Read Ebook: The Catspaw by Smith George O George Oliver Orban Paul Illustrator

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 581 lines and 22230 words, and 12 pages

"Gladly," said Barden. At least they were considering it. And so long as it was receiving consideration, it was far better than a complete rejection.

"This is, I take it, an experiment in sheer semantic reasoning?"

"It is more than that," said Barden slowly. "Not only is the reasoning logical when based upon the initial presumption, but I am firm in the belief that the initial presumption is correct."

"If the premise proves true, though," said Barden, "the returns would be so great as to warrant any expenditure."

"Agreed," said Murdoch. "Agreed. Just show me proof."

"It is all there."

"Mathematical proof? The only proof of valid mathematics is in the experimental data that agrees. And may I add that when experiment and math do not agree, it is the math that gets changed. As witness Galileo's results with the freely falling bodies."

Barden nodded slowly. "You mean that mathematics alone is no proof."

"Precisely. Figures do not lie but liars can often figure. No offense, Barden. I wouldn't accuse any man of willful lying. But the math is a lie if it is based on a false premise."

"You have no experimental data at all?" asked Harrison.

Murdoch looked at Harrison and smiled tolerantly.

"Since Mr. Barden is not independently wealthy he could hardly have made any experiments," said Murdoch.

Dr. Hansen looked at Barden and said: "I believe that you have stumbled upon this line of reasoning by sheer accident and so firm is your belief in it that you are making an attempt to have it tried?"

Barden smiled. "That is exactly right," he said earnestly.

"I do admire the semantic reasoning," said Hansen. "I am admittedly skeptical of the premise. Dr. Jones, you represent the Space Laboratory. This seems to be right in your department. What is your opinion?"

"If his theory is correct, great returns are obvious. However, I am inclined to view the idea as a matter of sophistic reasoning."

Barden hastened to get Dr, Jones' attention. "Look, sir. The same relegation of a theory to sophistic reasoning has happened before. Admittedly this is a new science. So have been several others. Someone must discover them in one way or another. The entire science of electronics was discovered in this way--Maxwell formulated the electromagnetic equations. Hertz made the initial experiments many years later. Marconi reduced them to practice, and then a horde of others came forth with their own contributions. Yet the vast technical holdings throughout the electronic field were initially based upon the mathematical predictions made by Maxwell."

"Is there no way for an unknown man to make a contribution to science?" asked Barden.

"Of course. Produce one shred of evidence by experimentation."

"The cost!" exploded Barden. "You admit that every piece of equipment will require special construction. There is nothing in the solar system at the present time that will be useful."

"All of which makes us skeptical."

Murdoch spoke up: "We're not accusing you of trying to perpetrate a hoax. You must admit, however, that it is quite possible for any man to be completely carried away by his own theories. To believe in them thoroughly, even to the point of despising any man who does not subscribe to the same belief."

"That I do admit. However, gentlemen, I implore you to try. What can you lose?"

Hansen smiled wistfully. "About three million dollars."

"But think of the results."

Hansen's wistful expression increased. "We're all thinking of the result of dropping about three million dollars at the theory of a young, unknown man. It's a wild gamble, Mr. Barden. We're betting our reputations on ten pages of mathematics and very excellent logic. Can you think of what our reputations would be if your predictions were false?"

"But they are not."

Murdoch interrupted. "How do you know?" he said flatly.

"I have--"

"Have you reviewed my mathematics?" demanded Barden.

"Naturally. And we find your mathematics unimpeachable. But an equation is not a flat statement of fact in spite of what they tell you. It is not even an instrument until you deduce from the equation certain postulates."

"But--

"I'll give an example. The simplest form of electronic equation is Ohm's Law. Resistance equals Voltage divided by Current. Or, simpler: E equals IR. That has been proven time and again by experiment. Your equations are logical. Yet some of your terms are as though we were working with Ohm's Law without ever having heard of resistance as a physical fact in the conduction of electricity. Your whole network of equations is sensible, but unless you define the terms in the present-day terminology, we can only state that your manipulation of your mathematics is simple symbolic logic. You state that if P implies notQ, such is so--and then neglect to state what notQ is, and go on to state what you can do with P. Unless we know your terms, we can't even state whether you are dividing by real or unreal factors."

"I see that you are unimpressed."

"Not at all. We hoped that you might have had some experimental evidence. Lacking anything material to support your theory--" Hansen spread out his hands in a gesture of frustration.

"Then I've been wasting my time--and yours?"

"Not entirely. Will you speak on your paper as an experiment in sheer semantics?"

Barden considered. Perhaps if this could be presented as such it would be better than no presentation at all. Let them think him a crackpot. He'd win in the end. He would give his talk on the basis mentioned and then if there were any discussion afterwards he might be able to speak convincingly enough to start a train of thought.

"I'll do it," he said.

"Good," said Hansen. "The ability to think in semantic symbols is valuable, and every man could use a better grasp of abstract thought. Your paper will be presented next week, here. We'll put you on the schedule for one o'clock."

Confidently, Tom Barden faced the sectional group of the Terran Physical Society and made his talk. He noted the interest present on every one of the eighty-nine faces. He prayed for a good reception, for he might be asked to present this paper at the international meeting, later. He felt that he was getting an excellent reception, for he had their interest.

He finished his speech and sat down. A buzz filled the room during the recess before discussion, and Barden saw with considerable interest that heads were nodding eagerly. Then the chairman rapped with his gavel.

"There will now be an open discussion," he said.

The buzz stopped.

"Any questions?" asked Chairman Hansen.

A hand went up near the back, and was recognized.

"I am Martin Worthington. I wish to state that the logic is excellent and the delivery was superb. May I ask if the pursuit of such impeccable logic is a matter of training, logical instinct, or by sheer imaginative power, did Mr. Barden momentarily convince himself of the truth of his premise and build up on that basis?"

Barden smiled. "The latter is true. Also, Mr. Worthington, I am still convinced of the truth of the basic premise."

The hall rang with laughter.

When it died, Barden continued. "Not only am I convinced of the validity of this theory, but I am willing to give all I have or ever hope to have for a chance to prove its worth."

"Then," said Worthington, "we are not so much to be impressed by the excellence of semantic reasoning as we have been. True sophistry is brilliant when the reasoner admits that his basic premise is false. Sophistry is just self-deception when the entire pattern is a firm conviction of the reasoner."

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet