Section 1.1: Gender and Scientific Recognition

Interestingly, in examining historical figures prior to 1953, the lack of female representation in science becomes apparent. This absence is largely due to the systemic exclusion of women from scientific fields until the early 20th century. Even in seeking an alternative to a figure like Marie Curie, we often find ourselves looking to men. Current statistics regarding Nobel Prizes in science suggest that we still have much work to do to include diverse voices. The negligence of half the population's potential in scientific inquiry is both absurd and shameful, underlining the importance of such discussions.

Heliocentrism — Johannes Kepler

Few groundbreaking discoveries lack predecessors, and heliocentrism — the idea that the Earth revolves around the sun — is no exception. This concept, which shifted humanity from the center of the universe, has a well-documented history before Nicolaus Copernicus published his revolutionary work, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, in 1543.

In the third century B.C., Greek mathematician Aristarchus of Samos proposed a similar model, and in the mid-15th century, German cardinal Nicholas of Cusa pondered the existence of a definitive center to the universe. What set Copernicus's theory apart was its strong mathematical foundation that accurately considered the movements of the planets.

Interestingly, Copernicus was initially reluctant to share his ideas until he was persuaded by a young Austrian scholar, Georg Rheticus, to publish his findings. This leads us to ponder: had Copernicus died prematurely, who else might have reached this conclusion?

While contemporaneous astronomers like Erasmus Reinhold and Christopher Clavius possessed the mathematical skills and observational talent, they were ideologically aligned with geocentrism. Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe brought fresh perspectives to the table with his model where the sun orbited the Earth while other planets revolved around the sun. However, it's likely that the leap to heliocentrism would have been delayed until the early 17th century.

Galileo, known for his bold promotion of Copernican theory, faced backlash from the Catholic Church. He was innovative enough to conceive of heliocentrism himself, but many believe that Johannes Kepler, Tycho's protégé, would have eventually arrived at the same conclusion due to his access to Tycho's exceptional observational data and his own mathematical prowess.

Laws of Motion — Christiaan Huygens

Isaac Newton often seems to occupy a realm distinct from his contemporaries in the late 17th century. While Robert Boyle excelled as an experimentalist who hesitated to formulate hypotheses and Robert Hooke confused promising ideas with comprehensive explanations, Newton demonstrated a remarkable ability to leap from meticulous observation to fundamental principles. His work transformed astronomy, moving from a mere description of celestial movements to an understanding of the underlying gravitational laws governing them.

Newton's Principia, published in 1687, was a response to Hooke's claims that he could explain the elliptical orbits of planets. Before addressing planetary behavior, Newton needed to articulate his laws of motion, which became the foundation of classical mechanics. They are succinct and elegantly stated: objects maintain their state unless acted upon by an external force; force equals mass times acceleration; and every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

Imagining alternative paths to these discoveries can dispel myths surrounding them. The Royal Society, filled with gentlemen amateurs, lacked true scientific visionaries. However, one contender for this achievement was Dutch polymath Christiaan Huygens, who was adept in mathematics, astronomy, and optics.

Huygens' work on mechanics and his theories regarding pendulum clocks influenced Newton's Principia. His investigations into collisions hint at the third law of motion, while he independently articulated a version of the second law. Huygens had the intellectual resources to initiate what we now call Newtonian mechanics.

Special Relativity — James Clerk Maxwell

Imagining alternative discoveries can also help dismantle established myths. The narrative of Einstein conceptualizing special relativity in 1905 by riding a light beam highlights his creativity but overlooks his true motivations. Contrary to popular belief, Einstein's theories were not primarily driven by the failed experiments of Albert Michelson and Edward Morley regarding the ether.

The impetus for special relativity arose from the equations of Scottish scientist James Clerk Maxwell, which unified electric and magnetic phenomena and predicted the speed of light as a constant. In contrast to other speeds, which depend on the medium, if the laws of physics remain the same regardless of an observer's speed, then the speed of light should remain invariant.

