Oprah is one of the most prolific world media personalities today who touches the hearts of everyone she interacts with. She is not only a media star but is also a writer, philanthropist, actor, and producer. Born as Oprah Gail Winfrey in rural Mississippi, Oprah is best known for “The Oprah Winfrey Show,” in which she interviews prominent personalities with her own personal style of interviewing. She is also the first African-American millionaire and has a true rags-to-riches story. But that is not all that can be said about her. Oprah Winfrey has written and co-authored many books that can be an excellent addition to your reading list. Here are five of the best books of Oprah Winfrey you should read today:
1. What Happened to You?
A book on trauma, resilience, and healing, this book is written by Oprah in collaboration with Renowned trauma expert Dr. Bruce Perry. This is a known fact that Oprah was abused as a child, and in this book, she reveals many of those traumatic memories for the first time.
The book focuses on personal experiences of trauma and aims to shift the perspective from a victim to a survivor. It has been a New York Times bestseller ever since its release and helps heal the readers from their own trauma and change their lives for the better. Dr. Bruce Perry shares the adversities people face when they encounter trauma and why people act a certain way if they have gone through such experiences.
A collection of some of her most popular essays from The Oprah magazine, this book is very candid and shares personal moments from Oprah’s life. The book focuses on life lessons and how to create the best opportunity out of a bad situation. Throughout the book, what shines is Oprah’s way of dealing with the most challenging problems life throws at her and the inspiring stories of her resilience.
The book derives its name from the column Oprah used to write for her magazine across the span of 14 years. She has picked her best essays and revised them for her readers in this masterpiece book.
There are 8 chapters in the book which follow various themes like joy, gratitude, connection, resilience, power, possibility, awe, and clarity. They guide you and allow you to redirect your life using real-life experiences.
3. The Wisdom of Sundays
Based on Oprah’s show “The Super Soul Sunday,” this book contains an inspiring collection of insights shared by world leaders featured on the show. It is a lavish book with breathtaking photographs that make reading it a very engaging experience. This book is divided into 10 chapters.
Each chapter starts with an essay written by Oprah herself. World leaders and personalities like Shonda Rhimes, Wayne Dyer, Elizabeth Gilbert, etc., share their spiritual experiences on healing, forgiveness, love, mindfulness, intention, etc., in this book.
All the episodes of the show (The Super Soul Sunday) are filmed on Oprah’s own private property, so the book shares some beautiful images of her personal life as well. The Wisdom of Sundays is a timeless classic that takes you on a captivating journey of healing and upliftment every time you pick it up.
Featuring a young Oprah walking through the wilderness, this book contains anecdotes and life lessons to guide you in the direction of your life. It has short essays drawing from personal experiences of Oprah and offers wisdom from her unique point of view. There is no one who knows how to transform their life more than Oprah as she rose from her traumatic past to a glorious present.
This book can be read and re-read several times, and even then, you will still find something new to learn from Oprah’s life experiences.
There are instances that show the human side of Oprah and how she handled negative comments about her work or personality that help the readers relate to her warm and kind nature.
5. Food, Health, and Happiness
When we see a celebrity like Oprah, all we see is how perfect her life is, but that is never the case. Oprah struggled with her weight for quite a long time and has had a complicated relationship with food. This book contains recipes prepared by famous celebrity chefs alongside Oprah’s personal notes on how these recipes helped her overcome her struggle with food.
The recipes include value points, too, if you are on weight watchers, so all the recipes are quite healthy and can be enjoyed guilt-free.
These recipes are definitely doable, and the book is designed with so much love that it can be seen in the photographs.
A unique aspect of this book is that the recipes range from simple home cooking recipes to elaborate fancy spreads. So, whether you’re eating alone or have several guests and want to make something special yet healthy, you will always find a healthy recipe that suits the moment.
Oprah’s interviews are not the only ones that earned her raving fans and hardcore supporters. The books written by her in her book club are also loved by people across the world. All these books are timeless, so they can be read and re-read when you feel like life is pulling you down and need some motivation. Her style of writing is not very preachy but has personal anecdotes that make the reader connect to her quickly. We hope this book guide on Oprah helped you make up your mind to choose the next book for your book collection.
In the 1960s, there was a heated debate going on between two opposing cosmological theories, which tried to explain the origin of the universe – the Big Bang theory and the Steady State theory. But before either of these theories existed, people believed in the static universe theory.
The static universe theory
They believed that the universe was neither expanding nor contracting. It had always existed the same way forever and was infinite in space and time. But Isaac Newton’s discovery of gravity in the seventeenth century challenged this belief.
Isaac Newton’s law of gravitation
Newton discovered that every body in this universe attracts every other body in the universe. The force with which two bodies attract each other is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.
To understand the impact of Newton’s theory on the static model of the universe, consider doing an experiment. Take a stone and throw it up towards the sky. Initially, the stone is at rest on your hand. Hence, the speed with which the stone is pulled down (negative velocity) due to gravitational acceleration is zero. So, at the moment you throw the stone, the speed with which you throw the stone, directed upwards (positive velocity), will be greater than the speed with which gravity pulls it, directed downwards. Therefore, the stone goes upwards.
But as the stone goes up, the velocity of the stone decreases due to the gravitational acceleration pulling it down. At one point in time, the stone stands still in the sky. At this instant, the force of gravity would have completely canceled out the force of the throw. After this instant, the stone starts moving downwards, with its speed increasing every second.
Thus, at any point, the stone is either moving up or moving down. It does not stay static, except for only one instant. But even this one instant is not a stable state, meaning that the stone cannot stay there for a long time.
Now, if you throw the stone up with a greater force, it goes higher up but eventually comes down. If you throw the stone with an extremely large force (more than 11km/s), it will keep going up. It will eventually escape the earth’s atmosphere and never return.
If you extend this concept to astronomical bodies, then one can understand that any two objects will either constantly move towards each other or away from each other. They cannot stay at a constant distance from each other indefinitely. Thus, Newton’s law of gravity challenged the notion of a static universe significantly.
Newton himself was also aware of the consequences of his theory. But he believed that God had placed the astronomical bodies like stars in perfect numbers and distances from each other. So, the gravitational forces exerted on each astronomical body by all the other astronomical bodies are canceled out. Hence, even though they were unstable, the stars remained in balance, just like a needle balanced on a single point. Thus, the entire universe managed to remain static for an infinite time.
Newton’s law of gravitation was a huge step for mankind. But it did have its flaws. For starters, even Newton didn’t understand how gravity could act without a medium. Moreover, there were some astronomical occurrences that his law of gravitation couldn’t explain. Yet, despite its flaws, it was widely accepted for a very long time.
Albert Einstein postulated that space, time, and mass were related. So, any object with mass warps, bends, or stretches the space and time around it. This warping action is the cause of all gravity. You would understand this if you have seen the movie Interstellar, where time runs faster when the hero nears a black hole. Because of its extreme mass, the black hole accelerates time when passing near it.
To understand this phenomenon, imagine two people standing opposite each other, each holding one of the two opposite edges of a big sheet. If these two people move away from each other, then the sheet will get outstretched up until the point when the entire sheet lies on a single plane. Now, if a third person drops a football in the middle of the sheet, you can imagine what would happen. The sheet would be pulled downwards, with the amount of pull greater in the middle and decreasing towards the edges. The heavier the football, the higher the force with which it pulls the sheet down. Now, if you drop a small object, maybe a tennis ball, on any location on the sheet, it would eventually move towards the middle, where the football is.
Now think of the sheet as the spacetime and the football as a star. Just like in the experiment above, the star would bend/warp the spacetime around it due to its mass. The heavier the star, the greater its bending/warping will be. And any other object in the vicinity will be pulled towards it, thus creating the effect of gravity.
At this point, you may be wondering what has Einstein’s theory of general relativity got to do with the origin of the universe. Actually, it has got a lot to do with the universe and its origin.
According to Einstein’s theory of general relativity, a massive object stretches the spacetime around it. And when light travels through this spacetime, it ends up getting stretched too. As it travels through this stretched spacetime more and more, it gets stretched more and more. As a result, its wavelength increases, and the light becomes red in color since red has the longest wavelength. This phenomenon is called cosmological redshift.
The big bang theory
Einstein’s theory of general relativity made a huge impact on the scientific community. It changed many people’s understanding of the universe. One of those people was a Belgian priest called Georges Lemaître. Since he was a kid, Lemaître had had an interest in finding out how things around him worked.
In 1915, when Einstein published his theory of general relativity, impressed by it, Lemaître started studying it. In 1927, he deduced that if Einstein’s theory was true, then the universe was not static; it was expanding in all directions. But he did not have any data to prove this. So, not many people believed in his theory. Even Einstein, who was a firm believer of the static universe, did not endorse Lemaître’s interpretation of his theory.
Edwin Hubble
Until 1919, the common perception was that our milky way galaxy was the only galaxy in the entire universe. But in 1919, while investigating the night sky using the Hooker telescope, the largest telescope at that time, Edwin Hubble found that several dust clouds, which were previously considered part of the milky way galaxy, were actually much, much farther away. Hence, he argued that they couldn’t be part of the milky way galaxy. They could only be entire galaxies, which were very far away. Thus, Hubble showed that the universe was made up of many galaxies, not just our own galaxy.
In 1929, unaware that Lemaître had proposed a theory of an expanding universe based on Einstein’s theory of general relativity, Hubble made a remarkable discovery. At that time, Hubble was investigating the cosmological redshift from various galaxies. He discovered that the amount of redshift in the light from a galaxy was proportional to its distance from earth. This indicated that other galaxies were moving away from us. Moreover, the speed with which a galaxy was moving away from us was proportional to its distance from earth, i.e., the farther a galaxy was, the faster it was moving away. These findings led him to take the only possible logical deduction – The universe was expanding. Even though this is the same conclusion Lemaître had arrived at two years earlier, Hubble was credited for discovering that the universe was expanding.
