Do You Think Science...

By asking a group of space physicists the unanswerable Semiconductor reveal the hidden motivations driving scientists to the outer limits of human knowledge. In an attempt to find meaning within the question, they open a Pandora's Box of limitations within science itself, revealing their own philosophical confines. Issues of faith, medicine and the laws of matter are raised to illustrate the infinitely complex universe we live in.

Thanks to the following scientists at The Space Sciences Laboratory, UC Berkeley, California, USA. for their contributions to this work:
Stuart Bale, David Brain, John Bonnell, Nahide Craig, Janet Luhmann, Bryan Mendez, Forrest Mozer, Stephen Mende, Ilan Roth, Chris Snead, Charles Townes and Andrew Westphal

Made during an Arts Council England International Artists Fellowship Programme: Art and Space Science at the UC Berkeley Space Sciences Lab., University of California, U.S.A. In partnership with the Leonardo network and NASA.

Blog Semiconductor kept during their fellowship.

Do You Think Science...
We knew that meeting and interviewing the space scientists would be a humbling if not an entirely intimidating experience. We, as artists look for the limits of meaning and often the unknowable where as scientists search for the concrete and absolute. It was time to turn the tables on the rocket scientists and find out how far beyond the known universe they would allow themselves to go. An impossible question was poised that would suggest at a definitive answer but one which might include infinities, a touchy subject amongst some. Under the current climate in the States, scientists often find themselves scrutinized about their faith and beliefs conflicting with their work. Many times we found that our question provoked a defensive response believing that we were somehow after their belief structures. The suggestion that science sometimes claims to hold the key to the bigger picture was frequently rejected but topics like “the theory of everything” were also raised and then rejected as mere catch phrases. But as we dug deeper we would find other closed doors to their hidden motivations. It has been a central theme in modern art to question what art is and what it means to be artists. Surprisingly it appeared that many of the scientists had gone though similar thoughts about their own practice at the early stages of their careers. But as professional scientists they seemed to ‘have gotten over it' as it were and lost the need to ask themselves this any more. So just like science they seemed to have resolved it once and for all and put it down to a teenage fad or distraction. Yet it could be proposed that ‘matured' artists have also resolved their own internal questions on the meaning or point of art. But that the initial drive to find meaning in the practice leaves traces and references. There were areas where confines of knowledge could almost be seen to be on the horizon but that the shear complexity and computational limits pushed it beyond our reach. Yet at the same time this challenge seemed to increase their drive and passion to get a deeper understanding. Medicine for example was used to illustrate where almost infinite chemical reactions on a nano scale meant they were very close to understanding it all but that seeing the whole picture was almost impossible.

Do You Think Science...	Home page art works page
Single Channel 12:15 + 6.16 versions / 4:3 / 2006 A Semiconductor film by Ruth Jarman and Joe Gerhardt made at the NASA Space Sciences Laboratory, UC Berkeley, California, USA. 2006

By asking a group of space physicists the unanswerable Semiconductor reveal the hidden motivations driving scientists to the outer limits of human knowledge. In an attempt to find meaning within the question, they open a Pandora's Box of limitations within science itself, revealing their own philosophical confines. Issues of faith, medicine and the laws of matter are raised to illustrate the infinitely complex universe we live in. Thanks to the following scientists at The Space Sciences Laboratory, UC Berkeley, California, USA. for their contributions to this work: Stuart Bale, David Brain, John Bonnell, Nahide Craig, Janet Luhmann, Bryan Mendez, Forrest Mozer, Stephen Mende, Ilan Roth, Chris Snead, Charles Townes and Andrew Westphal Made during an Arts Council England International Artists Fellowship Programme: Art and Space Science at the UC Berkeley Space Sciences Lab., University of California, U.S.A. In partnership with the Leonardo network and NASA. Blog Semiconductor kept during their fellowship. Do You Think Science... We knew that meeting and interviewing the space scientists would be a humbling if not an entirely intimidating experience. We, as artists look for the limits of meaning and often the unknowable where as scientists search for the concrete and absolute. It was time to turn the tables on the rocket scientists and find out how far beyond the known universe they would allow themselves to go. An impossible question was poised that would suggest at a definitive answer but one which might include infinities, a touchy subject amongst some. Under the current climate in the States, scientists often find themselves scrutinized about their faith and beliefs conflicting with their work. Many times we found that our question provoked a defensive response believing that we were somehow after their belief structures. The suggestion that science sometimes claims to hold the key to the bigger picture was frequently rejected but topics like “the theory of everything” were also raised and then rejected as mere catch phrases. But as we dug deeper we would find other closed doors to their hidden motivations. It has been a central theme in modern art to question what art is and what it means to be artists. Surprisingly it appeared that many of the scientists had gone though similar thoughts about their own practice at the early stages of their careers. But as professional scientists they seemed to ‘have gotten over it' as it were and lost the need to ask themselves this any more. So just like science they seemed to have resolved it once and for all and put it down to a teenage fad or distraction. Yet it could be proposed that ‘matured' artists have also resolved their own internal questions on the meaning or point of art. But that the initial drive to find meaning in the practice leaves traces and references. There were areas where confines of knowledge could almost be seen to be on the horizon but that the shear complexity and computational limits pushed it beyond our reach. Yet at the same time this challenge seemed to increase their drive and passion to get a deeper understanding. Medicine for example was used to illustrate where almost infinite chemical reactions on a nano scale meant they were very close to understanding it all but that seeing the whole picture was almost impossible.