We've been told to go out on a limb and say something surprising. So I'll try and do that, but I want to start with two things that everyone already knows. And the first one, in fact, is something that has been known for most of recorded history, and that is, that the planet Earth, or the solar system, or our environment or whatever, is uniquely suited to sustain our evolution -- or creation, as it used to be thought -- and our present existence, and most important, our future survival.
Rečeno nam je iskoračimo i kažemo nešto iznenađujuće. Tako da ću ja to i pokušati. Ali želeo bih da počnem sa dve stvari koje svi već znaju. Prva je, zapravo, nešto što je poznato kroz većinu zabeležene istorije. A to je da je planeta Zemlja ili sunčev sistem, ili naša životna sredina ili šta god, jedinstveno osposobljena da podrži našu evoluciju - ili kreaciju, kao što se ranije mislilo - i naše trenutno postojanje i što je najvažnije, naš budući opstanak.
Nowadays, this idea has a dramatic name: Spaceship Earth. And the idea there is that outside the spaceship, the universe is implacably hostile, and inside is all we have, all we depend on, and we only get the one chance: if we mess up our spaceship, we've got nowhere else to go. Now, the second thing that everyone already knows is that, contrary to what was believed for most of human history, human beings are not, in fact, the hub of existence. As Stephen Hawking famously said, we're just a chemical scum on the surface of a typical planet that's in orbit around a typical star, which is on the outskirts of a typical galaxy, and so on.
Danas ova ideja ima dramatičan naziv: Svemirski brod Zemlja. I ideja je da je izvan tog svemirskog broda, univerzum neumoljivo neprijateljski nastrojen, i sve što imamo je unutar tog broda, od toga zavisimo. I imamo samo jednu šansu: ako "zeznemo" naš svemirski brod, nemamo kuda da idemo. Druga stvar koju svi znaju je da suprotno onome u šta se verovalo kroz većinu ljudske istorije, ljudska bića zapravo nisu središte egzistencije. Kao što je Stiven Hoking rekao, mi smo samo hemijski otpad na površini tipične planete koja se nalazi u orbiti tipične zvezde, koja se nalazi na periferiji tipične galaksije, i tako dalje.
Now, the first of those two things that everyone knows is kind of saying that we're at a very untypical place, uniquely suited and so on. And the second one is saying that we're at a typical place. And, especially if you regard these two as deep truths to live by and to inform your life decisions, then they seem a little bit to conflict with each other. But that doesn't prevent them from both being completely false.
Prva od ove dve stvari koje svi znaju otprilike kaže da se mi nalazimo na jednom vrlo atipičnom mestu, jedinstveno pogodnom i tome slično, a druga kaže da smo mi na jednom tipičnom mestu. I posebno ako smatrate ove dve teze dubokim istinama, i vodiljama za život i životne odluke, onda izgleda da su one prilično u konfliktu jedna sa drugom. Ali to ih ne sprečava da obe budu potpuno pogrešne.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
And they are. So let me start with the second one: typical. Well, is this a typical place? Well, let's look around, you know, look in a random direction, and we see a wall and chemical scum --
One to i jesu. Tako mi dozvolite da započnem ovom drugom: Tipično. Pa - da li je ovo tipično mesto? Pogledajmo okolo, znate, pogledajmo u bilo kom pravcu, vidimo zid, i hemijski otpad -
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
and that's not typical of the universe at all. All you've got to do is go a few hundred miles in that same direction and look back, and you won't see any walls or chemical scum at all -- all you see is a blue planet. And if you go further than that, you'll see the Sun, the solar system and the stars and so on, but that's still not typical of the universe, because stars come in galaxies. And most places in the universe, a typical place in the universe, is nowhere near any galaxies.
to uopšte nije tipično u univerzumu. Sve što treba da uradite jeste da odete nekoliko stotina kilometara u istom pravcu i da pogledate nazad, i nećete više videti ni zidove ni hemijski otpad - sve što ćete videti je plava planeta. A ako odete još dalje od toga, videćete Sunce, sunčev sistem, zvezde i tako dalje. Ali to i dalje nije tipično za univerzum, jer zvezde dolaze u galaksijama. A većina mesta u univerzumu, tipično mesto u univerzumu, nije ni blizu neke galaksije.
