When I was fourteen, or thereabouts, one of the very first novels I read was the Foundation Trilogy of Isaac Asimov. Foundation is for anyone so presumptuous, as I was and still am, to have an interest in “big history”- the rise and fall of civilizations, the place of civilization within the history earth and the universe, the wonder at where we will be millenia hence, a spellbinding tale.
The Foundation Trilogy tells the story of the social mathematician, Hari Seldon, who invents the field of psychohistory which allows him to be able to predict the fall of the Galactic Empire in which he lives. The fall of the galaxy spanning empire will lead to a dark age that will last 35,000 years. Seldon comes up with a plan to shorten this period of darkness to only a millennium by establishing foundations that will preserve and foster learning at opposite ends of the galaxy.
My understanding of the origins of the Foundation Trilogy was that it was one of the greatest examples ever of a writer breaking free from the vice -grip of writer’s block. In 1942 Asimov was at a complete loss as to what he should write. Scanning his bookshelf he saw a copy of Edward Gibbon’s The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire and started to read, and soon had the plot of all plots, an idea that would see him through not just the Foundation Trilogy, but a series of works- fourteen in all.
I found it strange, then, when I picked up a book that represented our 21st century version of Gibbon’s Decline and Fall , a book by Ian Morris entitled Why the West Rules- For Now: The Patterns of History and What They Reveal About the Future,
that Morris made reference not to Foundation, but to a short story by Asimov that was written prior, which I had never heard of called Nightfall. *
Next time I want to do a full review of Morris’ fascinating book. For those so inclined, please do not be put off by the title. Morris is something much different from Eurocentrists who usually write books with such titles, and if he has the courage to write a meta-history in an age when respectable scholars are supposed to be more humble in the face of their ignorance and deliberately narrow in their purported expertise, his is a self-conscious meta-narrative that fully acknowledges the limits of our knowledge and of its author. Morris is also prone to creative leaps, and he borrows and redefines for his purposes two concepts of the human future. The first is one often talked about on this blog, The Singularity, and the second an idea from Asimov- the idea of social collapse found in Asimov’s aforementioned, Nightfall.
Like Foundation, Nightfall is also a tale of a civilization’s end, but it is not the gradual corrosion and decay found in Gibbon or Asimov’s other stories but of swift and total collapse. (The reason, no doubt, Morris chose it as his version of a negative future Again, more on that next time).
Nightfall, too, has a story around its origins. Asimov was discussing a quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson with the editor of Astounding Stories, John W. Campbell, that:
If the stars should appear one night in a thousand years, how would men believe and adore, and preserve for many generations the remembrance of the city of God which had been shown!
Campbell thought instead that people would very likely go mad.
Nightfall takes place on the imaginary world of Lagash. The planet is located in a star systems with six suns to the effect that it is always daytime on Lagash. The plot centers around a group of scientists at Saro University who discover that their civilization is headed towards a collapse that has been cyclically repeated (every 2049 years) many many times.
The most unbelievable element of Nightfall isn’t this cyclical collapse, which looks a lot like the “Maya Apocalypse” that a host of poor souls got sucked up into just last month, but the collaboration between scientists from different fields within the university, indeed, bordering on what E.O. Wilson has called “consilience”. You have a psychologist studying the psychological effects of darkness on Lagashians, an archeologist who has found evidence of repeated civilizational collapse, an astronomer who has discovered irregularities in the orbit of Lagash, and a physicist, and one of the main characters, Aton, who puts the whole thing together, and realizes that all of this fits with an invisible (because of the light) body orbiting Lagash that causes an eclipse and a brief night every two millennia that results in the destruction of civilization.
The other main character, Theremon, is a journalist who has written on a religious group, “The Cult” who have a distinct set of beliefs about the end of days handed down in their “Book of Revelation” (ugh). The belief entails the destruction of the world by a darkness in which flames in the sky rain down fire upon the earth and the souls of the living flow out into the heavens. The presentation of Theremon as a hardscrapple reporter, rather than, say, a scholar of religion, is the only thing that dates Nightfall as a story written in the early 20th century. One has no idea that as Asimov is writing civilization around him was in fact in a state of collapse as world war raged.
Why does nightfall bring the collapse of civilization on Lagash? For one, people become psychologically unhinged by darkness. Lagashians, evolved for eternal day, feel they are being suffocated when darkness falls. Without darkness, they have had no need to invent artificial light. When darkness falls, it is not fire from the heavens that destroys their own civilization, but the fact that they inadvertently burn their cities to the ground, lighting everything they can find on fire to escape the night.