The Hypothesis of the Primeval atom
But Lemaître used Hubble’s findings to propose something that faced strict opposition initially. He proposed that since the universe was expanding, it would have been smaller in the past. So, if we went back in time, long, long ago, the universe would have been an extremely dense but tiny object. Lemaître called this tiny object the Primeval atom. As it was extremely dense, at some point, the Primeval atom would have exploded suddenly. This explosion created space, time, and expansion, which continues to this day.
Lemaître’s theory had a profound impact on the way people viewed the universe. Moreover, it gave rise to philosophical questions, like, if the universe did begin with an explosion, what created the explosion in the first place.
Today, we call Lemaître’s theory the big bang theory. However, Lemaître did not call his theory the big bang theory. He called it the “hypothesis of the primeval atom.” The term ‘Big Bang’ was actually coined by Fred Hoyle. (Fred Hoyle is the scientist under whose supervision Stephen Hawking wanted to do his Ph.D. degree. But Hoyle declined Hawking because he already had enough students working under him.)
An illustration of how the Big Bang might have happened – By NASA/WMAP Science Team – Original version: NASA; modified by Cherkash, Public Domain, Link
Fred Hoyle
Fred Hoyle was one of those people who vehemently opposed the big bang theory. Indeed, he coined the term ‘Big Bang’ as a way to mock Lemaître’s theory. During an interview for BBC Radio in 1949, he said,
These theories were based on the hypothesis that all the matter in the universe was created in one big bang at a particular time in the remote past.
But the term he coined became famous in the 1970s and has stayed so since then.
But it is not hard to understand why many people opposed the Big Bang theory at that time. Most people at that time believed in a static universe. So, Lemaître’s proposal that the universe had a beginning was simply not acceptable for them. Moreover, there was no evidence to back his theory. But one of the major reasons why people were not willing to believe his theory was due to his religious background.
By claiming that the universe began from the primeval atom, Lemaître was indicating that something had somehow created the primeval atom in the first place, thus opening the possibility of the existence of a greater being. In 1952, when Pope Pious XII proclaimed that Lemaître’s theory confirmed the existence of the transcendental creator, it cemented many people’s beliefs that Lemaître’s religious beliefs were the motivation for his theory, thus reducing the credibility of this theory. Even though Lemaître affirmed that his religious background had nothing to do with his scientific theory, nobody believed him.
So, it is no wonder that for Fred Hoyle, who was an ardent atheist, Leimatre’s theory appeared unbelievable. Fred Hoyle instead believed in the steady-state model of the universe, which he and two other scientists had developed.
The steady-state theory
According to the steady-state theory, changes take place in the universe, but only on a smaller scale. When taken as a whole, however, the universe had always been the same at all times. To put it simply, the steady-state theory states that the universe doesn’t change over time.
But Hubble showed that the universe was expanding. The steady-state theory got around this by stating that as old galaxies disappear (either due to their increasing distance from earth or because they disintegrate into neutron stars and black holes) new stars and galaxies are formed, which take up their place. Thus, on a smaller scale, the universe might appear to be expanding, but on a larger scale, the universe maintains a constant density and constant average distance between galaxies.
So, the universe had always been the same at all times in the past. It will also continue to do so in the future. Therefore, unlike the big bang theory, which states that a creation event occurred at some time in the past, the steady-state theory states that nothing of that sort ever happened because the universe had always been the same. This is a particularly interesting aspect of the steady-state theory that appealed to believers of the static universe theory and atheists like Fred Hoyle.
The steady-state theory enjoyed great support until the 1960s. However, in the 1960s, Quasars and Cosmic Microwave Background radiation were discovered.
Quasars
Quasars are incredibly bright objects in the universe. They could be a thousand times brighter than the milky way galaxy, and yet, they are very small compared to a galaxy. But Quasars are only found billions of light-years away from earth and not anywhere nearby. This means that they existed only billions of years ago, not in the present. The fact that Quasars were the birthplace of galaxies and the fact that they existed billions of years ago provided strong evidence that the universe had changed over time. This went against the core belief of steady-state theory, which believed that the universe stayed the same forever.
Two pairs of quasars that existed 10 billion years ago (taken by Hubble Space Telescope) – By ESA/Hubble, CC BY 4.0, Link
Cosmic Microwave Background
In 1965, two researchers working at Bell Laboratories, while trying to build a radio receiver, stumbled upon Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), a noise that came uniformly from all directions in space. Big bang theory explains CMB as the radiation that was emitted when the universe was still young. CMB radiation was emitted by the universe almost 400,000 years after the big bang happened. The universe at that time was starting to cool down from a temperature of 273 million degrees.
Since then, the universe has been expanding and cooling down. So, the CMB has also cooled down to a temperature of -273.15°C today. The big bang theory explained CMB as relic radiation from the time the universe was young. In other words, CMB represents the heat/radiation left from the big bang. But since no astronomical body in the present emits such radiation, steady-state theory, which believes that the universe has remained the same forever, was not able to explain the presence of CMB.
Thus, in the 1960s, due to the discovery of Quasars and CMB, the steady-state theory was disproved. Since then, the big bang theory has been widely accepted as the theory explaining the origin of the universe.
The year 1915 was a revolutionary year for modern physics. It was in this year that Albert Einstein published his theory of general relativity.
Before that, for almost 200 years, people had considered gravity to be a mere attractive force between objects, as Newton had theorized. But Einstein’s theory of general relativity seriously challenged that notion. According to the theory of general relativity, gravity was not just an attractive force; it was the result of a massive object bending the spacetime around it.
Albert Einstein and his field equations
To describe the interaction of gravity due to this bending effect, Einstein published ten equations, called Einstein’s Field Equations. These equations provided a mathematical approach to gravity and hence, became the holy grail for astrophysicists.
But despite Einstein’s equations providing a possible way to find out how gravity really works, there was one big problem. Einstein had only published the equations, not their solutions. Moreover, his equations were non-linear, and non-linear equations are difficult to solve.
Karl Schwarzschild’s solution to Einstein’s equations
The first person to find a solution to Einstein’s equations was Karl Schwarzschild, an accomplished mathematician, theoretical physicist, and one of Einstein’s colleagues. And by finding a solution to Einstein’s equations, he theoretically predicted the existence of mysterious objects in the universe with infinite density and incredible gravitational attraction.
Today, we call these mysterious objects black holes and have come to accept their existence. But at the time Schwarzschild predicted the existence of black holes, most physicists disagreed. They considered black holes as mere mathematical anomalies that could not exist in reality.
After all, if a black hole could exist, then its strong gravitational field would not let anything, not even light traveling at 3×10^8 m/s, escape the black hole. So, for an observer outside the black hole watching an object falling into the black hole, the object would disappear suddenly. So, any information regarding that object (e.g., what happens to that object in the future?) would be lost to the outside world once it fell into the black hole. Hence, if a black hole existed, it would directly contradict the first law of thermodynamics, which states that energy (information) can neither be created nor be destroyed in an isolated system. That’s why most people at that time did not believe that a black hole could exist.
Black holes contradict the second law of thermodynamics
Moreover, the existence of black holes would also contradict the second law of thermodynamics, which states that the entropy (a measure of disorderliness) of any isolated system will always increase. For example, according to the second law of thermodynamics, if you stop cleaning your room, it will only get dirtier with time. It will never become cleaner as time passes unless you put some effort into doing so. Thus, the entropy of an isolated system always increases with time.
All objects (matter) have entropy. So, since an object disappears when dropped into a black hole, physicists assumed that its entropy would disappear too. Therefore, the total entropy of the entire universe would go down. But according to the second law of thermodynamics, this was forbidden. Hence, black holes violated the second law of thermodynamics too.
Stephen Hawking and Jacob Bekenstein
But Stephen Hawking, the famous theoretical physicist of the 21st century, was okay with it. He thought that if black holes really didn’t obey the second law of thermodynamics, then so be it. He believed that finding the truth about black holes was more important than being obsessed with the laws of physics.
But Jacob Bekenstein, a graduate student from Princeton University, did not agree with Stephen Hawking. He believed that black holes, too, must obey the second law of thermodynamics.
Jacob Bekenstein’s idea
In 1970, Stephen Hawking had theorized that the event horizon (boundary) of a black hole could never get smaller. If an object fell into a black hole, the black hole absorbed it, and its event horizon got bigger. So, a black hole and its event horizon only got bigger with time and never smaller.
In 1972, Bekenstein, who had read Stephen Hawking’s theory, came up with a wild idea. Every time an object fell into a black hole, the object and its entropy disappeared, while the event horizon of the black hole got bigger. So, what if the event horizon of the black hole was actually a measure of the entropy of the black hole?
Hawking was immediately flabbergasted by Bekenstein’s idea. He thought that it was seriously flawed. If the entropy of the black hole were to increase, it would get hotter, and with heat comes radiation. But black holes couldn’t radiate because their strong gravitational pull would never let anything escape their event horizons.
Hawking tries to prove Bekenstein wrong
So, when he returned to Cambridge, Hawking decided to prove Bekenstein wrong and started working on it. But contrary to his expectations, instead of proving Bekenstein wrong, he ended up discovering the mathematical relationship between a black hole’s event horizon and its entropy and confirmed that Bekenstein’s idea was indeed correct. This equation came to be known as the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy equation.
Hawking radiation
Combining Theory of General Relativity with Quantum physics
Hawking now realized that a black hole’s entropy could increase with time. And when its entropy increased, the black hole would get hotter and emit radiation.
Previously, he had only considered Einstein’s theory of general relativity, which told that nothing, not even radiation, could escape a black hole’s gravity. But he had failed to take quantum mechanics into account, which states that pairs of particles and antiparticles appear in the universe out of empty space. One of these partners (particle/antiparticle) would have positive energy, while the other would have negative energy. So, the partner with negative energy would seek out its partner with positive energy. They would then annihilate each other and disappear within a moment.
