my house in Santa Fe and drove
as high as you can go into the nearby Sangre de Cristo Mountains. After
leaving my Jeep in the ski basin parking lot, already some 10,000 feet
above sea level, I began walking higher. My destination, La Vega, "the
meadow," lay at the base of Santa Fe Baldy, an 11,600-foot peak of
Precambrian granite that juts above the timberline.
Almost as soon
as I reached the trail head, I realized that, once again, I had misjudged
the perversity of New Mexico weather. Looking out across the Rio Grande
Valley, I could see the next mountain range, the Jemez, where just weeks
earlier a fire had devastated fifteen thousand acres of one of my
favorite places, the wilderness backcountry of Bandelier National
Monument. Now storm clouds were boiling up over the Jemez and sweeping
toward the Sangre de Cristos. The temperature began dropping, and before
long snow flurries, of all things, were swirling around me.
I was
wishing I had worn a jacket and long pants instead of khaki shorts and a
T-shirt, when, as I rounded a corner on the trail, I heard a familiar
voice. "Well, hello," a man in a floppy cotton hat and a windbreaker
called out enthusiastically. He was walking toward me from the opposite
direction. "How are you?" he said. It took me a few seconds to
realize that I had randomly encountered the subject of this biography, my
Santa Fe neighbor Murray Gell-Mann, hiking with his stepson, Nick
Levis.
For weeks now I had been trying to pin down Gell-Mann for
another interview. He had been running hot and cold ever since I had told
him, two years earlier, that I intended to write his life story. Lately
he had been more helpful. But now I was worrying that his second thoughts
were being followed by third and fourth thoughts, and I had no idea what
stage our relationship was in. I was relieved that he seemed genuinely
pleased to see me. And I was struck again by how much, contrary to so
many of the legends, Gell-Mann liked people and conversation, the easy
camaraderie of encountering someone familiar on a mountain trail. The
physics lore is filled with stories of Gell-Mann cutting down a colleague
with a withering remark, of the mocking names he assigned to people whose
ideas he didn't respect. Particle physics is the most competitive of
intellectual sports, and faced with a theory or a theorist he didn't
like, Gell-Mann could be merciless. But up in the mountains, in New
Mexico, he seemed almost able to relax.
He introduced me to Nick,
who like me was shivering without a jacket. When I said I was headed for
La Vega, Gell-Mann was delighted at the coincidence. "La Vega," he said,
his mouth stretched wide to mimic as perfect a northern New Mexican
accent as you might hear in the villages of Chimayo or Truchas, down the
other side of the mountain. He and Nick had also been heading to La Vega
when the drop in temperature caused them to turn around, a little way up
the trail, at Nambe Creek -- "Nam-be," Murray said, with just the
right amount of padding around the b. Now they were heading
home.
If Gell-Mann was disappointed about not reaching this
particular goal, he didn't show it. His eyes sparkled, and he seemed
happy just to be out in the woods again. A few weeks earlier, the
cardiologists had stuck a catheter in his chest, checking on his progress
since a recent heart attack. They were relieved to find that the artery
they had scraped out -- a Roto-rooting, Gell-Mann called it -- was still
open. There was another, less threatening obstruction further downstream,
but the doctors decided to leave it alone.
I was tempted to turn
around and join Murray and Nick on the hike back. But somehow it seemed
improper. This was not Murray Gell-Mann, the Nobel laureate, the
discoverer of the quark and the Eightfold Way, but simply a man on a
holiday with his stepson. My strategy all along had been to avoid making
him feel cramped. I was in this for the long haul. After a few minutes,
we parted ways. I made it about a mile past Nambe Creek. Then, just
before the descent into the meadow, the clouds went black and I also
decided to save La Vega for another day. Heading back down the mountain,
I thought about how much I had come to like this brilliant, complicated,
always fascinating, and often exasperating man.
***
When we visit the ruins of ancient civilizations, we reserve a
peculiar fascination for those giant, elaborate structures that seem to
serve no practical purpose whatsoever: the pyramids built by the
Egyptians on the Nile and the Maya in Mexico, or the large circular kivas
of Chaco Canyon in northwestern New Mexico. They stand meaningless now,
rock-solid projections long outlasting whatever ideas they were meant to
represent. Catholicism still survives, so we can understand some of the
rationale behind Chartres, St. Peter's, and the other great cathedrals
and basilicas of Europe. But we have barely a hint of the ideas that
motivated the construction of the Sphinx.
It is sometimes said
that the cathedrals of the late twentieth century are the giant particle
accelerators, monuments to the belief -- far from obvious on its face --
that buried beneath the rough surface of the world we inhabit is a
crystalline order so beautiful and subtle the mind can barely grasp it.
