Language is ambiguous, imprecise, and not neutral in respect to
the phenomena observed and accounted for. For these and other
reasons, researchers working within the informational paradigm
needed to synthesize specialized languages designed in such ways
to avoid ambiguity and make higher efficiency of automated
processing possible. Many formal languages have become the new
scientific laboratories of our time, preparing quite well for
the new stage of computational disciplines. In parallel, new
forms of scientific experimentation, which correspond to the
complexity of the phenomena under observation and to their
dynamics, were developed. These forms are known under the name
simulation (sometimes modeling) and consist of observing not
the behavior of the researched aspect of the world, but one or
several of its descriptions.
To observe the explosion of a remote star, a time-span of data
collection that extends well over the age of humankind is
required. Instead of waiting (forever, so to speak), scientists
model astrophysical phenomena and visualize them with the aid of
sophisticated computable mathematical descriptions. These are
better suited to the scale of the phenomena than all the
equipment ever used for this purpose. Radio astronomy is no
longer about the stars seen through human eyes. It is not about
the visible, and it is not burdened by all the history of star
names. Radio-astronomy is about star systems, cosmic physics,
dynamics, even about the notion, so often discarded, of the
beginning of the universe. The geometry of higher (than three)
space dimensions is not about the visible-the surveyed land,
building, or ornament-never mind the magical spirits inhabiting
it. Such geometries submit theoretical constructs supporting a
practice of thinking, explaining, even acting, that is not
possible without the generalization of space dimensions. Whether
in the fiction of Flatland (Edwin Abbott's book about how
different life is in lower-dimension space compared to life in
what we take to be 3-dimensional reality), or in the computer
graphics animated representation of the hypercube, or in the
theories of higher dimension spaces (relating to Einstein's
relativity theory), scientific languages, irreducible to the
general language and non- translatable into it, are at work.
There are quite a number of similar subjects which make evident
the border at which science can no longer rely on language. A
non-language-based rationality- spatial reasoning, for
instance-becomes necessary in this realm of inquiry. As
sciences enter the age of computation, necessities become
possibilities. There are subjects of research in which the
brevity of a process makes impossible its direct observation and
appropriate description in language. Indeed, the universe of
extremely short interactions, of fast exchanges of energy, of
high frequency patterns (which give the appearance of a
continuum), among others, can be approached only with
instruments of observation whose own inertia is lower than that
of the phenomena scrutinized and with a conceptual framework for
which language (of high inertia) is ill equipped.
Language preserves in its structure the experience that made it
necessary; literacy does the same. This is why their
sequentiality conflicts with subjects of configurational
condition. This is also why linearity, inherent in the pragmatics
that formed literacy, conflicts with the inherent non-linearity
of the world. Many other conflicts are at work at the same time:
centrality of work opposed to distribution of tasks; hierarchy
and distributed networking; clear-cut distinctions and vagueness;
deterministic experiences of limited scope opposed to
self-configurational, chaotic processes of infinite adaptation
to new circumstances; dualism as opposed to pluralism (in
scientifically significant forms). At stake is the efficiency of
the effort, as it approaches issues of recuperation mechanisms
in nature and society, strategies of co- evolution (replacing
strategies of dominance) with nature, holistic models made
possible by both increased mediation and powerful integrative
mechanisms. Idealizing all these possibilities would be as
counterproductive as demonizing literacy-based practical
experiences. Nevertheless, we need a better understanding of what
no longer responds to requirements of human self-constitution
under the new scale of humankind, as we need an image of the
alternative practical experiences through which a new
rationality is formed.
In the rapidly expanding context of parallel scientific endeavors
and distributed tasks supported by speedy and reliable networks,
scientific research is liberated from the industrial model.
Instead of centralized institutions sharing in the use of
expensive instruments, there is an increasing number of
experiments taking place all over the world. Tele-presence is
less expressive a name for what researchers actually perform
thousands of miles away from each other, using expensive machines
and various measuring and testing devices. The laboratories that
once served as the place for scientific self-constitution are
replaced by collaboratories, a combination of real instruments,
which can be used more efficiently, and virtual places of
research that allow for more creativity. Real-time interaction
is fundamental to the context of focusing on nano-scale.
Multidisciplinarity is no longer an illusion, but a practical
requirement for the integration that scientific effort requires.