Coming up with the idea for Hawking radiation
Hawking proposed that if such a particle-antiparticle pair were to appear near the event horizon of a black hole, it was possible for the partner with negative energy to fall into the event horizon while the other escaped, preventing them from annihilating each other. The orphaned particle (or antiparticle) with positive energy would then travel away from the event horizon of the black hole. For an observer outside the event horizon, these escaping particles would look like radiation. Today, we call this radiation Hawking radiation.
Meanwhile, due to the negative energy particle (or antiparticle) which fell into the black hole, the overall energy of the black hole would reduce. And since energy is directly proportional to mass according to Einstein (E=mc^2), the mass of the black hole would reduce too. Thus, the black hole would get smaller with time and eventually disappear.
Hawking radiation was a remarkable discovery. It completely changed the perception of people on black holes and led to the Blackhole information paradox. Yet astronomers couldn’t observe Hawking radiation through a telescope. After all, astronomers can only study massive black holes with a telescope. But the more massive a black hole is, the lower its temperature, and the more insignificant the temperature of its radiation is, making it almost impossible to observe. So, Hawking never got a Nobel prize for his discovery. But his contribution to science and theoretical physics cannot be forgotten. He will always live in our memories as one of the inspirational, brilliant theoretical physicists of the 21st century.
Stephen Hawking is one of the most brilliant minds of the 21st century. He is known throughout the world for his disability, his scientific brilliance, and even for his interest in acting. But Stephen Hawking also had a weird habit that most people may not be aware of. He was a fan of making wagers. Throughout his life, he made several wagers with other scientific minds over pressing scientific questions. In this blog post, I discuss some of Stephen Hawking’s bets.
Stephen Hawking’s bets
In the early 1970s, when people’s interest in black holes spiked, Hawking made a rather controversial scientific wager.
1. Cygnus X-1
At that time, the most brilliant minds in science thought that Cygnus X-1, a strong source of X-rays, was a black hole. By observing the X-rays coming from Cygnus X-1, they suspected that Cygnus X-1 and a nearby supergiant star were orbiting their common center of mass. They deducted that the material sucked in from the star might have created a hot accretion disk around Cygnus X-1, which emitted the X-rays. They inferred its minimum mass to be at least six times that of the sun. So, theoretically, the chance of Cygnus X-1 being a black hole was pretty high.
I have done a lot of work on black holes, and it would all be wasted if it turned out that black holes do not exist. But in that case, I would have the consolation of winning my bet, which would bring me 4 years of the magazine Private Eye.
But in 1990, more than a decade later, Stephen Hawking conceded the bet, even though scientists were still not sure if Cygnus X-1 was actually a black hole.
2. Naked Singularity
But losing that bet did not stop Stephen Hawking from betting again. Just one year later, he bet against Kip Thorne and his colleague John Preskill that a naked singularity cannot exist
A singularity is a point where the variable or variables in a mathematical function become infinite. When that happens, the behavior of the function, which is normally predictable, becomes upredictable or undefined. The functions in question here are Einstein’s Field equations which represent his Theory of General Relativity. And a singularity in these equations means infinite mass and infinite curvature, i.e., in simple terms, infinite gravity.
Such a singularity exists theoretically in every black hole. Stephen Hawking bet that such a singularity can exist only behind the event horizon of a black hole. But Thorne and Preskill bet that it was possible for a singularity to exist even without an event horizon. (The event horizon is the boundary of a black hole, beyond which nothing, not even light, can escape from the black hole).
In 1997, Hawking conceded that bet too and reframed it as “a naked singularity cannot form under generic conditions.” This bet has still not been resolved.
3. The Blackhole information paradox
In 1974, Hawking proposed that black holes can emit radiation. Since this radiation is in the form of heat and independent of what fell into the black hole previously, it gave rise to the black hole information paradox.
In Physics, one thing is very important, and that thing is determinism, i.e., when one knows the parameters of a system, it must be possible to predict how the system behaved in the past and how it will behave in the future. Regardless of whether it is a single particle, a big chemical reaction, or the whole universe, once we know its properties, physics lets us predict its past and future states.
So, if we know everything that is to be known about a system or an object, like the number of particles it has, their positions, velocities, spins, electric charges, etc., then we can predict these particles’ behavior in the past and future. Hence, the raw information in a system (whatever we can know about it) is always preserved across time. It never gets created or destroyed; it only gets rearranged.
But this is not so easy when it comes to black holes, at least not after Hawking discovered Hawking’s radiation.
A black hole’s gravitational field is so strong that nothing can escape from it once inside its event horizon. So, regardless of whatever you throw inside the black hole, that object disappears. For example, if you throw a book inside a black hole, it disappears. We know what happens afterward, but we can guess that it will be stripped apart. But the book had a lot of information before being thrown into the black hole, like the number of particles it was made of, its chemical composition, etc., besides the obvious human-readable content it contained. So, what happens when the book is thrown into a black hole? If it gets stripped apart into its constituent particle, what happens to the information it earlier contained?
Earlier I told you that when you throw something into a black hole, it disappears.
Well…
It’s not completely true.
If you are an observer outside the event horizon of the black hole, and if you throw the book into the event horizon, the book just passes through it. You don’t know what happens afterward. Maybe, the information the book contained is somehow preserved in the black hole.
But in 1974, Hawking proposed that a black hole can emit radiation in the form of heat. This in itself is not the problem. The real problem is that, because of the radiation it emits, the black hole shrinks with time and eventually disappears. But what happened to the information about all the objects that the black hole had sucked in?
What happened to the information contained in the light, asteroids, planets, and stars it sucked in?
What happened to the information contained in the book you threw in?
Would the information somehow leak through Hawking’s radiation? Hawking tells us that it’s not the case. So, if the information about the book you threw into the black hole does not come out through Hawking’s radiation, and the black hole disappears, what happened to the information? Where did it go? This indeterminism about the information inside a black hole created the paradox – The black hole information paradox.
The wager about the Blackhole information paradox
In 1997, Stephen Hawking made a wager once again with Kip Thorne and John Preskill regarding the Blackhole information paradox.
This time, Hawking and Thorne were on the same side. According to the Theory of General relativity, the gravitational field of a black hole is so strong that not even light can escape from it. That is, the escape velocity of a black hole (The velocity an object needs to escape from the black hole’s gravitational pull and travel to outer space) is more than the speed of light. And since nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, nothing can escape a black hole. So, the information inside cannot leak from a black hole through Hawking’s radiation. Hence, the information carried by Hawking’s radiation must be new information and not from inside the black hole. Therefore, Hawking and Thorne bet that Quantum Physics needs to be rewritten.
On the other hand, Preskill bet that the Theory of General Relativity must be modified because Quantum Mechanics says that the information contained within the radiation emitted from black holes must somehow relate to the information that fell into the black hole at an earlier time.
In 2003, he conceded this bet as well.
4. Higgs Boson
In the early 2000s, Hawking bet against a physicist called Gordon Kane that the Higgs Boson could never be found. But the particle was eventually found in 2012. Hawking, who had obviously lost the bet, hailed Peter Higgs, the person who had theorized the existence of Higgs Boson almost 48 years earlier, and told that he should be given a Nobel prize.
We, as humans, have always been fascinated by the skies. For centuries, we have yearned to find out what lies beyond the comforts of our planet.
Yet, only a few people in history have dedicated their entire lives to finding the answers they had been seeking. And only a fraction of those people has made groundbreaking discoveries. And these discoveries have shaped our understanding of the universe today. Stephen Hawking is one of those people.
He dedicated his entire life to finding the truth about the universe. Even when he was diagnosed with a Motor Neuron Disease, he did not give up. He fought against the disease and lived for more than 50 years, even though doctors said he could live only two years.
But as inspiring as his fight against the disease might be, his contribution to science shouldn’t be forgotten.
At a time when the widely accepted consensus was that the Black Holes only expand with time, Stephen Hawking proposed that Black Holes shrink as well. Even though it was a highly controversial theory at that time, today, most people have come to accept it.
Thanks to this theory and his later work, we now have a better understanding of the universe we live in. So, It is no wonder that Stephen Hawking is hailed as one of the most brilliant minds of the twentieth century.
In this biography of Stephen Hawking, we take a look at his parents, his childhood, his struggles against the disease, and his contributions to science.
Parents
Stephen Hawking’s father was Frank Hawking. Frank’s father was a farmer. But even though he was the son of a farmer, he had a yearning for learning. His family recognized his intellectual abilities early. So, they sent him to Ley’s School, Cambridge, one of the prestigious schools in the UK, for education.
After passing out of Ley’s school with flying colors, he obtained his BA degree from Oxford with first-class honors. He then became a medical researcher at the medical institute in Hampstead.
Stephen Hawking’s mother was Isobel Eileen Hawking. She was the daughter of a doctor. At a time when few women could afford higher education, she earned her way into the University of Oxford. There, Isobel studied economics, politics, and philosophy.
When Isobel graduated from Oxford, she became one of the first female students to do so. After finishing her studies, she held various jobs before becoming a secretary at the medical institute in Hampstead. It was there that she met Frank Hawking.
Frank and Isobel got married during the second world war. Their first child was Stephen Hawking.
Stephen Hawking’s birth came at a very inconvenient time for the couple. They were financially not strong at that time. Moreover, Britain was fighting the second world war. When Isobel neared the end of her pregnancy, they were living in North London, where Germany frequently dropped bombs.
So, considering the safety of his wife and unborn child, Frank asked Isobel to move to Oxford. After all, Germany had agreed not to bomb Oxford in return for Britain not bombing Heidelburg and Göttingen. Hence, Isobel moved to Oxford and spent the last week of her pregnancy in a hotel.
When she stayed in Oxford, Isobel often went for short strolls. One day, during such a stroll, she entered a bookshop and bought an astronomical atlas. (An astronomical atlas or a star map is a map of the night sky. The map divides the night sky into grids to help identify and locate astronomical bodies like stars, constellations, etc.)
