This idea is simple enough to understand, but how would you test it? At any one time, there are millions of butterflies flapping their wings. Could we ever find the one to blame any subsequent hurricane on? Indeed, at any one time, there are trillions of other things causing equally small disturbances in the air: a woman fanning herself with a program at a play; a boy releasing a rubber band powered airplane; a mouse farting.
The Butterfly Effect metaphor is also extended to people every time a child is told he can make a difference in the world. Though true, it’s true in the same way it’s true with butterflies–not every beating wing begets a hurricane; not every difference made ultimately makes much of a difference. So with election time just around the corner as you read this, and candidates campaigning on platforms that always amount to nothing more than "I can make a bigger and better difference than can my opponent," it is worthwhile to think about this a bit.
Surely, some might think, there are scientists who have genuinely made contributions the size of hurricanes in the "atmosphere" of science. No doubt Einstein comes immediately to mind, for without Relativity theory, where would physics be today? But this is the wrong way to frame the question–it presupposes that Einstein was indispensable to the development of Relativity as it is practiced today, and this is simply untrue. Einstein’s 1905 "special relativity" paper contained nothing that hadn’t already been published by Lorentz, Poincare’, and Larmor. [See pp. 145-147 of Retardation and Relativity by Oleg D. Jefimenko (ISBN 0-917406-21-4), "References and Remarks for Chapter 6," the first four entries.] What about General Relativity? Was Einstein indispensable to our understanding of gravity? The answer, again, appears to be no. In the preface to one popular textbook on gravity, the authors state: "It is the objective of this book to develop gravitational theory in the most logical and straightforward way–in the way it probably would have developed without Einstein’s intervention." [See page xi of Gravitation and Spacetime by Ohanian and Ruffini (ISBN 0-393-96501-5).] Without Einstein our physics texts would still look very much the same as they do today. We just wouldn’t refer to super-bright physics majors as "the next Einstein."
Are there any important inventions we enjoy today that would never have existed without their famous inventors? This answer is also probably no. When you look at the history of famous inventions, it is usually the case that the equally famous inventor was the first to build a successful version. Hence, without Watt, we would still have steam engines. Without Edison, we would still have electric lights. Without Marconi, we would still have radio. Indeed, in this last case, the famous inventor didn’t even invent what he’s credited with. The actual credit goes to Tesla. [See Wizard: The Life and Times of Nikola Tesla, Biography of a Genius, by Marc J. Seifer (ISBN 1-55972-329-7).] But if not Tesla, someone else. A more important invention of Tesla’s was the modern AC power grid, but again, if not Tesla, someone else.
However, if Tesla had been successful with his Wardenclyffe project to transmit both radio and electric power wirelessly, that might have made a hurricane-scale difference to history, since no other inventor was even remotely on the way to doing that the way Tesla planned to. Nor were any other inventors as uniquely brilliant as Tesla in the field of electrical engineering. But he ran out of money, the project wasn’t completed, and we’ll never know.
As I mentioned earlier, the elections are coming. Are there any political figures who genuinely made unique differences to which they were indispensable causes? The United States would certainly have had another father if George Washington hadn’t come along, though the Revolutionary War might have gone very much differently. Without Winston Churchill, England may have lost the Battle of Britain. However, without Churchill someone else may very well have worn the same mantle. But it is hard to imagine that Germany would have adopted her uniquely evil Nazi persona without Hitler. Certainly, Hitler had help, willing accomplices to put into practice his crazy, brutal ideas. But they were followers, not leaders, and there was no historical necessity for Hitler. True, Hitler likely could not have come to power if there had not been the economic strangling of Germany post World War One. It may even be likely that the times would have produced another powerful German leader who would have taken the country into World War Two. But it did not have to be someone as uniquely awful as was Adolph Hitler.
In my Alternate View for April 2004 ("Edward Teller, R.I.P.") I described Edward Teller as the kind of man who had also made a genuine difference, for good in this case, to the world. I went so far as to boldly state: "Had it not been for Teller, the Soviet Union would have beaten the United States to thermonuclear weapons, and it’s not at all unlikely that we might now all be speaking Russian if they had." While I was working on this essay, Stan Schmidt forwarded a potential Brass Tacks letter to me from Scott T. Meissner. (I don’t know if Mr. Meissner’s letter ultimately made it into Brass Tacks or not.) Therein, Meissner says about my assertion above, ". . . to claim that the U.S. would have lost the cold war without Teller’s efforts to get the U.S. the thermonuclear bomb first, seems a bit of a stretch." He notes that the U.S. did, after all, have atomic bombs, and asks the question: "Doesn’t either weapon (A-bomb and H-bomb) have enough holocaustic capacity to impose a terrified state of mutually assured destruction?"
