Tragic Deaths of Three Great Scientists

Life is an enfoldment, and the further we travel, the more truth we comprehend. To understand the things that are at our door is the best preparation for understanding those that lie beyond. -- Hypatia


Recently, I was reading ‘Great Physicists’ by William H. Cropper and learnt that Ludwig Boltzmann, a great scientist of pre-quantum era (although his work was instrumental in the formulation of quantum mechanics), who was well known for his monumental contributions in thermodynamics had committed suicide. Although he was manic-depressive and prone to mood swings, it is also surmised that rejection of his work in statistical mechanics and atomic theory of gases by his peers for some of whom he had great respect, was a contributory factor for his depression. He valued, for example, Max Planck who did not openly support him. Max Planck did not oppose Boltzmann’s concept of the discrete nature of matter at the microscopic level, per se, but Boltzmann expected him to give unequivocal support for his work, which did not come in time. I was shocked to read about his death.

Then I started thinking how many other great scientists and intellectuals were victims of peer rejection, social mores, religious dogmas, self-inflicted introverted tortures, etc. The names started popping up in my mind. Among them was Socrates (469-399BCE) who was forced to death by drinking a cup of hemlock, Archimedes (287-212BCE) who was put to death by a Roman soldier who thought he was ignored and not given due respect by Archimedes who at that moment was in deep thought pondering over a mathematical problem.

Then there was Hypatia of Alexandria (-415CE), who was a great mathematician and astronomer of her time, and a woman of supreme beauty. Being a woman mathematician and astrologer in 4th century Alexandria was a dangerous occupation. The Council of Laodicea had outlawed divination in 364 CE and forbade to practice mathematics and astrology. Canon 36 states: They, who are of the priest-hood, or of the clergy, shall not be magicians, enchanters, or astrologers; nor shall they make what are called amulets, which are chains for their own souls. And those who wear such, we commend to be cast out of the Church. In 1415 CE when she was returning home from teaching, Hypatia was set upon by a Christian mob and was dragged into a church where she was stripped naked, killed, and the skin scraped from her body by sharp objects. Religious obsession truly drives people mad; they become beasts.

Then there was Giordano Bruno (1548-1600CE) who was burnt alive on the stake for his belief in Copernicasim. Galileo was put in house arrest at the old age of seventy for his Copernicasim and heliocentrism, and he died in captivity.

Aforementioned scientists and intellectuals were victims of social antagonism and religious intolerance. Percy Bridgman (1882-1961), a Nobel laureate in physics, on the other hand, shot himself to death by pulling a trigger in his mouth when he was seventy nine years old. He was suffering from terminal cancer and wanted to end his painful life. Alan Turing ended his life by self-poisoning because of social stigma of his homosexual behavior. There are many other famous intellectuals (Ernst Hemingway also shot himself to death) whose life ended tragically but I shall discuss the life story of only three historical scientists herein. I will first start with Ludwig Boltzmann, if for no other reason than inspiring me to write this article.

Ludwig Edouard Boltzmann

Boltzmann was born on February 20, 1844 in Vienna, Austria. He got his doctorate from the University of Vienna in 1866 for a thesis on kinetic theory of gases. He worked for his Ph.D. under the supervision of the renowned Josef Stefan. At that time, the University of Vienna was an active center of research on atomic theory of matter. Just after two years of Boltzmann’s arrival there, an older scientist, Josef Lochmit had used some of the ideas of kinetic theory to produce the first credible estimate of the size of atoms. After his Ph.D., Boltzmann became Assistant to his teacher, Josef Stefan. But he was a restless man. During his professional life, he kept flitting from one place to another constantly.

According to William H. Cropper (1), “Restlessness was the story of his life and work. Ludwig Boltzmann saw the physical world as a perpetually agitated molecular chaos; and, like the molecules, he never found rest himself. He moved from one academic position to another seven times during his career of almost forty years. The chronology goes like this: two years (1867-69) at the University of Vienna as an assistant professor; four years (1869-73) as an assistant professor of mathematics and physics at the University of Graz; back to Vienna for three years (1873-76) as a professor of mathematics; to Graz again for fourteen years (1876-90) as a professor of experimental physics; four years (1890-94) as a professor of theoretical physics at the University of Munich; a second return to Vienna for six years (1894-1900), this time as a professor of theoretical physics; and a third and final return to Vienna to succeed himself in the chair still unoccupied since his departure two years earlier.”