Later in her life, Isobel would regard this act of purchasing the astronomical atlas as a Prophecy, a sign of the great things the unborn child was going to achieve. But if you believe in prophecies, that wasn’t the only prophecy that foretold Hawking would become a great scientist. Coincidentally, he was also born exactly 300 years after the death of Galileo Galilei, the Italian astronomer, physicist, and philosopher.
Childhood
Stephen Hawking was born on January 8th, 1942. Both his parents were highly educated. He had two younger sisters and an adopted younger brother.
Stephen Hawking with his two sisters (Picture credits – https://www.vintag.es)
Stephen Hawking started his schooling at the Byron House School in London. But due to the progressive methods of education practiced by the school, which used hands-on projects to teach students to solve problems, work as a team, and be responsible socially, Hawking did not learn to read properly until he was eight years old.
Then, when he turned eight years old, his family moved to St Albans, a city in England. In St Albans, Hawking started studying at the High School for Girls. At that time, boys who were less than ten years of age could attend the girls’ school. So, since Hawking was just eight years old at that time, he was permitted to attend St Albans’ all-girls school.
After turning ten years old, Hawking started attending the St Albans school, a partially co-educational school.
But even though Hawking would later become an incredible genius, his childhood didn’t show any signs of that. His academic scores were menial, his handwriting was terrible, and he was lazy.
Most subjects were boring for him. So, in his first year at his school, he ranked third from the last in his class.
But Hawking had a curious mind.
The Hawkings were people who were considered eccentric. They drove an old taxi, had bees as pets, and produced fireworks in their greenhouse. During dinnertime, they rarely talked to each other. Instead, each of them read a book intently and ate in complete silence.
The Hawkings lived in a three-story house that needed to be fixed. Even though it never got fixed, it was the place where little Hawking’s interest in science started to develop.
The building had several old radios and clocks. Little Hawking eagerly dismounted these devices. Even though he wasn’t as successful in putting them back together, they served as ample fodder for his curious mind.
While living in that house, Hawking often spent time with his mother, lying in the backyard and gazing at the stars. It was there that his fascination for the stars began. It was probably then that questions about the universe started to pop up in his mind. Later in her life, his mother said,
Stephen always had a strong sense of wonder.
Growing up in an old house that had old devices, Stephen Hawking probably wanted to find out how things worked by himself. So, he didn’t spend much time studying. Instead, he spent time with his friends playing board games, creating model boats and airplanes, and discussing Christianity.
In 1955, a young British-Armenian mathematician called Dikran Tahta came to St Alban’s school to teach. He started teaching mathematics for Hawking’s class.
Even though the other subjects were boring for Hawking, Tahta’s classes were the exact opposite. They were lively, and the students could debate about absolutely anything. So, Hawking was drawn to Tahta’s classes.
Slowly, Hawking started to show interest in mathematics and science. In 1958, with the help of Tahta, Hawking and his friends even built a computer using recycled components. So, Hawking came to be called ‘Einstein‘ by his friends at school.
Inspired by his mathematics professor, Hawking decided to pursue a career in mathematics. But his father was afraid that mathematics didn’t have any job prospects. So, he asked Hawking to study medicine and follow in his footsteps. He also wanted Hawking to attend the University of Oxford, where he himself had studied.
University of Oxford
Stephen Hawking decided to join the University of Oxford and study mathematics. However, Oxford did not offer mathematics as a field of study back then. So, he opted for Physics and Chemistry instead.
Even though Hawking’s parents wanted him to study at Oxford, they did not have enough money to fund his education. So, the only way for Hawking to get into Oxford was by securing a scholarship. But Oxford’s scholarship exam was very tough. Hence, his headmaster advised him to take a year to prepare for the exam. But Hawking took the exam the same year, passed it, and got into Oxford.
In 1959, when he was 17 years old, Stephen Hawking began his undergraduate degree at University College, Oxford.
It was only necessary for him to know that something could be done, and he could do it without looking to see how other people did it.
So, obviously, he didn’t need the help of his professors or other students to finish his college work. And he finished them too quickly as well, while his classmates spent several long hours figuring them out. So, in his first year at the university, he felt mostly bored and lonely.
Stephen Hawking at Oxford, 1963 (Picture credits – https://www.vintag.es)
In his second year at the university, Hawking decided to be like other boys by becoming more social. So, he joined the university’s rowing club. But he wasn’t very fit. So, he was assigned the job of steering the boat instead of rowing. He soon became the daredevil of the team, rowing the boat into dangerous routes and damaging the boats.
But rowing wasn’t Hawking’s only hobby. In his second year, he also became interested in classical music, cosmology, and science fiction. So, he spent a lot of time pursuing these new hobbies. But due to the pursuit of these new hobbies, he was left with hardly any time to study.
Hawking wanted to do his post-graduate degree in Cosmology at Cambridge University. But to do so, he needed to pass his undergraduate degree with first-class honors. However, due to the pursuit of varied hobbies, Hawking had only an hour a day on average to focus on his studies. So, when the exam neared, he started spending sleepless nights studying rigorously. As a result, in 1962, he passed his Bachelor’s degree with first-class honors.
The motor neuron disease
At that time, there was a heated debate going on between two opposing cosmological theories, which tried to explain how the universe originated – the Big Bang theory and the Steady State theory.
Even though the steady-state theory was disproved eventually, by the time Stephen Hawking finished his Bachelor’s degree, the steady-state theory had many supporters. One of the men who proposed it and developed it further, Fred Hoyle, was also famous and was working as a professor in Cambridge.
So, Stephen Hawking wanted to do his doctoral thesis under the supervision of Fred Hoyle. Therefore, in 1963, Stephen Hawking started his doctoral degree at Cambridge University. But when he joined the university, Fred Hoyle already had enough students with him. So, Hawking was disappointed when the university assigned Dennis William Sciama as his supervisor.
Thus, the year 1963 became a year of ups and downs in the life of Stephen Hawking. To make matters worse, there were more downs than ups.
On the one hand, he achieved his dream of doing his doctoral degree at Cambridge University. But he was not assigned the supervisor he wished for. Moreover, it was in the same year that he was diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS).
The disease
The first symptoms of this motor neuron disease started showing in Stephen Hawking during his last year at Oxford. Occasionally, he started to have difficulties in rowing. At times, he tripped for no reason, and his speech slurred unexpectedly.
One day, when he was walking down the stairs, he lost his balance, fell down, and hit his head. But even though he was obviously shaken up by this incident, Hawking attributed it to a momentary distraction. Thereafter, he didn’t think much of it. He even kept these symptoms to himself.
But his symptoms soon started to worsen. His slurred speech became obvious to other people around him. Moreover, he started to look clumsy to other people since he tripped more often.
When he went home to meet his family for Christmas that year, they immediately noticed his symptoms. Alarmed, they sent him to a doctor, where Hawking was thoroughly examined for two weeks.
The diagnosis
The heartbreaking news came just after he turned 21. Stephen Hawking was diagnosed with a neurogenerative disease called Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). The disease slowly destroys the nerves that control the voluntary muscles. So, Hawking would lose control of his hands, legs, and other body parts like jaws. Losing control of his jaw muscles would mean that his speech would become slurred as well. Eventually, even involuntary movements like breathing would stop working. Therefore, the doctor who diagnosed Hawking told him that he had only two years to live.
So, Stephen Hawking was admitted to a hospital. Hawking, who started spending his days on a hospital bed, became terribly depressed. He thought about the things he wanted to learn, the hobbies he wanted to pursue, and the amazing girl he met at a party whom he wanted to date. But now, lying on his hospital bed and waiting at death’s door, everything seemed pointless. Why pursue any of them if he would be gone in just two years anyway?
Finding hope
It is at that time, with all hope lost and wanting to distract himself, did Hawking look at the patient in the neighboring bed. It was a young boy who was suffering from Leukemia, a type of blood cancer. Looking at the young boy’s heartbreaking state made Hawking look at his own disease from a different perspective.
Maybe, doing all the things he wanted to do wouldn’t be so pointless after all. If he wanted to get a Ph.D., pursue his hobbies, and marry the girl he met, he should do them. If not, he might end up regretting his decision later.
But despite his newfound hope, Stephen Hawking’s condition worsened slowly, and surviving independently became difficult. He needed support while walking, and his speech became almost intelligible. But on the bright side, the disease progressed slower than the doctors had initially predicted. It looked like he would have more time to live.
So, Stephen Hawking returned to work. Dennis William Sciama, his supervisor at Cambridge and a founder of modern cosmology, played a big part in convincing him to do so. But he wasn’t the only reason behind Hawking’s newfound hope to live. The other reason was Jane Wilde.
Stephen Hawking met Jane Wilde in 1962 at a party through their mutual friends and soon started dating her. In 1963, after Hawking was diagnosed with motor neuron disease, Jane became aware of his reduced life expectancy of just two years. Yet, despite that, she got engaged to him in 1964 and married him in 1965.
Jane Wilde played a big role in helping Stephen Hawking get out of his depression and focus on his doctoral degree.
Work
Hawking and Hoyle
After Stephen Hawking started doing his doctoral degree at Cambridge, he soon became famous. The fame came not because of his disability but because of an incident.
At that time, Fred Hoyle was famous because of his steady-state theory. One of the students working under him was Jayant Narlikar. And one of Narlikar’s tasks was to do the mathematical calculations for Hoyle’s theory.
It so happened that the person who occupied the office next to Narlikar was Hawking. And when Hawking, who was also interested in Hoyle’s theory, asked Narlikar for his research material, not wary of his true intentions, Narlikar gave them to him. And thus, Hawking started working on Hoyle’s theories. It’s not as if Hawking held a grudge against Hoyle for not accepting him as his student and wanted to humiliate him publicly. He was just interested in Hoyle’s theories and wanted to improve them further. So, he started working on Hoyle’s theories independently.