Well, that’s a good question to answer in a doctoral dissertation. But this is a Science Fiction magazine, so I’ll instead explore my claim with a little bit of alternate universe brainstorming, and bear in mind, I said "might."
Suppose that, for whatever reasons, Teller lost interest in pursuing work on the Hydrogen bomb after the war, so there was no passionate advocate for the project, certainly none with Teller’s level of expertise. A-bomb work would have continued, and the consternation felt when the Soviet’s detonated their first A-bomb in 1949 would also have been the same. The Intelligentsia of the era would have denigrated the achievement as more the result of clever spying than of superb talent in nuclear physics. They would not have felt it necessary to pursue work on the H-bomb because they already thought it was unlikely to work, a view based on Teller’s own earlier studies. Also, the U.S. still held the lead in the development of atomic weapons, with an ongoing robust program. It would have been felt that the U.S.S.R. would forever be playing catch up.
When the Soviets do test their first H-bomb, scientists in the U.S. are confused as to the actual nature of the device. Was it just a huge fission bomb? (It is possible to make an A-bomb that will yield up to the megaton range–it’s just a waste of material.) Having no thermonuclear program of our own, it’s not so easy to recognize the test for what it is.
Eventually, the Soviets will put to use the psychological advantage given to them by their new weapon, and they certainly needn’t be straightforward in their dealings with the U.S. Suppose that their first public demonstration comes as the result of an intentional accident?
Imagine the following scenario. A Soviet military ship cruises along the U.S. coast, relatively near Washington DC or perhaps New York City, though remaining in International Waters (for various reasons, figure about 12 miles offshore). On board is a 50-megaton device. Sometime prior to the demonstration, a communication is received from the Kremlin that said ship is having a problem. The crew is evacuating. They tell the U.S. that "an experimental nuclear mine" is involved and warn that bombing the ship will cause an explosion. They apologize. Hours go by while concerned parties work with the Kremlin to figure out what to do.
The Soviets make it look good. They have a full crew aboard the ship that really does need to be evacuated. Few aboard have even needed to be in on the plot, so as they are rescued and end up aboard U.S. Navy ships, they provide little useful information about what happened. All they can say is, "The meters redlined and we were told to leave," or words to that effect.
Top nuclear experts in the U.S. are called together or connected by telephone. Most of them doubt that the U.S.S.R. has actually built a thermonuclear weapon, let alone that they’d be making mines out of them and floating them around the world on ships. But Teller perhaps, in this alternate universe, argues that the secret tests we noticed several years back really were of "the Super," and that a truly devastating accident may be imminent. Arguments ensue.
Meanwhile, the planned for amount of time from the initial warning of a problem has ticked off and the device explodes. The result? Since the ship is out to sea, both prompt radiation effects (no one close enough to irradiate) and heat (no one close enough to burn up) can be ignored. Wind might be a problem–twelve miles away from a 50-megaton explosion wind speed still tops 130 miles per hour, so coastal structures will be treated to a very strong hurricane-force gust. What will be genuinely devastating is the literal blast wave of water that will roar into shore–compared to that, the wind damage will be inconsequential.
The Soviets say "Oops," apologize, and offer to help in any way they can. The American leadership and American public examine the billions of dollars in damage done by this accident. They try to come to grips with the fact that this one bomb exploded with a force equivalent to a thousand of their bombs, and this at a time when the U.S. doesn’t even have a thousand bombs. They think over what might have happened had the Soviets intended to cause harm.
Shortly thereafter, the U.S.S.R. begins to throw its weight around in Europe and Asia, but leaves the U.S. alone as long as it refrains from interference. So the U.S., as a second rate nuclear power without any thermonuclear technology of its own, does what?
I don’t know. Perhaps the U.S. does nothing until it is too late to do anything, and the U.S. becomes a Russian-speaking nation. I’ve long been shocked by just how intransigently gullible the Intelligentsia can be when it listens to lies spoken with a flourish and a smile. On the other hand, I am also shocked, though pleasantly, by how long it has taken the world to get to Hell given that we’ve been headed there in a hand basket since I was a kid. At least, that’s what the adults told me. Perhaps everything would have come out pretty much the same anyway.
Nevertheless, I for one am happy that I inhabit that Universe in which Edward Teller flapped his wings.