Boltzmann’s contributions in statistical mechanics were the reason of his fame in the scientific community and also a continuing source of frustration and despair in his life. He extended Maxwell’s work on the dynamics of molecules in gases and using the statistical method derived the second law of thermodynamics according to which entropy (symptomatic of disorder in nature) always increases. He thus extended the earlier formulation of entropy by Rudolph Clausius (who had also coined the word ‘entropy’). Boltzmann’s entropy equation

S = k Ln W

is almost as beautiful, if not as well-known, as Einstein’s equation

E = mc^2.

In Boltzmann’s equation, S = entropy, k = Boltzmann’s constant, Ln = symbol for logarithm to the natural base, and W = number of the microscopic degrees of freedom of a thermo-dynamical system.

Boltzmann’s equation is inscribed on his tombstone in memory of his prominent contributions to physics, in particular to thermodynamics.

Poincare’ had formulated a theorem (recurrence theorem) which suggested that Newton’s theory was reversible in time meaning that his equations remained unchanged when time was reversed (sign of t was changed from negative to positive and vice versa). On the other hand, Boltzmann’s entropy equation is unidirectional in time because entropy increases in time. Poincare’ himself did not criticize Boltzmann’s work but others, particularly the logical positivists, picked up this argument and ran away with it.

Logical positivism was a philosophical movement, which had emerged in Europe toward the end of the nineteenth century. Those who indulged in it belonged to what came to be known as ‘Vienna Circle’. Their basic thesis derived from the British empiricism of Bacon, Locke, and Hume but they took it to extremes.

The basic creed of empiricism is that only a theory, which is verified by experiments and actual observations, can be considered as credible. Anything not supported by empirical evidence is not trustworthy. However, it is only reasonable that judgment should be suspended on theoretical aspects, which have not yet been verified for want of required instruments, apparatus, and appropriate experimental and observational techniques.

In view of their extremism, the logical positivists, their leader Ernst Mach (of Mach number in supersonic flow) in particular, unleashed a ruthless attack on ‘kinetic theory of molecular motion’ on the premise that atoms and molecules are unobservable; therefore it is pointless to theorize about them. Clausius, Maxwell, and Boltzmann had developed the kinetic theory and obtained significant results which led to revolutionary developments (formulation of quantum theory, for example) in physics in the twentieth century. The logical positivists discarded them out of consideration.

According to David Lindley (3), “Boltzmann had now proved that the distribution he and Maxwell had arrived at through a mixture of guesswork and arguments from plausibility was not just the right one but indeed the only possible one. Finally this was a proof, starting from nothing but Newton’s laws for the collection of atoms, that a state of thermal equilibrium must correspond to a Maxwell-Boltzmann velocity distribution, and that the Maxwell-Boltzmann velocity distribution was the only corresponding to thermal equilibrium.”

Initially, Einstein also paid allegiance to Ernst Mach and his logical positivistic creed but later on, in view of his own work and the work of other theoretical physicists, moved away from positivism. According to Neill Porter (3), “Uncharacteristically he (Einstein) remarked to Heisenberg: It is the theory which decides what we can observe. Undoubtedly Einstein had been strongly influenced by positivist Ernst Mach but he forsook positivism early on for a realist view of nature.”

According to http://unx1.shsu.edu/~ice_cmt/bio/boltzman.htm, “Attacks on his (Boltzmann’s) work continued and he began to feel that his life’s work was about to collapse despite his defence of his theories. Depressed and in bad health, Boltzmann committed suicide (October 5, 1906) just before experiment verified his work. On holiday with his wife and daughter at the Bay of Duino near Trieste, he hanged himself while his wife and daughter were swimming. However the cause of his suicide may have been wrongly attributed to the lack of acceptance of his ideas. We will never know the real cause which may have been the result of mental illness causing his depression.”

