Scientists call a theory that unites many ideas in a simple way “beautiful.” Are unity and simplicity among the criteria of beauty outside of science? Support your answer.
Solution 10E Something that is beautiful for a scientist may or may not be the same for an audience outside of science. A scientist is well aware of scientific principles, theories etc. But same may not be true for a person not studying science. Therefore, for a theory to be understood by common people it has be simply described to make it attractive. For example, let us consider the topic of an object sinking or floating in water. A scientist will easily conclude that an object having a density higher than that of water will sink and an object having a lesser density than water will float. But a common person may have difficulty in understanding without proper examples. An iron ball may be taken and dropped into a bucket of water. It will sink in water as it has more density. Similarly, ice floats in water as it has density lower than that of water. Such examples will make things look simple to a person outside of science. Uniting many ideas into a theory may also look beautiful to a common person. But those scientific ideas has to be easily understandable or has to be explained with proper examples. When such ideas are united to make a theory, it may seem beautiful to a person having less understanding of science. For example, to explain Newton’s first law of motion we can present some simple examples like pushing a book on a table to a particular direction or stopping a moving ball to change their states of rest or motion. Uniting both examples, the theory of Newton’s first law of motion can be defined. This make things simpler to understand and that is where the beauty in this approach may lie for a common person to understand scientific theories.