|
Jules Verne wrote such memorable classics as 20,000 leagues under the sea (1869), Journey to the Center of the Earth (1864), Around the World in Eighty Days (1872), and From Earth to the Moon (1865). From 1895 to 1991, H.G. Wells wrote The Time Machine (1895), The Island of Dr. Moreau (1896), The Invisible Man (1897), War of the Worlds(1898), and The First Men on the Moon (1901). Other notable writers from the 20th century include Issac Asimov and Arthur C. Clarke. These exciting and imaginitive books inspired several generations of scientists by creating new worlds where impossible science such as time travel, genetic mutation, air travel, submarine travel, spaceflight, and aliens existed. Today, many modern innovations seems to have been anticipated by the original Star Trek tv series, such as teleportation, wireless communication, laser weapons, and flat panel big screen tvs ;).
So why am I bringing this up? Well lately I've been reading a lot of biographies of Scientists and Engineers in order to put together single page biographies for CR4 (You may have seen them posted), and I was struck by how many of the turn of the century scientists mentioned Wells or Verne as inspiration. History books tend to list only accomplishments and a bit of the human element is erased from the historical men and women we study. Its easy to forget that there were pivotal simuli that inspired these people towards greatness.
So how do we as Engineers and Scientists rate the impact of these writers on the developement of science? Many of these stories put forth ideas that had never been in print before. Before the era of the Scientific Method, some of these stories might have been labeled as Natural Philosphy (and maybe Moral Philosphy). Today I think we would be reluctant to admit the scientific aspect of these authors. They are writers and we are scientists. It seems to me though that if they were thinking up new ideas, that one hundred years later became scientific reality, that we should acknowledge their contribution to the scientific process as scientists, or at the very least, scientific philosphers.
Now I admit there is a lot of bad science fiction out there, and ironically, I don't read science fiction at all. Ispiration for me came in the form of Star Wars (only the ones with Han Solo please), Star Trek (only the ones with Bones), and MacGuyver. Unofficially we all will admit to each other that we were inspired by these shows or books, but there is very little official recognition. I'd like to see that change, though I admit I don't know how it would be done. Still, I can't shake the feeling that these writers aren't getting the professional credit they deserve for the scientific contributions they make.
| 