Humiliating Hoyle publicly
In June 1964, Fred Hoyle decided to make his findings publicly known. So he presented his results to an audience of almost a hundred people at the Royal Society of London. And as is customary, after finishing his talk, Hoyle asked the audience if there were any questions. Hawking, as one would expect, did attend that meeting. And when Hoyle asked if there were any questions, Hawking stood up, clutching his stick, which he used for support.
Hawking said, “The quantity you’re talking about diverges.” The room suddenly fell silent. And when Hoyle asked how he could be sure about that, Hawking said, “Because I worked it out.”
Hoyle felt embarrassed and told that Hawking’s action was unethical. In response, Hawking and others told Hoyle that announcing unverified results was unethical as well. As one could imagine, this incident brought public shame to Hoyle while making Hawking famous. After all, he had challenged one of the most famous physicists of that time.
But contrary to one’s expectations, this incident did not lead to a long-term enmity between the two men. The only person who bore the full brunt of Hawking’s actions was the innocent middleman Narlikar.
Work on singularities
The 1950s and 1960s were times when the concept of black holes was gaining momentum. It was when many physicists started researching about these astronomical bodies. One of those people was Roger Penrose.
What is a singularity?
Mathematically speaking, a singularity or a singular point is a point at which an object starts behaving in an undefined, unusual, or chaotic way, because the variables that make up the mathematical expression become infinity.
Roger Penrose’s theorem
After researching about black holes, Penrose theorized that at the center of black holes, a spacetime singularity occurs in Einstein’s theory of general relativity. Einstein’s theory of relativity says that every object warps or bends or curves the spacetime around it. This bending action is directly proportional to the mass of the object. So, a singularity in Einstein’s theory of relativity could mean one of the two things:
1. Space-like singularity – All the matter in the object/body is compressed to a single point. Hence, the object has infinite density.
2. Time-like singularity – The object/body curves the space around it so much that the curvature becomes infinite. Hence, the curvature becomes a straight line.
Penrose theorized that a singularity occurs in a black hole. When a massive star dies, it collapses under its own gravity. It pulls all the matter inward towards itself up until the remnants of the star are compressed to a single point. This is called a black hole. Since all the matter in a black hole is compressed to a single point, its volume is zero, and hence, its density becomes infinity. And since it has extreme gravity, it curves spacetime so much that the curvature becomes infinity. So, a spacetime singularity occurs in a black hole.
Hawking’s takes an interest in Penrose’s theorem
When Penrose published his theorem, Hawking was a research student. Two years had passed since he was diagnosed with motor neuron disease. Two years back, if someone had told him that he would make it past the two-year deadline, he might not have believed them. But now, things were actually not as bad as he had imagined back then. The disease was progressing slower than the doctors had predicted.
Moreover, he was now engaged with Jane, the girl he loved so much, and wanted to marry her. And to marry her, he needed a job, and to get a job, he needed a Ph.D. degree. So, according to Stephen Hawking’s own accounts in his book ‘A Brief History of Time,’ he was trying desperately to find a topic for his Ph.D. thesis. Therefore, after reading Penrose’s theory, Stephen Hawking was inspired to apply the same concept to the Big bang. He also wrote his Ph.D. thesis on the topic.
In 1966, Stephen Hawking got his doctorate degree, specializing in general relativity and cosmology. Thereafter, he was awarded a fellowship at Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge. So, he remained at Cambridge and started working with Penrose to develop their theories further.
Hawking’s develops upon Penrose’s theorem
In 1968, Stephen Hawking theorized that the universe might have started out as a singularity too. To arrive at this conclusion, Hawking reversed the direction of time in Penrose’s theorem. Hawking argued that, if according to Penrose’s theorem, an enormous amount of matter (from a dead star) could be compressed into an infinitely dense single point, if one were to reverse the direction of time, then it would be possible, for an enormous amount of matter to be formed from an infinitely dense single point.
Thus, Stephen Hawking’s collaborative work with Roger Penrose helped jump-start his scientific career.
Deteriorating health
But while Stephen Hawking’s scientific career was taking off, his health deteriorated terribly. He couldn’t walk without using crutches anymore. Moreover, he lost his ability to write as well. But Hawking did not give up. Instead, like Mozart, who could compose symphonies in his head, Hawking started using visual methods, like seeing equations as geometrical bodies, to do calculations.
Despite his disabilities, Hawking tried to do his daily activities independently. He disliked it when anyone offered to help him due to his disability. After all, in his mind, firstly he was a scientist, secondly a writer, and finally a normal person. And that’s how he wanted others to see him as well.
This ability to see himself as a scientist rather than a disabled person gave Hawking the ability to delve deeper into the abyss of cosmology and come up with groundbreaking theories. But not all of these theories could not be considered factually correct. Some of these theories were wrong. So, Hawking himself later disproved these theories. One such incident happened in the early 1970s.
In 1970, Stephen Hawking postulated that the event horizon of a black hole can never get smaller. The event horizon is the boundary of the black hole, beyond which nothing can escape the black hole. Not even light can escape from the black hole once it enters the event horizon. Once an object enters the event horizon, it cannot be observed from the outside.
Hawking’s radiation
In 1973, Hawking started studying Quantum theory, which deals with the motion and interaction of subatomic particles. This led him to conclude that what he had postulated in 1970 (The event horizon of a black hole can never get smaller, i.e., black holes don’t emit particles) was actually wrong. He found out through a thought experiment that black holes do leak radiation, which we call today Hawking’s radiation. Since they emit radiation and particles, black holes aren’t actually completely black. Moreover, by leaking radiation, black holes gradually exhaust their energy, get smaller, and eventually disappear.
A few weeks after he published his theory, Stephen Hawking was awarded the Fellowship of the Royal Society, a prestigious award the Royal Society gives to people who have made a substantial contribution to the improvement of natural knowledge. At that time, Hawking was one of the youngest scientists to win that award.
But despite Hawking winning the award, his theory was heavily scrutinized by the scientific community initially. It was only at the end of the decade, after further research was made on the subject, did many scientists come to accept it as a significant discovery in theoretical physics.
As interest in black holes grew among the general public in the late 1970s, physicists like Stephen Hawking were interviewed by mass media. As a result, Stephen Hawking became famous. But it made some of his colleagues and counterparts angry because they thought that Stephen Hawking was using his disability to become famous.
In 1977, Hawking was appointed the professor of gravitational physics at Cambridge. Two years later, he was appointed the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge, a post once held by Isaac Newton and Charles Babbage. He held the post for the next 30 years. During this time, he received international recognition for his work and won several awards.
Hawking’s most famous book – A Brief History of Time
In 1982, Hawking decided to publish his second book. His first book was very technical. So, he wanted this book to be a financial success since he needed money for household expenses as well as to fund his children’s education. So, he sought out a mass-market publisher called Bantam Books instead of an academic publisher.
Stephen Hawking created the first draft of his book by 1984. But since it was meant for the general public, Stephen Hawking had to edit it several times because Bantam Books claimed that his initial draft was too technical for the general public.
Finally, after four more years of hard work, Hawking published the book ‘A Brief History of Time’ in 1988.
The book was a huge hit. It was eventually translated into 40 languages and sold more than nine million copies. Moreover, it remained in the London Sunday Times bestseller list for a record 237 weeks.
Hawking becomes a celebrity
Thus, as one could imagine, this book alone removed Stephen Hawking’s financial woes. Since then, Hawking had written many other books, which were big hits as well. But with financial success came celebrity status. For any normal human being, celebrity status might have been a boon, but for Stephen Hawking, it was not the case.
Perils of the celebrity status
Due to Hawking’s disability, his wife Jane had to take care of him most of the time. In addition to that, she had to take care of their children and do daily household chores as well. While this gave Hawking a lot of time to focus on theoretical physics, it tired Jane tremendously. So, in 1974, Hawking requested Bernard Carr, one of his students, to stay with them and take care of him. Since then, many other students have stayed with Hawking and taken care of him. This turned out to be a good idea since it gave Jane enough time to build her career.
Stephen Hawking, Jane and their first two children (Picture credits – www.irishtimes.com)
But in the late 1970s, Stephen Hawking’s condition deteriorated even more. So, he couldn’t use his crutches anymore and had to resort to using a wheelchair. By that time, his speech had also become so slurred that only his family members and close friends could understand what he was saying. So, if he had to communicate with someone else, people from his close circle had to translate what he was saying.
As if that wasn’t bad enough, in 1985, Hawking contracted Pneumonia. Pneumonia worsened Hawking’s condition, which was already pretty bad, so much that he couldn’t even breathe anymore. His doctors thought that Stephen Hawking was going to die. So, they thought it would be better if they turned off his life support. If they had done that, Stephen Hawking would have died within a few days. But his wife Jane was not willing to give up. So, his doctors tried to save him by making an incision in his windpipe to help him breathe. This surgery worked and saved Hawking’s life. But it did completely end Hawking’s ability to speak. Even the little speech he had left was now lost.
So, Hawking started using a device to help him communicate with others. This device had a library of almost 3,000 words, and Hawking could just click on the screen to choose the words he wanted to speak. The words he chose were then synthesized into speech. With the help of this device, Hawking could communicate with a speed of up to 15 words/minute.
After the surgery, Hawking needed care round the clock. Hence, stay-at-home nurses, working three shifts a day, started taking care of him.
So, becoming a celebrity was not easy for Stephen Hawking or the people around him. Becoming a celebrity or traveling around the world (to promote his book, for instance) meant that all his support staff had to travel with him. Moreover, if he contracted any diseases during a journey, it could quickly become life-threatening. After all, he had contracted Pneumonia in 1985 during his visit to CERN in Switzerland.
Hawking divorces Jane and marries Elaine
But his constantly worsening health condition did not stop Hawking from doing what he loved – giving lectures, working on his theories, and traveling to other countries when his work demanded. But since he focused on all these things, he ultimately had less time for his family. Sometimes, he would lose himself in thought for several hours on end, leaving his wife and three children worried. Then, suddenly, he would wake up and claim that he had solved the equation. One can imagine how depressing it would have been for his wife, who had spent all those years caring for him. Moreover, the constant presence of nurses and assistants by his side also worsened his relationship with his wife.