So let's go out further, till we're outside the galaxy, and look back, and yeah, there's the huge galaxy with spiral arms laid out in front of us. And at this point, we've come 100,000 light-years from here. But we're still nowhere near a typical place in the universe. To get to a typical place, you've got to go 1,000 times as far as that, into intergalactic space. And so, what does that look like -- "typical?" What does a "typical" place in the universe look like? Well, at enormous expense, TED has arranged a high-resolution immersion virtual reality rendering of the view from intergalactic space. Can we have the lights off, please, so we can see it?
Zato krenimo dalje, dok ne stignemo izvan galaksije, i pogledamo nazad, i da, vidimo ogromnu galaksiju sa spiralnim kracima koja leži ispred nas. Sada smo udaljeni oko 100.000 svetlosnih godina odavde. Ali mi i dalje nismo ni blizu tipičnog mesta u univerzumu. Da bi stigli do tipičnog mesta, morate ići 1000 puta dalje od tog mesta u međugalaktički prostor. I, dakle, kako to "tipično" izgleda? Kako izgleda tipično mesto u univerzumu? Uz ogroman trošak, TED je omogućio prikaz visoke rezolucije u virtuelnoj realnosti pogleda iz međugalaktičkog prostora. Mogu li se ugasiti svetla, molim vas, da bismo mogli da vidimo?
Well, not quite, not quite perfect.
Pa, nije baš sasvim savršeno - vidite, u međugalaktičkom prostoru
You see, intergalactic space is completely dark, pitch dark. It's so dark, that if you were to be looking at the nearest star to you, and that star were to explode as a supernova, and you were to be staring directly at it at the moment when its light reached you, you still wouldn't be able to see even a glimmer. That's how big and how dark the universe is. And that's despite the fact that a supernova is so bright, so brilliant an event, that it would kill you stone dead at a range of several light-years.
je potpuni mrak, mrkli mrak. Toliko je mračno, da ako biste gledali u najbližu zvezdu, i da ta zvezda eksplodira kao supernova, i ako biste gledali direktno u nju u momentu kada svetlost stigne do vas i dalje ne biste bili u stanju da vidite čak ni treptaj. Toliko je veliki i mračan univerzum. I to je uprkos činjenici da je supernova tako sjajan, toliko blještav događaj, da bi vas ubila na mestu da se nalazite do nekoliko svetlosnih godina daleko.
(Laughter)
A ipak, iz međugalaktičkog prostora,
And yet, from intergalactic space, it's so far away you wouldn't even see it. It's also very cold out there -- less than three degrees above absolute zero. And it's very empty. The vacuum there is one million times less dense than the highest vacuum that our best technology on Earth can currently create. So that's how different a typical place is from this place. And that is how untypical this place is. So can we have the lights back on please? Thank you.
toliko je daleko da je ne biste čak ni videli. Takođe je i vrlo hladno tamo - manje od tri stepena iznad apsolutne nule. I veoma je prazno. Vakuum je tamo milion puta manje gustine nego najjači vakuum koji se trenutno na Zemlji, uz najbolju tehnologiju može stvoriti. Eto koliko je drugačije tipično mesto od ovog mesta. I eto koliko je ovo mesto atipično. Možemo li dobiti svetlo nazad, molim vas? Hvala.
Now, how do we know about an environment that's so far away and so different and so alien from anything we're used to? Well, the Earth -- our environment, in the form of us -- is creating knowledge. Well, what does that mean? Well, look out even further than we've just been -- I mean from here, with a telescope -- and you'll see things that look like stars, they're called quasars. "Quasars" originally meant "quasi-stellar object," which means "things that look a bit like stars."
