I am not a fan of retired general Wesley Clark. There is a military cliché about generals always preparing for the last war. Like most clichés, it has more than a grain of truth. Some generals cannot envision how warfare changes with time. Clark’s public statements about how the Bush administration should have run the war reveals the cliché holds true for Clark. Tommy Franks did an awesome job winning the war in a manner that directly contradicted many of Clark’s stated policies. I think the Pentagon did the right thing in forcing Clark’s retirement. Many of Clark’s other political statements strike me as ludicrous.



Despite this, I think Clark should not take any flack for believing that mankind will be able to exceed the speed of light.

"I still believe in e=mc², but I can't believe that in all of human history, we'll never ever be able to go beyond the speed of light to reach where we want to go," said Clark. "I happen to believe that mankind can do it.



"I've argued with physicists about it, I've argued with best friends about it. I just have to believe it. It's my only faith-based initiative." Clark's comment prompted laughter and applause from the gathering.

This has prompted riducule from many, including from some bloggers I admire. Clark’s statement clearly violates the current understanding of scientists. However, history is on his side. People thought the sound barrier could not be broken. Others said an atomic bomb was impossible. Many scientists thought the atom was the smallest particle in the universe. Then protons, nuetrons, and electrons were thought to be the smallest particles in the universe. Now we think the quark family makes up the smallest set of particles. The history of science is filled with absolute claims that have been proven false as we learn more.



One way or another, I suspect FTL (faster than light) travel will occur. It may not technically violate the speed of light (e.g., the use of wormholes or other mechanisms to travel through other dimensions), but I too have faith that this obsticle can be overcome. And it would not surprise me if our current understanding about the properties of light turn out to be just as false as our initial beliefs about atoms.



I also agree with this quote by Nick Powers. It is impossible to transcend the laws of nature. You can only determine that your understanding of nature has changed. Or as another Clarke put it: "New ideas pass through three periods: 1) It can't be done. 2) It probably can be done, but it's not worth doing. 3) I knew it was a good idea all along!



So let’s cut Clark some slack on this issue. I wish other politicians would have more faith in our ability to overcome obsticles.

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):