Engaging in a fantasy, we can imagine, centuries and centuries from now,
archaeologists (from this planet or perhaps from beyond the solar system)
perplexed and captivated by the remains of the
seventeen-mile-circumference particle accelerator being constructed at
CERN, the European Center for Nuclear Research, near Geneva, or the
four-mile ring at Fermilab in Illinois. These "atom smashers" are among
the largest, most powerful machines ever built by the human race -- not
for the purpose of generating power, like the dams and nuclear reactors,
or for predicting the weather or simulating nuclear explosions, like the
supercomputers. Their sole purpose is intellectual: to find the faintest
glimmers of evidence that, despite so many appearances to the contrary,
we live in a mathematically symmetrical universe. How is it that a
civilization long ago became so obsessed with this idea? That will be the
riddle of these twentieth-century sphinxes.
If our parchments and
our data banks survive along with the wreckage of our great machines, the
archaeologists will learn a remarkable story: How the elders of the
church of science came to believe that, despite what we perceive, matter
is not continuous; it is made of invisible particles linked together in a
beautiful architecture. As the atomists would show over the years, the
seemingly infinite variety of the world is generated by some one hundred
elements, neatly arranged in the Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleev's
periodic table of the elements.
Viewed from the heavens, any hint
of geometry on the earth -- land divided into rectangles and circles,
rock cut into blocks and piled straight and high -- is usually a sign of
intelligent creatures imposing order on an irregular world. But surely,
the scientists believed, this harmony we find so soothing runs deeper.
Beneath the world's confusion of forms is a scaffolding built according
to a geometry as pleasing to the mind as a Gothic cathedral.
Since
no one could directly see this geometry, the best one could hope for was
to study its shadows. And so the physicists began to build the machinery
they believed would provide an indirect glimpse. At first these devices
were as simple as a jar enclosing gold foil leaves that seemed to waft in
the wind of an invisible essence called electricity. By the early
twentieth century, scientists were making gas-filled tubes that glowed in
the dark with what they took to be mysterious beams of positive and
negative charge. By studying and measuring these weird emanations, the
physicists reached a powerful consensus: The world was even more elegant
and symmetrical than Mendeleev and the atomists dared imagine. The
variety of atoms found on the earth and in the sky were made up of
combinations of just three particles: the proton, the electron, and the
neutron.
But this newfound simplicity was short-lived. Not content
with their instruments, the scientists built bigger and bigger machines.
With the first particle accelerators, small enough to fit on a tabletop,
they began smashing their elementary particles into each other and
discovered that they weren't so elementary after all. They could be
shattered into fragments. When they built bigger accelerators to smash
the pieces even harder, they were left with fragments of fragments.
Placing carefully designed detectors on mountaintops or sending them
aloft in balloons, they found traces of still other particles, the cosmic
rays bombarding the planet from space. Soon, there were so many of these
"elementary" constituents that they threatened the very desire for order
that had driven the search. The physicists were in despair.
And
then, leading them out of the confusion, came the young scientists whose
string of discoveries would do so much to make sense of it all, to find
pattern hiding beneath the confusion. Viewed through these magicians'
wonderful new lenses, the clouds lifted and order shone through. But it
came at a curious price. To restore beauty to the core of creation,
humanity was asked to believe in truths stranger than any that had come
before.
The most remarkable of these wizards was Murray Gell-Mann.
Graduating from Yale University at age eighteen, by the time he was
twenty-one he had earned a Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology. Less than three years later, he began his revolution with an
astonishing theory explaining the unlikely behavior of certain cosmic
rays -- the so-called "strange particles" that bombarded the earth from
space. The legend was born. From then until a decade later, when he
proposed the existence of quarks, Gell-Mann dominated particle physics.
He is sometimes called the Mendeleev of the twentieth century, for what
he provided was no less than a periodic table of the subatomic particles.
In a fanciful allusion to Buddhist philosophy, Gell-Mann called his
organizing scheme the Eightfold Way. While the periodic table shows that
the plenitude of atoms can be generated by combining just three particles
-- the proton, electron, and neutron -- the Eightfold Way shows that the
hundreds of subatomic particles are made up of a handful of the elements
Gell-Mann named quarks. Complexity was reduced to simplicity
again.
But there is an important difference between the
architecture of Mendeleev and the architecture of the Eightfold Way. And
it is here that one can glimpse the enormity of the intellectual upheaval
brought on by Gell-Mann and his colleagues. The periodic table, now a
commonplace in any high school chemistry course, classifies the elements
according to properties we can perceive with our senses. Every element is
characterized by a unique mass and charge. Mass is something we feel when
we pick up a rock; we generate charge when we shuffle across a carpet and
touch a doorknob.
Classified according to these commonsense
qualities, the elements miraculously arrange themselves into columns --
the rare earth metals, the noble gases, and so forth -- whose members
share similar characteristics.
