Atoms, Genes, and Other Useful Fictions

I was just informed by my 391 Blackboard page of an upcoming seminar (looks like for a general audience) by Dr. Buskirk:

“Atoms, Genes, and Other Useful Fictions”

Allen Buskirk, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry

Thursday, March 11, 2 pm in the Library Auditorium

Scientists rely on analogies to our common experience to explain natural phenomena. As far back as the ancient Greeks, thinkers have explained stability in the natural world in terms of fundamental particles which are indivisible, solid, and permanent. Change is explained in terms of interactions between these particles. These ideas appeal to our physical intuition that simple, solid objects are long-lasting. The philosophy of atomism was adopted wholesale by early modern physicists. In the late 19^th century, biologists seeking to explain the stability of hereditary traits coined the word “gene” to correspond to the atom; “gene” was originally intended to mean an indivisible, stable particle of heredity that could be passed on to posterity but also recombined to generate diversity. Both concepts (atoms and genes) have been tremendously successful in the 20^th century. But in the very moment of their triumph, they have unraveled in surprising ways: atoms were split and shown to contain ever smaller particles that obey the bizarre rules of quantum mechanics. Indeed, the subunits of atoms are not merely particles but bundles of energy described as waves. Similarly, though genes are DNA molecules, they rely on cellular systems for their replication, maintenance, and regulation. It turns out that atoms and genes are not indivisible, stable particles, nor can they support all the lofty causal claims ascribed to them. The story of atomic thinking in chemistry in biology demonstrates both the power and the limitations of metaphor in science.

Sounds pretty entertaining!