Kako možemo znati nešto o okruženju koje je toliko daleko, koje je toliko različito, toliko strano, od svega na šta smo navikli? E pa, Zemlja - naše okruženje, u formi nas samih - stvara znanje. Šta to znači? Pa, pogledajte još dalje od mesta gde smo upravo bili - mislim odavde, teleskopom - videćete stvari koje liče na zvezde. One se zovu kvazari. "Kvazari" originalno znači kvazi-zvezdani objekti. Što znači stvari koje pomalo liče na zvezde.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
But they're not stars. And we know what they are. Billions of years ago and billions of light-years away, the material at the center of a galaxy collapsed towards a supermassive black hole. And then intense magnetic fields directed some of the energy of that gravitational collapse and some of the matter back out in the form of tremendous jets, which illuminated lobes with the brilliance of -- I think it's a trillion -- suns.
Ali oni nisu zvezde. A mi znamo šta su. Milijarde godina ranije i milijarde svetlosnih godina daleko, materijal u središtu galaksije se urušio prema super-masivnoj crnoj rupi. I tada su magnetna polja usmerila deo energije tog gravitacionog kolapsa, i deo materije, natrag napolje u obliku ogromnih mlazova koji su osvetlili režnjeve svetlošću jačine od - mislim trilion sunaca.
Now, the physics of the human brain could hardly be more unlike the physics of such a jet. We couldn't survive for an instant in it. Language breaks down when trying to describe what it would be like in one of those jets. It would be a bit like experiencing a supernova explosion, but at point-blank range and for millions of years at a time.
Sada, fizika ljudskog mozga ne može biti različitija od fizike takvog mlaza. Ne bismo mogli preživeti ni tren u njemu. U jeziku ne postoje reči kada pokušamo da objasnimo kako bi bilo u takvom mlazu. To bi bilo kao doživeti eksploziju supernove, ali tik ispred nosa i milionima godina odjedanput.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
And yet, that jet happened in precisely such a way that billions of years later, on the other side of the universe, some bit of chemical scum could accurately describe and model and predict and explain, above all -- there's your reference -- what was happening there, in reality. The one physical system, the brain, contains an accurate working model of the other, the quasar. Not just a superficial image of it, though it contains that as well, but an explanatory model, embodying the same mathematical relationships and the same causal structure.
A pritom, taj mlaz se desio na takav način da milijardama godina kasnije, na drugom kraju univerzuma, nešto hemijskog otpada može da tačno opiše i modeluje, i predvidi, i iznad svega, objasni - uočite tu reč - šta se tamo zaista dešavalo. Jedan fizički sistem, mozak, sadrži tačan radni model drugog - kvazara. Ne samo površnu sliku njega, iako sadrži i nju, već objašnjavajući model, koji uključuje iste matematičke odnose i iste uzročne strukture.
Now, that is knowledge. And if that weren't amazing enough, the faithfulness with which the one structure resembles the other is increasing with time. That is the growth of knowledge. So, the laws of physics have this special property, that physical objects as unlike each other as they could possibly be can, nevertheless, embody the same mathematical and causal structure and to do it more and more so over time.
E, to je znanje. I ako ovo nije bilo dovoljno zadivljujuće, verodostojnost kojom jedna struktura podseća na drugu, vremenom se povećava. To je rast znanja. Zakoni fizike, dakle, imaju ovo izuzetno svojstvo, da fizički objekti, različiti među sobom do krajnjih granica, ipak mogu da otelotvoruju iste matematičke i uzročne strukture i to sve više i više tokom vremena.
So we are a chemical scum that is different. This chemical scum has universality. Its structure contains, with ever-increasing precision, the structure of everything. This place, and not other places in the universe, is a hub which contains within itself the structural and causal essence of the whole of the rest of physical reality. And so, far from being insignificant, the fact that the laws of physics allow this or even mandate that this can happen is one of the most important things about the physical world.
Mi smo hemijski otpad koji je različit. Ovaj hemijski otpad ima univerzalnost. Njegova struktura sadrži, sa stalno sve većom preciznošću, strukturu svega. Ovo mesto, a ne ostala mesta u univerzumu, glavna je tačka koja sadrži unutar sebe strukturnu i uzročnu suštinu čitavog ostatka fizičke realnosti. I tako, daleko od toga da je beznačajna, činjenica da zakoni fizike omogućavaju, ili čak obavezuju da se to može dešavati, jedna je od najbitnijih stvari o fizičkom svetu.