He was sixty two years old when he died. What a sad loss of a gifted talent.

Alan Mathison Turing

Alan Mathison Turing had a short life to live. He was born in June 1912 to an upper middle class British family and he died in June 1954. He contributed significantly to the science of computation in his brief life and earned a place among Time Magazine’s one hundred great scientists of the last millennium. He received the traditional British school education and went to King’s College, Cambridge University, in 1931. He was quite at home in King’s College, which was truly a nerve center of mathematical and scientific discoveries. He was a Cambridge Wrangler, Mathematics Tripos. He got his Ph.D. from Princeton University in 1938.

During the World War II years (1939-45), Turing worked for the British government at Bletchley Park, Wartime Communications Headquarters. Here he was able to decipher the codes that the Germans were using to communicate. “This was an especially difficult task because the Germans had developed a type of computer called the Enigma. It was able to generate a constantly changing code that was impossible for the code breakers to decipher in a timely fashion,” (4). He continued his research on computers at the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) after the war.

His contributions to computer science and theory of computation are truly monumental. He heralded Artificial Intelligence (AI). According to Andrew Hodges (5), “The paper ‘On Computable Numbers’ (1936-37) was his first and perhaps greatest triumph. It gave a definition of computation and an absolute limitation on what computation could achieve, which makes it the founding work of modern computer science.” Hodges also stated, “His (Turing’s) contention was that the computer, when properly programmed, could rival the brain. It founded ‘Artificial Intelligence’ program of coming decades.”

Turing asserted in his 1950 paper ‘Computing Machinery and Intelligence’ (6), “The reader must accept it as a fact that digital computers can be constructed, and indeed have been constructed, according to the principles we have described, and that they can in fact mimic the action of a human computer very closely.” His understanding of the underlying theory was indeed very deep. Most, in fact all of them, of the modern computers operate with electricity and the brain’s neural system is often compared to an electrical network. Many may infer as if electricity is the ‘soul’ of digital computers. Turing explained that this was not so. He (6) stated, “The fact that (Charles) Babbage’s (Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge from 1828 to 1839) Analytical Engine was to be entirely mechanical will help us to rid ourselves of a superstition. Importance is often attached to the fact that modern digital computers are electrical and that the nervous system is also electrical. Since Babbage’s machine was not electrical, and since all digital computers are in a sense equivalent, we see that the use of electricity cannot be of theoretical importance.” Having said this, it is good to remember that electric computers are fast, compact, and efficient.

Turing’s end was tragic. He was said to be a homosexual. According to wysiwyg://13/http://itmanagement.webopedia.com/TERM/A?Alan_T uring.htm, “In an unfortunate end to his prolific career, Turing was arrested in 1952 after British authorities found out he was having a relationship with another man. Under British law, homosexuality was a crime, and it resulted in Turing’s losing his security clearance to continue his work at Bletchley Park. Rather than face a life in prison, Turing accepted treatment of regular estrogen injections, which were believed to neutralize libido. In 1954, Turing committed suicide by eating a cyanide-laced apple.”

However, there is another story pertaining to his death. According to Hodges (5), “In hindsight it is obvious that Turing’s unique status in Anglo-American secret communication work meant that there were pressures on him of which his contemporaries were unaware; there was certainly another ‘security’ conflict with government in 1953. Some commentators, e.g. Dawson (1985), have argued that assassination should not be ruled out. But he had spoken of suicide, and his death, which was by cyanide poisoning, was most likely by his own hand, contrived so as to allow those who wished to do so, to believe it as a result of his penchant for chemistry experiments.”

Whatever the cause of his death, it sure was untimely and a tragic end to such an intellectual fruitful life.

Among the honors and awards that he garnered in his short lifetime, were Smith’s Prize, Cambridge University in 1936, Order of the British Empire (OBE) in 1946, and Fellow of Royal Society in 1951.

