Scientiic cosmology is the study of the universe through astronomy and physics. However, cosmology also has a signiicant cultural impact. People construct anthropological cosmologies (notions about the way the world works), drawing in scientiic theories in order to construct models for activities in disciplines, such as politics and psychology. In addition, the arts (literature, ilm and painting, for example) comment on cosmological ideas and use them to develop plot lines and content. This chapter illustrates examples of such work, arguing that scientiic cosmology should be understood as a signiicant cultural inluence.Keywords: cosmology, culture, politics, psychology, literature, ilm, space travel IntroductionModern scientiic cosmology is valuable in itself for what it reveals about the nature of the cosmos we inhabit [1]. It is a demonstration of the power of modern science to transform our understanding of who we are and where we came from. However, most cosmologists focus on scientiic questions and are not fully aware of the impact of cosmological theories on culture, including politics and the arts. This chapter introduces this wider context on the basis that both scientists and the public should be aware of the broader importance of their work and its inluence on the way we think. Cosmologists often rely on the fascination the subject brings: as Rowe observed in his textbook way back in 1968, 'In the ields of astronomy and cosmology we live in a period of excitement' [2]. Cosmology therefore both impacts culture and is described and represented by it. This chapter explores some ways in which this happens. As Muriel Rukeyser wrote, 'The universe is made of stories, not of atoms ' [3]; see also Impey [4]. If we select four fundamental causes of changes in our perceptions of the world in the last century, then they would be irst relativity, second quantum mechanics, third the expanding universe and fourth, the space programme. The irst three date from a fairly narrow time band, if we date special relativity from 1905, general relativity from 1915, that the universe is expanding and is much bigger than previous thought from Edwin Hubble's publications from 1924 to around 1930 and quantum mechanics from Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg's formulation of the Copenhagen interpretation in 1925-1927 [5]. This epic revision of scientiic knowledge of underlying structures of the universe was therefore concentrated into just a quarter of a century. The dramatic period of the human space programme was concentrated into just over 8 years from the irst human space light in 1961 to the Moon landing in 1969.All have fundamentally altered the way that we think about life here on Earth. Often these changes are taken for granted. For example, mobile phone technology, dependent as it is on satellite networks, is transforming not only the social lives of teenagers in the west, but also the economic muscle of poor farmers across the third world. Meanwhile, super-fast quantum computing makes use of phenomena such as entan...

No abstract

No abstract

Historians are often called upon to justify themselves to critics who argue that the past is dead and gone -and irrelevant. The counterargument, of course, is that that the present can never be understood without a knowledge of the past, but it is often still difficult to argue that such knowledge can be of practical use. A recent question posed on the excellent HASTRO history of astronomy electronic mailing list by Peter Hingley, Librarian at the Royal Astronomical Society, concerning the relevance of ancient astronomical material for contemporary science, produced some interesting observations. It was pointed out, for example, that records of sunspot observations from the past provide evidence for the sun's behaviour in the present. Brad Schaeffer of Yale University commented that Chinese supernova records have been pivotal in many detailed arguments about supernova remnants and pulsars, and reported that he has made use of ancient Chinese observations of supernova for purposes of measuring the Hubble Constant. Such work should lay to rest doubts about history's relevance.Most of us, however, are probably more familiar with the application of astronomical records to an understanding of intellectual history, in which respect the most famous of the Chinese observations, that of the Crab Nebula in 1054, presents us with a so far unresolved historical problem: if the Nebula was apparently bright enough for the Chinese to see during the day, how is it possible that, as far as we know, no European chronicler mentioned it? The only explanations proposed so far are unconvincing. For example it is said that due to a prevailing belief in the perfection of the heavens inherited from the Greeks, an anomaly such as a star shining during the day was simply not noticed. This theory fails to explain why an anomaly such as Halley's comet was noticed -and recorded in the Bayeux Tapestry -only a decade later. It is also contradicted by the contrary position, set out in the Old Testament, that God sends his warnings through celestial anomalies, stars falling to earth or the moon glowing red, events which were deemed significant precisely because they breached the perfection of the heavens. Thus we might have

No abstract