Now, how does the solar system -- our environment, in the form of us -- acquire this special relationship with the rest of the universe? Well, one thing that's true about Stephen Hawking's remark -- I mean, it is true, but it's the wrong emphasis -- one thing that's true about it is that it doesn't do it with any special physics, there's no special dispensation, no miracles involved. It does it simply with three things that we have here in abundance. One of them is matter, because the growth of knowledge is a form of information processing. Information processing is computation, computation requires a computer, and there's no known way of making a computer without matter. We also need energy to make the computer, and most important, to make the media, in effect, onto which we record the knowledge that we discover.
E sada, kako sunčev sistem - i naše okruženje, u formi nas - postiže ovu specijalnu vezu sa ostatkom univerzuma? Jedna stvar koja je tačna u vezi sa zapažanjem Stivena Hokinga - mislim, jeste tačno, ali je pogrešan naglasak - jedna stvar koja je tačna u vezi sa tim je da to nije postignuto nikakvom specijalnom fizikom. Nema namenskih izuzetaka, nema umešanih čuda. To se postiže jednostavno pomoću tri stvari koje imamo ovde u izobilju. Jedna od njih je materija, jer rast znanja je oblik procesiranja informacija. Procesiranje informacija je računanje, računanje zahteva računar - a ne postoji poznati način da se napravi računar bez materije. Takođe nam je potrebna i energija da bismo stvorili računar, i najvažnije, da bismo napravili medij na koji ćemo zabeležiti znanje koje otkrijemo.
And then thirdly, less tangible but just as essential for the open-ended creation of knowledge, of explanations, is evidence. Now, our environment is inundated with evidence. We happened to get round to testing, let's say, Newton's law of gravity, about 300 years ago. But the evidence that we used to do that was falling down on every square meter of the Earth for billions of years before that, and we'll continue to fall for billions of years afterwards. And the same is true for all the other sciences. As far as we know, evidence to discover the most fundamental truths of all the sciences is here just for the taking, on our planet.
I treće, manje opipljivo, ali jednako fundamentalno za neograničeno stvaranje znanja i objašnjenja, je dokazni materijal. Naše okruženje je preplavljeno dokaznim materijalom, primerima. Desilo se da smo odlučili da testiramo recimo, Njutnovu teoriju gravitacije - pre oko 300 godina. Ali dokazni materijal koji smo koristili u tu svrhu pada dole na svaki kvadratni metar Zemlje milijardama godina unazad, i nastaviće da pada još milijardama godina ubuduće. I ista je istina za sve ostale nauke. Koliko nam je poznato, dokazni materijal za otkrivanje najfundamentalnijih istina u svim naukama je lako dostupan ovde, na našoj planeti.
Our location is saturated with evidence and also with matter and energy. Out in intergalactic space, those three prerequisites for the open-ended creation of knowledge are at their lowest possible supply -- as I said, it's empty, it's cold and it's dark out there. Or is it? Now actually, that's just another parochial misconception.
Naša lokacija je prepuna dokaznog materijala, a takođe i materije i energije. Tamo u međugalaktičkom prostoru, ova tri preduslova za neograničeno stvaranje znanja su u najnižoj mogućoj raspoloživosti. Kao što sam rekao, tamo je prazno i hladno i mračno. Ili nije? Zapravo, to je samo još jedna parohijalna zabluda.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
Because imagine a cube out there in intergalactic space, the same size as our home, the solar system. Now, that cube is very empty by human standards, but that still means that it contains over a million tons of matter. And a million tons is enough to make, say, a self-contained space station, on which there's a colony of scientists that are devoted to creating an open-ended stream of knowledge, and so on.
Jer zamislite kocku tamo negde u međugalaktičkom prostoru, iste veličine kao naš dom, sunčev sistem. Ta kocka je vrlo prazna po ljudskim standardima, ali to i dalje znači da ona sadrži preko milion tona materije. A milion tona je dovoljno da se napravi, recimo, samoodrživa svemirska stanica, na kojoj se nalazi kolonija naučnika koji su posvećeni kreiranju neograničenog toka znanja, i tako dalje.