Hypatia of Alexandria

The great era of Greek mathematical science, which began with the birth of a man, ended with the death of a woman. (Margartet Wertheim quoted by Sue Toohey)

Hpatia’s date of birth is not known with any degree of certainty. However, it is known that she was murdered in 415 CE. She was born in Alexandria. Because of her tragic death and a distinguished person that she was, a kind of ‘sacred halo’ of martyrdom has resulted around her.

Her father, Theon, was a mathematician and she followed in his footsteps. Generally, women intellectuals were looked down upon in her time and Hypatia was no exception. According to Sue Toohey (7), “Although Plato, and Pythagoras before him, had believed in the intellectual equality of women and both philosophers had encouraged full education of women, Aristotle felt that they did not have the intellectual capabilities of their male counterparts.” In Hypatia’s time, the situation worsened because it was not only male chauvinism that threatened her, it was the general condemnation of knowledge of mathematics, astronomy, astrology, and neo-Platonism by the newly emerging dominant religion, Christianity, Hypatia was a pagan and could be considered guilty of the above on all counts. She was a mathematician (she taught it), astronomer, astrologist, and a neo-Platonist.”

Alluding to a tight stranglehold that Christianity came to have on the society, Toohey stated, “This was not a good time, however, to be involved in such fields of enquiry. Emperor Constantine had converted to Christianity in 312 CE, declaring it to be the official state religion of Rome. Prior to that time, Christianity had simply been one of many religions vying for prominence. What was once a small sect of persecuted followers flourished and became the dominant religion; it wasn’t long before the persecuted became the persecutors.”

Many writers have admired Hypatia with a degree of exaggeration. While Porter’s (3) statement “She (Hypatia) was the greatest woman scientist of antiquity of whom we have a record” is accurate, M. Alic’s claim (quoted by Porter) that “she was the most eminent woman scientist before Marie Curie” is certainly widely off the mark. Sophie Germain (1776-1851) was a greater mathematician than Hypatia. Hypatia was not a profoundly original thinker while Sophie made numerous original contributions in mathematics. Sophie also suffered great disadvantages for being a woman (see, for example, my article “Three Hard Questions and Quest for Their Solution,” Chowk.com, January 4, 2003). Simon Singh (8) has described another Italian mathematician, Marie Agnesi (born in 1718), who was “acknowledged to be one of the finest mathematicians in Europe.”

Some other historians have described Hypatia’s distinguished status more accurately. For example, A.W. Richeson’s statement (quoted by Porter), “..after her (Hypatia’s) death, we have no other (woman?, author) mathematician of importance until late in the Middle Ages,” may be true. Similarly, R. Jacobacci’s statement “with her passing away there was no other woman mathematician of importance until the eighteenth century” is accurate.

Among Hypatia’s several other works, she is particularly known for her commentary on Ptolemy’s “The Almagest”. According to Porter, “Several major Greek works, above all the Almagest, owe their survival to her.”

She was a teacher and had some renowned personages as her students. For instance, one of her students was Synesius who later on became a bishop. Porter has speculated on several various reasons for Hypatia’s murder. One of them which is quite plausible is: The archbishop Cyril saw her as a threat to the power of the church in Alexandria.

It is conjectured that she was around sixty when she was murdered. This places her year of birth at 355 CE.

References

1.Cropper, William H., “Great Physicists,” Oxford University Press, New York, 2001.
2.Lindley, David, “Boltzmann’s Atom,” The Free Press, A Division of Simons and Schuster, Inc., 2001, p.55.
3.Porter, Neil A., “Physicists in Conflict,” Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol and Philadelphia, 1998, p. 117.
4.Kowalik, John M, “Alan Turing,” http://oi.cs.vt.edu/~history/Turing.htm.
5.Hodges, Andrew, “Alan Turing,” “The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2002 edition),” Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL=http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2002/entries/turin g/.
6.Turing, Alan, “Computing Machinery and Intelligence,” Mind, 59, 1950, pp 433-460.
7.Toohey, Sue, “The Important Life and Tragic Death of Hypatia,” wysiwyg://e.50/http://www.skyscript.co.uk/hypatia.htm.
8.Si ngh, Simon, “Fermat’s Enigma,” Anchor Books, DoubleDay, New
York, London, pp. 99-101.