In the 1980s, Jane developed romantic feelings for another man. But she decided not to pursue her romantic feelings so as to stay with Hawking and look after him. Even though Hawking was initially okay with it, as time progressed, he started feeling that his wife had stopped loving him.
Moreover, he started liking one of his nurses. So, in 1990, he left Jane. In 1995, after they got divorced, he married Elaine Mason, the nurse he liked, despite his family members and friends being concerned about Hawking due to Elaine’s strong personality and protective nature.
Second marriage – (Picture credits – www.nzherald.co.nz)
An abusive marriage
After their marriage, Hawking’s family members felt more and more excluded from his life. And just like they feared, this marriage turned out to be a disaster.
In the eleven years that the marriage lasted, Elaine was often accused of abusing Hawking both physically and emotionally. Hawking even came to a hospital once covered in cuts and bruises. And when the doctors asked him how he got the injuries, he didn’t have an answer.
In 2003, Hawking’s daughter, Lucy Hawking, got a call from one of Hawking’s caregivers informing her about a severe sunburn. So, despite her father telling her earlier not to interfere in his marriage, she called the police.
So, a formal investigation was launched against Elaine.
She was accused of slamming Hawking’s wrist on his wheelchair and fracturing it, humiliating him by denying access to his urine bottle so that he would wet himself, damaging his cheek with a razor, letting him submerge under water while giving him a bath as a result of which water entered his throat where he had an operation decades earlier, abandoning him in the garden on the hottest day of the year for such a long time that he got heatstroke and suffered from severe sunburn.
Yet, despite all these accusations coming from so many people, Hawking himself denied being abused by Elaine and asked to be left alone.
But why did he do that?
Many people believe that his pride might have come in the way of the truth. After all, Hawking was one of the most famous scientists in the world. Yet, he needed help even to perform his daily bodily functions. It was a sad fact that would have been difficult for him to accept. So, coming out and telling that he had been abused by his wife would have been a final blow to his dignity.
In 2004, the police finally closed the case, unable to find enough evidence to convict Elaine. Two years later, Hawking and Elaine divorced silently. After that, he got closer with Jane, their children, and their grandchildren.
Other interests
But the changes in Stephen Hawking’s personal life did not affect his professional life. He continued his work on black holes and published many more books. The book he had earlier published, ‘The Brief History of Time,’ was made into a film by Steven Spielberg in 1992. However, it was not widely released.
Stephen Hawking has also appeared in several popular TV shows. The Big bang theory, The Simpsons, Star Trek, and Futurama are some of the famous TV shows he has starred in.
Stephen Hawking with the actors of Big Bang theory – (Picture credits – bbci.co.uk)
He has also lent his voice to Ad commercials for companies like BT, Intel, etc. In 2016, after appearing in an ad for Jaguar, he posted on Facebook,
You all know me as Professor Stephen Hawking, the physicist wrestling with the great concepts of time and space. But there is another side to me that you may not know: Stephen Hawking, the actor.
But besides his disability, his scientific brilliance, and his interest in acting, Stephen Hawking was also famous for one more thing – his habit of making wagers. Throughout his life, he made several wagers with other scientific minds over pressing scientific questions.
In 2007, he even flew in a zero-gravity aircraft and experienced brief stints of weightlessness.
Hawking during a Zero Gravity flight (Picture credits – NASA)
Disease worsens
While Stephen Hawking’s life was, without doubt, an interesting one, his disability worsened steadily. By 2005, it had worsened to the point where he couldn’t use his hands anymore. So, controlling his wheelchair was out of the question. Moreover, communicating by selecting words using his hands became impossible as well. So, his then-graduate assistant created a device called the cheek switch. It was attached to his glasses. Through an infrared beam, it could detect whenever Hawking tensed his cheek muscle.
Hawking’s communication device also got an upgrade. In the new version, there was a software program called EZ keys. In this new software, a cursor moved across the screen automatically through the letters of the English alphabet. Hawking had to move his cheek muscle to stop the cursor over the letter he wanted. Then, the software would bring up a list of suggestions for words starting with the letter Hawking selected. After that, Hawking would select the word he wanted by moving through that list. He had to repeat this process for every word he wanted to add to a sentence.
But as one could imagine, it was an extremely tedious and time-consuming process. It was made even more difficult by Hawking’s need for perfection. Hawking did not want to select just any words and finish the sentence. He wanted to select the perfect words to get the right message across. So, he could only communicate one or two words per minute. Therefore, in 2011, he asked Intel’s co-founder Gordon Moore for help.
Attempts at making Hawking’s life easier
So, Moore arranged a team of experts to meet Hawking. The team arrived at Hawking’s office and introduced themselves. But Hawking did not respond. So, one of them, Horst Haussecker, started explaining to Hawking why they were there. But 20 minutes into his speech, Hawking suddenly started speaking.
Pete Denman, another member of that team and a person who uses a wheelchair like Hawking, later recalled that incident. He said that Stephen Hawking
“welcomed us and expressed how happy he was that we were there. Unbeknownst to us, he had been typing all that time. It took him 20 minutes to write a salutation of about 30 words. It stopped us all in our tracks. It was poignant. “
So, the researchers tried various methods to make Hawking’s life easier. From devices that read his facial expressions to those that detected his eye movements to those that recognized his brain patterns, they tried everything. However, all those attempts failed. They couldn’t use Hawking’s eye movements to help him choose the words because his eyelids were constantly drooping. They couldn’t use the brain signals from Hawking because the signals from his brain were too weak compared to a normal person.
Finally, by the end of 2013, Intel came up with a working version that used an adaptive word predictor. Many of Stephen Hawking’s documents were incorporated into the system, which improved its predictive ability. In this system, once Hawking selected a character, the software predicted the word he wanted. Selecting that word would predict the next word in the sentence. For example, if Hawking chose the letter’ T,’ the software would predict ‘The.’ If Hawking selected ‘The,’ the software would predict ‘Black,’ and if he selected ‘Black,’ it would predict ‘Hole.’ This system finally made Hawking’s life a bit easier.
Since 2009, Hawking was not able to control his wheelchair anymore. So, the researchers also tried to modify it to suit his condition. They tried to create a joystick to steer the wheelchair. Hawking could control the joystick using his chin. But it did not work because engaging and disengaging the joystick was difficult since Hawking couldn’t use his neck muscles.
Death
As years passed, Hawking’s condition got worse. During his last years, he was often hospitalized, requiring the use of a ventilator because he couldn’t breathe properly anymore. On March 14th, 2018, he died peacefully at his home in Cambridge, aged 76, after having contributed so much to science and the human race.
Stephen Hawking’s popular books
The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time (1973)
A Brief History of Time (1988)
Black Holes and Baby Universes (1993)
The Universe in a Nutshell (2001)
On the Shoulders of Giants (2002)
A Briefer History of Time (2005)
God Created the Integers (2005)
George’s Secret Key to the universe and its sequels (2007 – 2016)
The Grand Design (2010)
My Brief History (2013)
Interesting facts about Stephen Hawking
Hawking has always been portrayed as a brilliant scientist who overcame his disability and made remarkable achievements. But sadly, there was another side to him as well. In the book ‘Hawking: the Selling of a Scientific Celebrity,’ Charles Seife reveals that side of Hawking. In 1999, Hawking tried to have Andrew Farley, a Ph.D. student, kicked off from Cambridge just because his research jeopardized Hawking’s belief of information being destroyed in black holes (the belief which Hawking himself changed later on in his life). But the university paid no heed to Hawking. So, Farley was eventually able to complete his Ph.D. But his confidence took a severe hit. Imagine admiring one of the most famous scientists in the world since childhood, and then, when you meet him, you end up getting bullied by him. It would devastate anyone. After this incident, Hawking also ended his long friendship with Farley’s Ph.D. supervisor, Hawking’s graduate student, several years earlier.
After Hawking was diagnosed with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, doctors told Hawking that he had only 2 years left on earth. Yet, defying everyone’s expectations, he lived for 55 more years. And by doing so, he became a symbol of hope and motivation for people with disabilities.
Hawking believed that technology was imperative for mankind’s survival. Yet, he could not bring himself to trust in Artificial Intelligence. In 2014, during the launch of the Centre for the Future of Intelligence at Cambridge University, he said, “Alongside the benefits, AI will also bring dangers, like powerful autonomous weapons, or new ways for the few to oppress the many.”
Hawking was a great fan of space exploration. He firmly believed that humans have to move to planets other than earth. During a conference in Norway in 2017, he said, “We are running out of space, and the only places to go to are other worlds. It is time to explore other solar systems. Spreading out may be the only thing that saves us from ourselves. I am convinced that humans need to leave earth.”
Even though his discovery of Hawking’s radiation was a remarkable achievement, it could not be observed due to its extremely low energy. So, Stephen Hawking never got a Nobel prize. But he won various other medals throughout his life. One of these is the USA Presidential medal of freedom, which Barack Obama awarded him in 2009.
When we think of Eugenics and Social Darwinism, the person who comes to our minds immediately is Charles Darwin. Many of us believe that Charles Darwin was behind these movements. Or, to be precise, Charles Darwin’s theories were behind them.Definitions:
Social Darwinism – The idea that believes in the ‘Survival of the fittest.’ Social Darwinists believe that people become better in society because they are the fitter individuals, i.e., the strong become rich and powerful, while the weak become poor and powerless.
Eugenics – The practice of improving the human race by selectively breeding individuals with desirable characteristics.
‘Survival of the fittest’
Most people believe that Darwin’s concept of ‘Survival of the fittest’ helped the 18th and 19th century Europeans justify their ill-treatment of the rest of the world. It provided these people a pedestal on which they could stand and think of themselves as the more fit race of the human species. Moreover, they could easily attribute their cruel behavior to the natural process of human evolution instead of acknowledging it as having learned it during their lifetime. All thanks to Charles Darwin. At least, that’s what most people think.