Now, it's way beyond present technology to even gather the hydrogen from intergalactic space and form it into other elements and so on. But the thing is, in a comprehensible universe, if something isn't forbidden by the laws of physics, then what could possibly prevent us from doing it, other than knowing how? In other words, it's a matter of knowledge, not resources. If we could do that, we'd automatically have an energy supply, because this transmutation would be a fusion reactor.
Naravno, daleko je iznad sadašnje tehnologije čak i da se sakupi vodonik iz međugalaktičkog prostora i iz njega formiraju drugi elementi i tako redom. Ali stvar je u tome što, u razumljivom univerzumu, ako nešto nije zabranjeno zakonima fizike, šta nas to može sprečiti da uradimo nešto, osim neznanja kako? Drugim rečima, to je stvar znanja, ne resursa. Ako bismo mogli to da uradimo, mi bismo automatski imali izvor energije, jer bi ova transmutacija bila fuzioni reaktor.
And evidence? Well, again, it's dark out there to human senses, but all you've got to do is take a telescope, even one of present-day design, look out, and you'll see the same galaxies as we do from here. And with a more powerful telescope, you'll be able to see stars and planets in those galaxies, you'll be able to do astrophysics and learn the laws of physics. And locally there, you could build particle accelerators and learn elementary particle physics and chemistry, and so on. Probably the hardest science to do would be biology field trips --
A dokazni materijal? Pa, opet, mračno je tamo za ljudska čula. Ali sve što treba da se uradi je da se uzme teleskop, čak neki današnjeg dizajna, da se pogleda gore i videćete iste galaksije kao što se vide i odavde. A sa moćnijim teleskopom, bićete u mogućnosti da vidite zvezde i planete u tim galaksijama, bićete u mogućnosti da radite astrofiziku i da učite zakone fizike. I lokalno tamo, mogli biste izgraditi akcelerator čestica i učiti fiziku elementarnih čestica, hemiju, i tako dalje. Verovatno bi bilo najteže izvesti terenske izlete iz biologije,
(Laughter)
jer bi bilo potrebno nekoliko stotina miliona godina
because it would take several hundred million years to get to the nearest life-bearing planet and back. But I have to tell you -- and sorry, Richard -- but I never did like biology field trips much --
da se dođe do najbliže planete sa životom i nazad. Ali moram vam reći - izvini Ričarde - nikada nisam mnogo voleo terenske izlete iz biologije
(Laughter)
i mislim da bi nam po jedan u nekoliko stotina miliona godina
and I think we can just about make do with one every few hundred million years.
bio sasvim dovoljan. (Smeh)
(Laughter)
Tako zapravo, međugalaktički prostor
So, in fact, intergalactic space does contain all the prerequisites for the open-ended creation of knowledge. Any such cube anywhere in the universe could become the same kind of hub that we are, if the knowledge of how to do so were present there. So, we're not in a uniquely hospitable place. If intergalactic space is capable of creating an open-ended stream of explanations, then so is almost every other environment, so is the Earth. So is a polluted Earth. And the limiting factor, there and here, is not resources -- because they're plentiful -- but knowledge, which is scarce.
sadrži sve preduslove za neograničeno stvaranje znanja. Bilo koja takva kocka, negde u univerzumu, bi mogla postati ista vrsta središta kakvo je naše, ukoliko bi znanje o tome kako se to radi bilo prisutno tamo. Tako da mi nismo na jedinstveno gostoprimljivom mestu. Ako je međugalaktički prostor sposoban za kreiranje neograničenog toka objašnjenja, onda je i skoro svaka druga sredina. Tako i Zemlja. Tako i zagađena Zemlja. A ograničavajući faktor, i ovde i tamo, nisu resursi, jer ih je mnoštvo, već znanje, koga je malo.
Now, this cosmic knowledge-based view may -- and, I think, ought to -- make us feel very special. But it should also make us feel vulnerable, because it means that without the specific knowledge that's needed to survive the ongoing challenges of the universe, we won't survive them. All it takes is for a supernova to go off a few light-years away, and we'll all be dead!