In its ability to sift pattern from
chaos, the Eightfold Way is at least as powerful, but tantalizingly more
subtle. The qualities Gell-Mann used to arrange the subatomic particles
were far more abstract than charge and mass. In his scheme, particles
were classified according to elusive qualities called isospin and
strangeness, which have no counterpart in the world of everyday
experience. To describe the invisible patterns said to underlie the
material world, Gell-Mann's strangeness was soon followed by more new
qualities with names like charm, truth, and beauty. They "exist" not
within the familiar world of three dimensions (four, if you include
time), but within artificially constructed mathematical spaces, imaginary
realms of pure abstraction.
Was this world stuff or mind stuff? To say
that Gell-Mann "discovered" the quark is not quite right. All of his
great breakthroughs came from playing with symbols on paper and
chalkboards. His most important tools, he liked to say, were pencil,
paper, and wastebasket. His discoveries were not of things but of
patterns -- mathematical symmetries that seemed to reflect, in some
ultimately mysterious way, the manner in which subatomic particles
behaved. But then "invented the quark" is not quite right either
-- implying some kind of postmodern relativism in which science is pure
construction, just another philosophy. When Mendeleev drew his table, he
left blank spaces for unknown elements that were discovered only years
later. This manmade artifice was predicting truths about the real world.
And so it was with the Eightfold Way. New kinds of particles demanded by
Gell-Mann's abstract invention showed up in the experimenters' atom
smashers.
The conflicting views of the nature of scientific ideas
-- are they discovered or invented? -- are starkly laid out in the titles
of two books: The Hunting of the Quark by Michael Riordan and
Constructing Quarks by Andrew Pickering. Are quarks real particles
(whatever that means) or mathematical contrivances? It's a debate that
Gell-Mann refused to engage in. Philosophy, he thought, was a waste of
time. But the puzzling questions about the reality of quarks -- particles
that cannot in principle be independently observed -- quietly churned in
his mind. One can see the struggle in the words he wrote and the lectures
he gave. Ultimately he and just about everyone stopped worrying about it.
Whether invented or discovered or something in between, it was
Gell-Mann's quarks and his Eightfold Way that laid the foundation for the
explanation physicists have given for how the world is made. For years
particle physicists argued over who was the smartest person in their
field: Richard Feynman or Murray Gell-Mann.
This idea of breaking
the world into pieces and then explaining the pieces in terms of smaller
pieces is called reductionism. It would be perfectly justified to
consider Gell-Mann, the father of the quark, to be the century's
arch-reductionist. But very early on, long before mushy notions of holism
became trendy, Gell-Mann appreciated an important truth: While you can
reduce downward, that doesn't automatically mean you can explain upward.
People can be divided into cells, cells into molecules, molecules into
atoms, atoms into electrons and nuclei, nuclei into subatomic particles,
and those into still tinier things called quarks. But, true as that may
be, there is nothing written in the laws of subatomic physics that can be
used to explain higher-level phenomena like human behavior. There is no
way that one can start with quarks and predict that cellular life would
emerge and evolve over the eons to produce physicists. Reducing downward
is vastly easier than explaining upward -- a truth that bears
repeating.
In the last decade, what aspires to be a new branch of
science has sprung up to try and come to grips with complex phenomena --
organisms, economies, ecosystems, societies, the thunderstorms that sweep
through the Rockies. Gell-Mann, some fifteen years after winning a Nobel
Prize for his reductionist tour de force, reversed direction and helped
found the Santa Fe Institute, a world center for studying complexity.
Part of his motivation was political. An ardent conservationist, he hoped
to find scientific ammunition to support his environmental causes. He
wanted to understand the complexity of the rain forests and convince the
world that they must be preserved. But he also hoped to deepen the
world's understanding of the relationship between the unseen particles
science understood so well and the unruliness of the world that confronts
us every day. Sitting in his small office, with its pictures of the
particles he had discovered hanging on the walls like family portraits,
he would look out at the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, at all this rich
biology and geology begging to be understood. And, though some of his
Santa Fe colleagues would beg to differ, he believed he had come close to
figuring it out.
Author Biography
Excerpted from Strange Beauty by George Johnson. Copyright© 1999 by George Johnson. Excerpted by permission of Knopf, a division of Random House, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
George Johnson, a former Alicia Patterson
Fellow and finalist for the Rhone-Poulenc Prize, covers science for the
New York Times. His previous books include Machinery of the
Mind: Inside the New Science of Artificial Intelligence, In the Palaces
of Memory: How We Build the Worlds Inside Our Heads, and Fire in
the Mind: Science, Faith, and the Search for Order. He lives with his
wife in Santa Fe, New Mexico.