In some ways, I think, Asimov was playing with all sorts of ideas about technology, science, and religion with Nightfall. After all, it was the taming of fire that stands as the legendary gift of Prometheus, the technology that gave rise to human civilization destroys the civilization of Lagash. The faculty of Saro, like we humans, undergo their own version of a Copernican Revolution. Just as our relative position in the space blinded us for so long to the heliocentric nature of the solar system, and just as our inability to see with the naked eye past Jupiter, let alone out past the Milky Way, blinded us to the scale of the cosmos, Lagashians are blinded by their own position of being surrounded by six suns that hide the night sky. The astronomer, Beenay, speculates in Nightfall that perhaps what the “Cultist” saw with the fall of darkness were other suns more distant than the six that surround Lagash as many as “a dozen or two, maybe”. Theremon responds:
Two dozen suns in a universe eight light years across. Wow! That would shrink our world into insignificance.
Asimov is also playing with the tendency of all of us, even scientists, to get imaginatively stuck in the world which they know. Beenay can imagine a world like our own with only one sun, but he thinks life on such a strange world would be impossible, because the sun would only shine on such a planet for half of the day, and constant sunlight, as the Lagashians know, is necessary for life.
Whereas Asimov localizes the myopia that comes from seeing the universe from a particular point in space and time the physicist, Lawrence Krauss, in a recent talk for the Singularity University, places such myopia from our place within the overall history of the universe. Before 1910, with Edwin Hubble and his telescopes, people thought they lived in a static universe with only one galaxy- our own. Today we know we live in an expanding universe with many billions of galaxies. Krauss points out that in the far future of a universe such as our own which is expanding, and in which local regions of galaxies are converging, future astronomers will not be able to see past their own galaxy even as we now do into the past of the universe including telltale signs of the beginning of the universe such as the cosmic background radiation. What they will see, the only thing they will be able to see, is the galaxy in which they live surrounded by seemingly infinite darkness- exactly the kind of universe astronomers thought we lived in in 1910.
Asimov’s, Nightfall, and Krauss’s future universe should not, however, encourage the hubris that we are uniquely placed to know the truth about the universe. Rather, it cautions us that we may be missing something very important by the myopia inherent in seeing the universe from a very particular point in space and time.
If all that weren’t enough, Asimov’s, Nightfall, is playing with the conflict between science and religion. The work of the scientist at Saro threatens to undercut the sacred meaning of nightfall for the Cultists. Indeed, the Cultist appear to hold beliefs that are part “Maya apocalypse” part pre-Copernican Christian cosmology regarding the abode of God and the angels being in the “heavenly spheres”. Whereas the scientists at Saro have set up a kind of mass fall out shelter in which a number of Lagashians can survive nightfall, and intend to photograph what happens as a sort of message in a bottle for the next civilization on Lagash to witness the darkness, the Cultists try to sabotage the recording of night and to destroy the observatory in which the scientists at Saro have retreated. Their own religious convictions being more important than the survival of civilization and scientific truth.
Ian Morris thought the 70 year old short-story Nightfall had something very important to say to us of the early 21st century, and I very much agree. Why exactly Morris, who is, after all, a historian and archaeologist interested in very long cycles of history would see this strange story of immediate collapse as a warning we should heed will be my subject of my next post…
Another SFnal work which deals with a version of cyclical history is Brian Aldiss’s “Helliconia” trilogy, set in a world where each season lasts hundreds of years. It chronicles the rise and of course, inevitable fall of a civilization over a thousand years. There’s more to it than that, and is worth engaging with. Just read it recently, so it popped into mind!
Looks like my local library has -Spring, Summer, and Winter- so that’s something to add to my reading list!
This myopia is very problematic for people like you and me who love to speculate on the big issues and big movements. Even though I try to think out of the box about these things I am afraid even my conception of the box might be too narrow.
Krauss when he talks about the future with galaxies separated by vast distances might actually be falling into a similar trap. This is, of course, the currently held scientific view of where the Universe ends up billions of years from now, but I would not be too surprised if the matter is more complicated. The Universe is a little more than 13 billion years old and until relatively recently it was thought that the expansion of space was driven by the initial Big Bang. Then it was discovered that apparently about 4 billion years the rate of expansion began to increase driven by something called Dark Energy. It might very well be that there are various phase transitions in the Universe and the current increasing expansion could, in fact, reverse or that some other future might come about. Krauss may be basing his own physics and view of the future on the current rules of the Universe but those rules might also change with time.