Did Darwin coin the term ‘Survival of the fittest’?
But the truth is, Charles Darwin never used the term ‘survival of the fittest’ as these people understood it. Indeed, he didn’t even coin the term.
Initially, when Charles Darwin published his abstract, ‘On the Origin of Species,’ he had used the term ‘Natural Selection.’ He had used it to denote the process through which the natural variations occurring in some individuals give them an advantage for survival and reproduction over the other individuals in a species. After all, this process was similar to farmers and pigeon breeders, who artificially selected the individuals to breed.
In 1864, after reading Charles Darwin’s abstract, Herbert Spencer, an English biologist, philosopher, and sociologist, coined the term ‘Survival of the fittest’ in his book ‘Principles of Biology.’
Charles Darwin in 1868 – By Julia Margaret Cameron – Reprinted in Charles Darwin: His Life Told in an Autobiographical Chapter, and in a Selected Series of His Published Letters, edited by Francis Darwin. London: John Murray, Albemarle Street. 1892.Scanned by User:Davepape, Public Domain, Link
In 1866, Alfred Russel Wallace, who had independently created an evolution theory that was similar to Darwin’s evolution theory, wrote to Darwin. He argued that Darwin’s use of the term ‘Natural Selection’ might give the readers the impression that nature actively selects the organisms that get to reproduce. He recommended the use of Spencer’s term ‘survival of the fittest’ instead as it would get rid of this ambiguity. Darwin, who had never thought about it before, confessed that Wallace’s argument made sense.
What did Darwin think about the term ‘Survival of the fittest’?
In the first four editions of his abstract, Darwin had used the term ‘Natural Selection.’ In his book, The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication, which Darwin published in 1868, he explains that the term ‘Survival of the fittest’ might be a better choice, at the same time revealing his reluctance to get rid of the term ‘Natural Selection.’ He writes,
This preservation, during the battle for life, of varieties which possess any advantage in structure, constitution, or instinct, I have called Natural Selection; and Mr. Herbert Spencer has well expressed the same idea by the Survival of the Fittest. The term “natural selection” is in some respects a bad one, as it seems to imply conscious choice; but this will be disregarded after a little familiarity.
In the fifth edition of ‘On the Origin of Species,’ published in 1869, Darwin uses the term ‘survival of the fittest’ as a synonym. He gives full credit to Spencer for this term and writes,
I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term Natural Selection, in order to mark its relation to man’s power of selection. But the expression often used by Mr. Herbert Spencer of the Survival of the Fittest is more accurate, and is sometimes equally convenient.
What did Darwin use this term for?
But Darwin only intended ‘Survival of the fittest’ to refer to genetic variations that have the highest rate of reproductive output. But by using the term ‘fittest,’ Darwin did not refer to the strongest individuals in a species.
Darwin never intended ‘survival of the fittest’ to mean that only the strongest individuals in a species can thrive, even though the literal meaning is just that. If you think about it, reproduction is the backbone of evolution, and survival is only one aspect of it. Moreover, physical fitness provides no advantage to an individual in an evolutionary sense if it doesn’t increase the individual’s chances of reproduction. So, when it comes to evolution, the ‘fittest’ individual in a species is neither the strongest one nor the fastest one, but the one that is better suited or adapted to survive and reproduce in the immediate, local environment. Hence, by putting all these together, one can understand that Darwin used the term ‘Survival of the fittest’ not to refer to the strongest individuals in a species but to the variations among individuals that produce the highest rate of reproductive output.
Hence, the argument put forth by Social Darwinists and Eugenists that evolution favors the survival of the strongest individuals in a species is ill-founded. And the claim that Darwin himself meant that is baseless.
Social Darwinism
Darwin neither created the concept of Social Darwinism nor supported it. Indeed, as one could imagine, he didn’t even coin the term Darwinism. The term Darwinism was coined by the English biologist Thomas Henry Huxley in 1861 after he read Darwin’s abstract.
Just like Darwin did not create the term Darwinism, he had nothing to do with Social Darwinism as well. Indeed, the two people who were instrumental in this movement were Herbert Spencer and Francis Galton, and not Charles Darwin.
In 1798, an English economist called Thomas Robert Malthus wrote an essay called ‘An Essay on the Principle of Population.’ In it, he puts forth the idea that as the population of a species increases, it would eventually outgrow food production. And when that happens, the weakest individuals will start dying due to starvation. This is the essay that helped Darwin figure out how evolution happens.
Who came up with the concept of social Darwinism?
Like Darwin, Herbert Spencer, too, read Malthus’ essay. Several years later, he read Darwin’s theory of evolution as well. Spencer was a polymath who believed that the natural laws discovered by biologists should not be limited to biology alone. He thought that these natural laws revealed an underlying universal order.
Hence, they could be applied to inorganic realms of life as much as to the organic realm. Therefore, the natural laws that are true in biology must also apply to other fields like human society, economy, the human mind, etc.
So, driven by his belief and motivated by Malthus’ essay and Darwin’s theory of evolution, Spencer started creating parallels between biology and sociology.
Herbert Spencer in 1893 – By [1]. The updated source is [2] and lists the following information: ; Source Smithsonian Institution Libraries, Public Domain, Link
In his book called ‘The Social Organism,’ which he published in 1860, he compares human society to a biological organism. He argues that just like organisms evolve through the process of natural selection, society evolves too. As a result of this evolution, one part of the society becomes rich and powerful, while the other part of the society becomes poor and weak. And it was normal for the rich to become richer at the cost of the poor becoming poorer.
Herbert Spencer and social Darwinism
Spencer believed that there was no need to correct society because it evolves automatically. Competition for survival and status was an evolutionary process essential for the betterment of the human race. And even though this evolution process creates unbearable pain for many individuals, it was necessary. So, he believed that the reforms for improving the lives of the weak and the poor actually came in the way of social evolution. Hence, he was against these social reforms and believed that they should be abolished. These beliefs led him to coin the term ‘survival of the fittest’ in his book ‘Principles of Biology’ published in 1864. Thus, Spencer contributed greatly to social Darwinism.
Many of the people who read Spencer’s books became convinced that the rich exploiting the poor was how nature meant it to be. Thus, Spencer’s views became popular, and by the end of the nineteenth century, Spencer had become one of the most influential people in Europe.
Eugenics
As Spencer’s concept of Social Darwinism was becoming popular in the late nineteenth century, another man came up with a more outrageous idea. That man was none other than Francis Galton, Charles Darwin’s cousin.
Who came up with the concept of eugenics?
Galton argued that institutions like mental asylums and welfare only helped the poor inferior people survive and reproduce at a higher rate than Britain’s superior, more-deserving wealthy class.
He thought this went against evolution. So, he proposed to improve the quality of the human race by getting rid of the poor and the weak. He called this elimination process eugenics.
Eugenics is taken from the Greek word eugenes which means well-born.
Francis Galton in the 1850s – Scanned from Karl Pearson‘s The Life, Letters, and Labors of Francis Galton., Public Domain, Link
Eugenics becomes famous in the USA
Even though eugenics never really got any support in England, it was a huge hit in the USA. During the 1920s and 1930s, books were published, and films were made in the USA promoting eugenics. Throughout the country, exhibitions were held, which conducted ‘better baby’ and ‘fitter family’ competitions.
Many eugenicists believed in Lamarck’s theory of Acquired Characteristics, which stated that the behavior an organism learns during its lifetime could be passed down to its offspring. So, morality, frugality, etc., could be passed down to children.
Positive and negative eugenics
Eugenicists divided eugenics into two types: positive Eugenics and negative Eugenics.
The goal of Positive Eugenics was to encourage the reproduction of people with desirable traits.
On the other hand, the goal of negative eugenics was to discourage/stop the reproduction of people with non-desirable traits. White people in the upper-middle-class and high-class societies were considered people with desirable traits. The traits of all the other people, like non-whites, poor, disabled, feeble-minded, widowed, criminals, and mentally unstable, became undesirable. Even among the white people, those belonging to Western and Northern European countries were considered desirable, whereas those belonging to Southern and Eastern European countries were considered undesirable.
Eugenics in the USA
The American Eugenics movement mostly focused on negative eugenics. And the US government actively supported it by enacting laws. These laws supported forced sterilization of the undesirables. Between the years 1907 and 1939, almost 30,000 people were sterilized against their will in the USA. Most of them were women, as women were expected to have high standards of morality to bear children. Moreover, in 1913, 29 US States prohibited mixed-race marriages because children born to parents of two different races were deemed inferior.
If you were an undesirable living in the USA at that time, your life was pretty much doomed. To show how terrible those times were for the undesirables, we have to look at a supreme court case. In 1927, a woman of lower economic status called Carrie Buck filed a case claiming that a rich young man had raped her. But instead of investigating the case properly, the supreme court ruled her feeble-minded and sterilized her against her will. It also ruled forced sterilizations as being federally legal.
Thus, the forced sterilizations in the USA devastated the lives of the people who were considered undesirable. But besides that, these forced sterilizations also had an added unexpected effect – They motivated an evil-minded man to take the route of destruction.
Hitler and Eugenics
In 1924, when Hitler was imprisoned after organizing a failed coup, he read about social Darwinism and Eugenics. Influenced by the ‘survival of the fittest’ concept of social Darwinism, he came to believe that the German master race had become weak because of the non-Aryans in Germany. So, he started forcefully sterilizing people who did not fit his pure-blooded Aryan stereotype – the Jews, Poles, Soviets, homosexuals, people with disabilities, etc. But what initially started out as a sterilization campaign soon turned into a genocide. In his book ‘Mein Kampf,’ Hilter points out the success of the American Eugenics movement. So, it’s obvious that he was at least partly motivated by it.