E sada, ovo gledište na kosmos, bazirano na znanju, može, a ja mislim i trebalo bi - da učini da se osećamo veoma posebnim. Ali takođe treba da učini da se osećamo i ranjivim, jer to znači da bez konkretnog znanja neophodnog da bi se preživeli izazovi koji se stalno dešavaju u univerzumu, nećemo ih preživeti. Sve što je potrebno jeste da jedna supernova eksplodira nekoliko svetlosnih godina daleko,
Martin Rees has recently written a book about our vulnerability to all sorts of things, from astrophysics, to scientific experiments gone wrong, and most importantly, to terrorism with weapons of mass destruction. And he thinks that civilization has only a 50 percent chance of surviving this century. I think he's going to talk about that later in the conference.
i svi ćemo biti mrtvi! Martin Ris je nedavno napisao knjigu o našoj ranjivosti na svakakve stvari, od astrofizike, do toga da naučni eksperimenti pođu naopako, i što je najvažnije na terorizam sa oružjem za masovno uništenje. I on misli da civilizacija ima svega 50 posto šanse da preživi ovaj vek. Mislim da će pričati o ovome kasnije na konferenciji.
Now, I don't think that probability is the right category to discuss this issue in, but I do agree with him about this: we can survive and we can fail to survive. But it depends, not on chance, but on whether we create the relevant knowledge in time. The danger is not at all unprecedented. Species go extinct all the time. Civilizations end. The overwhelming majority of all species and all civilizations that have ever existed are now history. And if we want to be the exception to that, then logically, our only hope is to make use of the one feature that distinguishes our species and civilization from all the others, namely, our special relationship with the laws of physics, our ability to create new explanations, new knowledge -- to be a hub of existence.
Ne mislim da je verovatnoća prava kategorija u kojoj bi pričali o ovoj temi. Ali se slažem sa njim u ovome: moguće je i da preživimo i da ne preživimo. Ali to ne zavisi od verovatnoće, već od toga da li ćemo na vreme stvoriti relevantno znanje. Opasnost uopšte nije bez presedana. Vrste stalno bivaju istrebljivane. Civilizacije se završavaju. Ogromna većina svih vrsta i civilizacija koje su ikada postojale su sada istorija. I ukoliko želimo da budemo izuzetak, logično, naša jedina nada je da upotrebimo jednu stvar koja izdvaja našu vrstu, i našu civilizaciju od svih drugih. A to je naša specijalna veza sa zakonima fizike. Naša sposobnost da stvaramo nova objašnjenja, nova znanja - da smo središte postojanja.
So let me now apply this to a current controversy, not because I want to advocate any particular solution, but just to illustrate the kind of thing I mean. And the controversy is global warming. Now, I'm a physicist, but I'm not the right kind of physicist. In regard to global warming, I'm just a layman. And the rational thing for a layman to do is to take seriously the prevailing scientific theory. And according to that theory, it's already too late to avoid a disaster, because, if it's true that our best option at the moment is to prevent CO2 emissions with something like the Kyoto Protocol, with its constraints on economic activity and its enormous cost of hundreds of billions of dollars, or whatever it is, then that is already a disaster by any reasonable measure. And the actions that are advocated are not even purported to solve the problem, merely to postpone it by a little. So it's already too late to avoid it, and it probably has been too late to avoid it ever since before anyone realized the danger. It was probably already too late in the 1970s, when the best available scientific theory was telling us that industrial emissions were about to precipitate a new ice age, in which billions would die.