While Dutch physicist Hendrik Lorentz made strides toward reconciling electromagnetic theory with relative motion, it’s plausible that Maxwell himself, had he lived longer, would have independently reached the same conclusions as Einstein, particularly as he possessed profound insights into the nature of light and electromagnetism.

General Relativity — Hermann Minkowski

In 1916, Einstein introduced general relativity, a revolutionary theory that redefined gravity, explaining it as a curvature of spacetime influenced by mass. This theory remains the most comprehensive explanation of gravitational phenomena, encapsulating everything from planetary orbits to the expansive universe.

However, Hermann Minkowski, a mathematician who taught Einstein, had already begun exploring concepts that would contribute to general relativity. Minkowski proposed that the correct understanding of special relativity involved four-dimensional spacetime, a notion Einstein initially questioned but later incorporated into his work.

Minkowski recognized that while objects moving at constant speeds trace straight lines in spacetime, accelerating objects follow curved paths. His insight into non-Euclidean spacetime paved the way for a deeper understanding of gravitational interactions, suggesting that he could have further developed these ideas into a full theory of gravitation had he not died prematurely in 1909.

Quanta — J. J. Thomson

The discovery of quanta represents one of the more incidental breakthroughs in physics. Max Planck, who stumbled upon the concept of quantization in 1900 while researching blackbody radiation, initially regarded it as a mere mathematical tool rather than a profound scientific truth. Planck posited that energy is emitted in discrete packets, or "quanta," but hesitated to treat this hypothesis as a fundamental reality.

While Wilhelm Wien made significant contributions to the understanding of blackbody radiation, he was too conservative to risk the implications of Planck's findings. However, had Planck not introduced the concept, it seems likely that another path toward the understanding of quantization would have emerged, possibly through J. J. Thomson, who discovered the electron and had substantial expertise in atomic theory. Thomson's insights could have led to a more courageous exploration of quantum mechanics.

Structure of DNA — Rosalind Franklin

Rosalind Franklin's pivotal contributions to the discovery of DNA's double-helical structure are often overshadowed by the accolades awarded to James Watson and Francis Crick. It was Franklin's meticulous X-ray diffraction data that provided critical evidence for the helical arrangement of DNA, enabling Watson and Crick to formulate their model in 1953.

Despite her significant role, Franklin's caution and conservatism in scientific exploration may have hindered her from arriving at the conclusion independently. However, many experts, including zoologist Matthew Cobb, assert that Franklin had already grasped the double-helix structure, as revealed in her detailed notebooks.

The suggestion that Franklin could have made this discovery herself emphasizes the importance of recognizing her contributions. She, along with Linus Pauling, who proposed an incorrect triple-helical model, exemplifies the complexities of scientific discovery and the sometimes unfortunate overshadowing of female scientists' work.

Natural Selection — A Broader Perspective

Simultaneous discoveries are not uncommon in science, as evidenced by the parallel development of calculus by Newton and Leibniz or the discovery of oxygen by Scheele, Priestley, and Lavoisier. The theory of evolution through natural selection was independently proposed by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace in 1858.

It raises the question: if both Darwin and Wallace had not existed, who else might have deduced this revolutionary theory? Some historians suggest that even in the absence of Darwin's specific framework, the concept of evolution would likely have emerged, albeit possibly in a different form.

James Lennox, a historian of Darwinian theory, posits that alternatives to Darwin's ideas were actively debated, suggesting that a different theory of evolution might have taken precedence. This highlights the notion that scientific paradigms are shaped not only by individual contributions but also by the broader context of inquiry and the prevailing intellectual climate.

As we reflect on these counterfactual scenarios, it becomes evident that while science presents us with useful theories for understanding the world, the unique voices and ideas of individual scientists undeniably shape our conceptual frameworks.

Philip Ball is a writer based in London.

This video titled "Experts DESTROY Darwin's Theory in 16 Minutes" examines critiques of Darwin's theories and offers alternative viewpoints on evolution.

In "What Darwin won't tell you about evolution - with Jonathan Pettitt," the discussion delves into lesser-known aspects of Darwin's theories and their implications for modern science.