One intriguing coincidence is that the origin of life on Earth dates to the same 4 billion years. One of the key parts of the Fermi Paradox is that life and intelligent life has had presumably billions of years to evolve and, therefore, by this time the aliens should have already arrived on Earth if life and intelligence were common. However, it might be that Universe was simply not hospitable to life until about 4 billion years ago. It might even be that it was conducive to intelligent, conscious life until relatively recently, perhaps the last half billion years or so. In other words, the aliens may be roughly on the same timeline we are on as far as exploring the Universe. The phase transitions in the Universe may occurring at macro and micro scales, maybe sub-atomic scales, in a synchronous manner.
In complete agreement, James. It is totally presumptuous for Krauss (or anyone for that matter) to predict the future of the universe from contemporary physics or other sciences. In fact, I just saw this article today that throws our ideas of galaxy formation/evolution into doubt:
I really wasn’t aware of Krauss until quite recently, and though I think he goes way overboard on the implications of his “universe from nothing”, I think he does have some interesting things to say about the future of civilization and the singularity which when taken together with what some others thinkers are saying adds up to something even more interesting. If you’re confused as to what I am saying it’s because I’m still confused myself, but I hope to write something about it not in my next post but the one that follows.
I had my eye on Morris’ book for about a year before I bought it. Now. I’ve had it for about a year and still haven’t read it! At least I’ll be able to reference it for your next post(s) and have an informed opinion for once.
You always have an informed opinion, Hank!
I thought Morris’ book was very interesting. Would love it if you’d share your unique take when I post on it.
Thanks for the interesting review of Freefall, I would really like to devote some more of my time to reading good science fiction. I’m also looking forward to your review of Morris’s book, particularly what you can relate of Morris’s predictions for the future.
I’ve been thinking a bit about how the world may be heading towards more turbulent times with automation likely to continue steadily replacing labour. This idea seems to be gaining more media attention, but I’m not sure that many mainstream economists have really been discussing this long enough to have the time to really consider the potential ramifications and responses.
I’m still trying to decide whether I should try to get involved in shaping the future or sit back and watch things unfurl. If I do try to have some sort of impact, I would need to decide what I would try to do… focus on trying to develop technology or trying to develop other ideas of ethics and social engineering. History and past ideas of utopia are important to keep in mind. 🙂
Myopic thinking is probably worst when it encourages people to force everyone to share the same views. There are likely to be many challenges ahead for civilisation, and many of them seem to evade resolution due to opposition to open and free discussion.
A video I saw of Lawrence Krauss giving a lecture painted an interesting picture of our current understanding from cosmology. I’m curious to see how scientist go furthering the knowledge that’s been developed. I am, however, fairly comfortable admitting to being slightly sceptical of some popular concepts in physics, including dark energy, dark matter, and string theory. It might be sensible to sit on the fence on these matters until physicists have tested explanations or predictions for these ideas. I also don’t foresee having the time to try comprehend the mathematics (or possibly even the capability) that would be necessary to critique these ideas, so there are many areas where I just have to rely on their attempts to describe things for laypeople.
In my view, Martin Ford, had a really good take on the effect of the automation wave on the economy.
Here’s a review of his “Light’s at the End of the Tunnel:
[…] break through it may result in the end of civilization, what he, borrowing from Isaac Asimov calls Nightfall. If one takes one of Morris measures, say urbanization, and plays out the trend line, what one gets […]
One significant issue in simulating the brain is scale. The actual brain only dissipates a few watts. Power consumption is 3 square meals per day. A pint of gin. Maintenance is 8 hours of downtime. Real estate is a 42-foot sailboat (22 Net Tons of volume as ships are measured) and a place to drop the hook. fake oakley sunglasses http://pinterest.com/fakeoakleysoaho/fake-oakleys/
[…] of eliminativism and BBT to intelligent aliens put me in mind of Isaac Asimov’s short story Nightfall in which a world bathed in perpetual light is destroyed when it succumbs to the fall of night. […]
[…] When not seen from the point of false omniscience we call the present, history has always been the unwieldy struggle of rival forces, shifting alliances, and enemies that cannot be clearly distinguished along purely ideological or religious lines. There is not, nor has there ever been, a direction to history, it being as Churchill lamented “one damned thing after another”. It’s perhaps the fact that we’ve been forced to re-learn this that makes the present so damned painful. Many of those who thought we were headed towards a brighter future instead find themselves slipping back into nightfall. […]