In several of the science classes I’ve taken over the past three years at Colby, particularly Physics, the Big Bang and its associated theory are a common point of discussion. Generally placed as a an early topic in the term’s curriculum, conversation about the Big Bang lasts for an relatively equal time as the actual events of the Big Bang, a mere blip in the overall timeline.  Students (and teachers) quickly embrace this idea and happening, ready to move immediately on to the next topic without hesitation or questioning. However, upon further glance and thought, it becomes vital to question and reintroduce the discussion of chaos and order. A single millisecond (or infinitely smaller) moment of chaos resulting in hundreds of thousands of years of order following begs a further investigation into order on our (and the Earth’s) origins – if we’re born from chaos, is it constantly present or is order miraculously found?


It is generally much easier to find order than it is to recognize chaos. Producing relationships, reasoning, sequences, and justifications is inherent to human nature of observations and analyses, however allowing for chaos is not. Dissonance opposes the natural tendency to find solution, and our scientific understanding does not extend far enough to understand the philosophical factors that play into this juxtaposition. Professor Kocevski addressed this knowledge gap, acknowledging that there is still much we don’t know, in the realm of scientific discovery, particularly in reference to the big Bang. However, it is possible that our knowledge gap exists not only in fact, but also approach. Why are we so eager to accept the Big Bang Theory that is shared with us, and why are we so eager to share this approach to discovery, human life, and order? Is it in our “natural manner” to immediately how, why, and who we are? Understanding and comprehension are entirely dependent on perception, even physically, when looking at such a baseline theory as the Doppler Effect. They are centered around time, distance, and relativity, three common focal points of our discussion of physical chaos and order.


Walking away from this lecture re-instilled in me a sense of doubt – not for science, but rather blind acceptance. As Professor Kocevski alluded to, there are no real constants, particularly within time and space. Even given factual evidence and scientific support, we must constantly question our approaches, and the structure that is so easily placed upon our teachings. Chaos and order, though defining our everyday existences, are constructions in themselves.