I dozvolite mi sada da ovo primenim na trenutnu kontroverzu, ne zato da bih zastupao neko konkretno rešenje, već samo da ilustrujem vrstu stvari na koju mislim. Kontroverza je globalno zagrejavanje. Ja sam fizičar, ali nisam prava vrsta fizičara. U odnosu na globalno zagrevanje, ja sam samo laik. I racionalna stvar koju laik može da uradi je da shvati ozbiljno preovlađujuću naučnu teoriju. A po toj teoriji, već je prekasno da se izbegne katastrofa. Jer ukoliko je tačno da nam je najbolja opcija u ovom trenutku da sprečimo emisije CO2 nečim kao što je Kjoto Protokol, sa svojim ograničenjima na ekonomske aktivnosti i sa svim enormnim troškovima od stotina milijardi dolara ili već koliko, onda je to već katastrofa po svim razumnim merilima. A akcije koje se predlažu nisu čak ni usmerene da se problem reši, već samo da ga odlože na kratko. Dakle, već je prekasno da bi se izbegao, i verovatno je bilo prekasno da se izbegne još davno pre nego što je iko i prepoznao i shvatio opasnost. Verovatno je bilo prekasno i 1970-ih, kada nam je najbolja dostupna naučna teorija govorila da će industrijske emisije ubrzo doneti novo ledeno doba u kome će milijarde umreti.
Now, the lesson of that seems clear to me, and I don't know why it isn't informing public debate. It is that we can't always know. When we know of an impending disaster and how to solve it at a cost less than the cost of the disaster itself, then there's not going to be much argument, really. But no precautions and no precautionary principle can avoid problems that we do not yet foresee.
Lekcija mi se čini očiglednom, i ne znam zašto ne utiče na javnu debatu. Lekcija je da ne možemo uvek znati. Kada znamo za predstojeću katastrofu, i kako da je rešimo po ceni manjoj od cene same katastrofe, onda i neće biti neke velike polemike. Ali nikakav oprez i nikakav princip predostrožnosti, ne mogu izbeći probleme koje još nismo predvideli.
Hence, we need a stance of problem-fixing, not just problem-avoidance. And it's true that an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure, but that's only if we know what to prevent. If you've been punched on the nose, then the science of medicine does not consist of teaching you how to avoid punches.
Stoga nam je potreban stav okrenut rešavanju problema, ne samo izbegavanju problema. I tačno je da je bolje sprečiti nego lečiti ali isto važi samo ako znamo šta da sprečimo. Ako ste primili udarac u nos, medicinska nauka se ne sastoji od podučavanja kako da izbegnete udarce.
(Laughter)
Ako bi medicinska nauka prestala sa traženjem lekova
If medical science stopped seeking cures and concentrated on prevention only, then it would achieve very little of either.
i skoncentrisala se samo na prevenciju, onda bi postigla jako malo od oboje.
The world is buzzing at the moment with plans to force reductions in gas emissions at all costs. It ought to be buzzing with plans to reduce the temperature and with plans to live at the higher temperature -- and not at all costs, but efficiently and cheaply. And some such plans exist, things like swarms of mirrors in space to deflect the sunlight away and encouraging aquatic organisms to eat more carbon dioxide. At the moment, these things are fringe research; they're not central to the human effort to face this problem or problems in general. And with problems that we are not aware of yet, the ability to put right -- not the sheer good luck of avoiding indefinitely -- is our only hope, not just of solving problems, but of survival.
Svet je trenutno prepun planova da se prinudno smanje emisije gasova po svaku cenu. Trebalo bi da je prepun planova da se smanji temperatura i planova da se živi pod većom temperaturom. I ne po svaku cenu, već efikasno i jeftino. I neki takvi planovi postoje, stvari kao što su sistemi ogledala u svemiru koji odbijaju sunčevu svetlost, i ohrabrivanje vodenih organizama da jedu više ugljen dioksida. U ovom trenutku, ove stvari su sporedna, periferna istraživanja. One nisu centralne u ljudskim nastojanjima da se suoče sa ovim problemom, ili problemima uopšteno. A sa problemima kojih još nismo svesni, sposobnost da ispravimo - a ne čista sreća da ih izbegnemo na neodređeno vreme - naša je jedina nada, ne samo za rešenje problema, već za opstanak.
So, take two stone tablets and carve on them. On one of them, carve: "Problems are soluble." And on the other one, carve: "Problems are inevitable."
Uzmite dve kamene ploče i ugravirajte ih. Na jednoj izrezbarite "Problemi su rešivi." A na drugoj "Problemi su neizbežni."
Thank you.
Hvala vam.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)