Most important piece of scientific knowledge

[Ryan_m_b]

"We've received a message: don't be evil!"

"Excellent! What shall we do because of it?"

"Isn't it obvious? We should do good and extinguish the evil of the blacks, the gays and the Jews."

Moral of the horrific story of history: morality is malleable.

 

[flatmaster]

"We've received a message: don't be evil!"

"Excellent! What shall we do because of it?"

"Isn't it obvious? We should do good and extinguish the evil of the blacks, the gays and the Jews."

Moral of the horrific story of history: morality is malleable.

"Don't be Evil" was just stollen from Google's motto. I'm not eloquent enough to write the actual message consicely.

The message would include this omen about the dangers of mis-using scientific discoveries allong with the "morality is malleable" part you mentioned.

 

[Yanick]

I doubt hitting them with one specific scientific bit of knowledge will really help. I agree with Ryan, you need to get them to a good head start in developing civilization. Science and technology develop rapidly when the mundane things in life like food, water, shelter etc are taken care of and people have enough leisure time to pursue trivial matters (trivial in a pragmatic sense).

So depending on how far back the cataclysm sets mankind you'd provide them with the next big discovery to get them well on their way. Something like fire, the wheel, agriculture, the stuff's of the industrial revolution etc. These will aid much more into helping the human race to re-discover all the Scientific knowledge they lost. Who cares about an atom if you need to run after a gazelle for 5 hours just to get some meat on the table?

 

[mfb]

Hmm... what about some (distant) target as incentive to study nature?
"With science, it is possible to go to the Moon".

 

[flatmaster]

Hmm... what about some (distant) target as incentive to study nature?
"With science, it is possible to go to the Moon".

That's the sort of thing I was thinking of. I would add...

"With science, it is possible to go to the moon or to destroy the earth. The choice is yours. "

 

[Ryan_m_b]

That's the sort of thing I was thinking of. I would add...

"With science, it is possible to go to the moon or to destroy the earth. The choice is yours. "

As others have said this is too easy to fade into myth. I can't remember which religion has the saying "with faith it's possible to move mountains" but that statement is functionally indistinguishable to "with science it's possible to go to the moon". Ironically without showing how to get to the moon the latter statement is somewhat unscientific

 

[AnTiFreeze3]

I would have one helluva run-on sentence.

 

[nitsuj]

Oh yes. But I'm sure people would want to know more.

More about physics that SR? Do the physicists really know more? less the complication that's gravity

 

[tade]

"Don't be Evil" was just stollen from Google's motto. I'm not eloquent enough to write the actual message consicely.

The message would include this omen about the dangers of mis-using scientific discoveries allong with the "morality is malleable" part you mentioned.

People will always find ways to misuse something. And Google seems to be getting more evil by the day

 

[tade]

Hmm... what about some (distant) target as incentive to study nature?
"With science, it is possible to go to the Moon".

As others have said this is too easy to fade into myth. I can't remember which religion has the saying "with faith it's possible to move mountains" but that statement is functionally indistinguishable to "with science it's possible to go to the moon". Ironically without showing how to get to the moon the latter statement is somewhat unscientific

It is unscientific, but other than being associated with religion, more imaginative people would think of it.

For instance, Kepler even wrote a sci-fi novel about sailing to the moon on a "skyship".

 

[tade]

More about physics that SR? Do the physicists really know more? less the complication that's gravity

Yes, more. All there is to know.

 

[Devils]

Keep yourself and hands clean, observe sanitation in yourself, your food and water.

 

[AnTiFreeze3]

Keep yourself and hands clean, observe sanitation in yourself, your food and water.

That's actually incredibly useful; I hadn't thought of it. Prior to germ theory, the lack of proper sanitation really hindered the livelihood of the human species.

Most of the other suggestions are surely helpful in terms of scientific knowledge, but as far as actually contributing to the survival of humanity, this one seems to be the best.

EDIT:

I guess an earlier post or two mentioned germ theory. Regardless, I still think it is very beneficial idea to pass on.

 

[Borek]

One of the things that stopped science for many hundreds years was the fact that experiments were considered unnecessary. So I would go with something like "scientific method & the nature is always right" - but I agree that first, it can be abused, second, you need a critical mass for things to get started.

 

[epenguin]

I think what several people have tried to say, e.g. about experiment is better (as well as more completely and accurately) expressed

"The two divergent views" (I.e. the value of knowledge as an end in itself, as against as a means to useful applications) "... The history of the sciences was made not by the one or the other school of thought but from the interplay of both. ... theories and hypotheses are seldom based on a panoramic survey of the general scene. They rest more often on a detailed searching into matters which a casual view might well dismiss as specialised, recondite and obscure, and access to the realm of fruitful theories is usually by devious and unexpected ways, found out by men with very different ends in view." (Cyril Hinshelwood, "Structure of Physical Chemistry")

I'd add that although people sometimes research obscurities for their own sakes they more often than not had a reasonable idea of the importance of what they were into, a somewhat trained insight to realize that investigating specific heats or the length of pea plants In crosses could reveal something deeper behind the apparent obscurity. I mentioned the example of early electrostatics in #16. You encounter only a specialised often unobvious bit of the world in the laboratory.

 

[nitsuj]

Yes, more. All there is to know.

Yea I agree, I was just being a jackass. but I do need to subtract "All there is to know", HA "they" wish! (and me too)

 

[nitsuj]

Keep yourself and hands clean, observe sanitation in yourself, your food and water.

"The devils in the details" came to mind.

 

[tade]

Keep yourself and hands clean, observe sanitation in yourself, your food and water.

I think many modern-day humans still need to be reminded of this.

 

[tade]

"The devils in the details" came to mind.

Don't make another post, otherwise you'll go over the lucky number.

 

[tade]

One of the things that stopped science for many hundreds years was the fact that experiments were considered unnecessary. So I would go with something like "scientific method & the nature is always right" - but I agree that first, it can be abused, second, you need a critical mass for things to get started.

Was it Plato who advocated lying in bed and thinking instead of performing experiments? And Aristotle was the young hotshot who believed otherwise?

"The two divergent views" (I.e. the value of knowledge as an end in itself, against as a means to useful applications)

Some people do research for the first reason, in general, society wants it to be done for the second reason.

In addition, Einstein said "Many take to science out of a joyful sense of superior intellectual power; science is their own special sport to which they look for vivid experience and the satisfaction of ambition".


Speaking of practicality, the LHC costs 9 billion USD, how did they manage to get the European governments to finance it? Especially given Europe's current state of affairs.

 

[mfb]

in general, society wants it to be done for the second reason.

Not always, and the society does not make direct decisions about big science projects.

The LHC produces useful applications. Win-win situation for all.

 

[tade]

Not always, and the society does not make direct decisions about big science projects.

The LHC produces useful applications. Win-win situation for all.

Like the huge computer network required? I wonder how much funding it still receives as of now. Most European governments would have probably classified it as low priority due to the economic crisis.

 

[mfb]

The huge computer network and various software developments, the high-tech particle detectors, data analysis methods, radiation hard components, ...
Funding is sufficient to run or improve the accelerator and the detectors, and the planned upgrades get enough money to proceed, too.