Eugenics falls out of favor
As the entire world watched Hitler’s actions with horror and disgust, eugenics started falling out of favor. Even though eugenics had started becoming irrelevant in the 1930s due to the difficulty in proving Lamarck’s theory, its association with Nazi propaganda is what that finally awakened many eugenicists. The same people who had once supported the negative eugenics movement with great vigor started calling for the end of eugenics and started promoting human rights for all citizens of the world instead. Thus, eugenics finally came to an end in the USA and many parts of Europe by the end of the second world war.
Eugenics, now
But sadly, eugenics hasn’t completely disappeared from this world. It is not a dead concept from the 19th century and 20th century.
Even in the 21st century, several countries continue to forcefully sterilize their people.
The research into genetics has led to the invention of Germline engineering, which can be used to alter the genes of an unborn baby. Even though it can be used to identify and treat genetic variations associated with particular diseases, it can also introduce desired variations into babies – something which can be misused by people with money to make their children genetically superior. Hence, such a process is not considered legal by law.
Was Darwin behind social Darwinism or eugenics?
After having read the negative impacts of social Darwinism and Eugenics, it is far easier to think that Darwin was behind these. But as pointed out before, the biggest contributor to social Darwinism was not Darwin but Spencer. And the person who invented eugenics was, again, not Darwin, but his cousin Galton.
Darwin’s views on slavery
Darwin was actually against the mistreatment of people who were considered inferior by the Europeans at that time. In the second chapter of his first book, ‘The Voyage of the Beagle,’ published in 1839, Darwin writes about his experience in Rio de Janeiro, in present-day-Brazil:
While staying at this estate, I was very nearly being an eye-witness to one of those atrocious acts which can only take place in a slave country. Owing to a quarrel and a lawsuit, the owner was on the point of taking all the women and children from the male slaves, and selling them separately at the public auction at Rio. Interest, and not any feeling of compassion, prevented this act. Indeed, I do not believe the inhumanity of separating thirty families, who had lived together for many years, even occurred to the owner. Yet I will pledge myself, that in humanity and good feeling he was superior to the common run of men. It may be said there exists no limit to the blindness of interest and selfish habit.
Here one can clearly see that Darwin was strictly against the institution of slavery. But it is not surprising, considering he descended from grandfathers who themselves fought against slavery in England. His forefathers on his mother’s side even created their own medallions that portrayed a shackled slave, with the saying, “Am I not a Man and a Brother.” So, it is understandable where Darwin gets his virtues from.
But he also adds the sentence,
Yet, I will pledge myself, that in humanity and good feeling he was superior to the common run of men.
Why he adds this sentence is hard to say. It might be because this man provided Darwin with a house to stay in during his travels, and Darwin did not want to tarnish his image completely. It might also be because he was educated, had a good standing in society, and could be considered a gentleman.
Darwin also shares another regrettable incident in this book.
I may mention one very trifling anecdote, which at the time struck me more forcibly than any story of cruelty. I was crossing a ferry with a negro, who was uncommonly stupid. In endeavouring to make him understand, I talked loud, and made signs, in doing which I passed my hand near his face. He, I suppose, thought I was in a passion, and was going to strike him; for instantly, with a frightened look and half-shut eyes, he dropped his hands. I shall never forget my feelings of surprise, disgust, and shame, at seeing a great powerful man afraid even to ward off a blow, directed, as he thought, at his face. This man had been trained to a degradation lower than the slavery of the most helpless animal.
On the 19th of August we finally left the shores of Brazil. I thank God, I shall never again visit a slave-country. To this day, if I hear a distant scream, it recalls with painful vividness my feelings, when passing a house near Pernambuco, I heard the most pitiable moans, and could not but suspect that some poor slave was being tortured, yet knew that I was as powerless as a child even to remonstrate.
Thus, Darwin makes it clear that he was made of a different caliber than many other Europeans of that time, who believed they were superior to other people and hence, had the right to abuse them. He actually hated slavery.
Darwin, social Darwinism and eugenics
But one could argue that the book was published in 1839, far before social Darwinism became a powerful force. After all, in 1859, Darwin named the Abstract ‘On the Origin of Species by the Means of Natural Selection, or, the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.’ So, doesn’t the use of the term ‘Preservation of Favored Races’ suggest that he supported social Darwinism? Well, actually… No.
Today, the term ‘Race’ is used to refer to a subset of a species. But at the time Darwin wrote the abstract, the terms Race and Species were synonymous. No difference existed between them. Therefore, Darwin wasn’t silently supporting social Darwinism, as people are led to believe nowadays. Indeed, he believed the opposite. Social Darwinism was based on the concept of competition among individuals in a species. But Darwin believed that as organisms evolved, they developed a sense of sympathy towards others. He made his beliefs public through his book, ‘The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex,’ published in 1871. In this book, he writes,
The following proposition seems to me in a high degree probable—namely, that any animal whatever, endowed with well-marked social instincts, the parental and filial affections being here included, would inevitably acquire a moral sense or conscience, as soon as its intellectual powers had become as well, or nearly as well developed, as in man. For, firstly, the social instincts lead an animal to take pleasure in the society of its fellows, to feel a certain amount of sympathy with them, and to perform various services for them.
As for Eugenics, Galton came up with the concept only one year after Charles Darwin’s death. Moreover, Darwin’s theory of evolution also doesn’t support social Darwinism or eugenics because Darwin used the concept of survival of the fittest purely in the biological sense of evolution. He never intended it to be applied to the social sense. So, from these pieces of evidence, I am led to believe that Darwin neither supported nor advocated social Darwinism or Eugenics.
The year was 1836. Charles Darwin had just returned home after spending five years on the HMS Beagle expedition. By then, John Stevens Henslow, Darwin’s botany professor, had already published the geological letters Darwin had sent him during his voyage as a pamphlet and sent it to famous naturalists in England. Moreover, the fossils and the plant, animal, and bird specimens Darwin had brought with him from his voyage, proved highly useful for zoologists. As a result, when he was just 27 years old, Darwin became famous among the scientific community in England.
But Darwin’s accomplishments did not stop there. After all, Darwin wasn’t satisfied with being the one who helped formulate the most accepted theory of evolution. He wanted to be the one who formulated it. So, he set himself up on the mission to find out how evolution happens.
The result of this mission was the Theory of Natural Selection and several other theories. In this blog post, we look at these theories of Darwin and find out which were correct and which weren’t.
Darwin’s theories that are considered correct
Theory of Natural Selection
According to Darwin, Natural Selection happens due to variations that occur in some individuals of a species. If these variations are favorable and help the individuals survive until they reproduce, their variations are passed on to the next generation. If they are not favorable, then these individuals don’t get to reproduce, and hence, their variations are not passed on to the next generation. Thus, favorable variations are passed down to successive generations, whereas unfavorable variations die out. This mechanism forms the basis of evolution. According to Darwin, two processes may happen as a result of natural selection.
Anagenesis
If a species keeps evolving continuously as a result of the favorable variations that occur in some individuals, then, after several hundreds or thousands of generations, the resulting species might be completely different from the original species. By that time, the original species would have completely disappeared. Darwin calls this process where one species completely replaces another species Anagenesis. In this process, the original species produces only one new species and does not branch out.
Speciation
A variation of the concept of Anagenesis is Speciation. While in Anagenesis, only one new species is formed by replacing the original species, in Speciation, many new species can be formed by replacing the original species, which may differ from each other significantly. This happens in species, where some populations migrate to areas with weather conditions that are different from their home region.
The populations that migrate might face different environmental conditions and survival threats. If these populations stay there in isolation from the original species and breed among themselves, then, after many generations, they may evolve differently when compared to the population that stayed back.
For example, if a population migrated to a warmer environment, individuals in that population might develop body features to survive in hot climates. On the other hand, the population that migrated to a colder environment might evolve to survive in colder climates. So, after hundreds or thousands of generations, these populations would have evolved so differently when compared to each other that they couldn’t breed with members of the other population anymore. So, they need to be classified as a new species altogether.
Evidences to support Darwin’s theories
Natural Selection was a revolutionary concept. Darwin knew that it would take the world by surprise. By postulating that species evolve into completely different species over time, he would be implying that humans evolved from animals too. It would upset many religious heads because it would go against their core belief that God created humans. So, providing convincing evidence to back his theory of evolution became important for Darwin. Therefore, he spent almost two decades gathering evidence for it.
But the time Darwin spent gathering evidence did not go to waste. When he finally published the 490-page abstract called ‘On the Origin of Species,’ he could quote examples from several fields, like paleontology, embryology, etc., as evidence to support his theory. Are you curious to find out what these pieces of evidence are? Then, keep reading.
Bio-geography (The geographical distribution of plants and animals)
One of the pieces of evidence that Darwin mentions in his books is the co-occurrence of several species of Galapagos Finches. Several species of these birds are found in the Galapagos, the group of isolated islands in the pacific ocean. The similarities between them suggest that they might have originated from a bird species in Central or South America, then migrated to these isolated islands, where they could have evolved into different species.
Embryology
Another example Darwin mentions in his books is the similarity between embryos. Darwin notes that during the initial stages of formation, the embryos of more evolved organisms like birds, animals, fishes, etc., appear similar to those of more primitive life-forms.
Taxonomy (The classification of life-forms)
Using the observable traits that organisms possess, biologists decide which organisms to group into the same family, species, etc. Darwin used the same technique to find out how evolution happened. He compared the traits of the life forms that existed during his time with those of fossils. Then, he deducted that the more similar traits a life form and a fossil shared, the closer they are linked through evolution.
The proofs we have now
Today, Darwin’s theory of evolution is widely accepted. The numerous fossils we have found over the ages serve as testimony to the correctness of his theory. By determining the age of the rocks in which these fossils are found, scientists are able to affirm one thing – The fossils of simple organisms are found in very old rocks, while the fossils of complex life forms are found in newer rocks. This proves that Darwin was correct in thinking that complex organisms evolved from simple organisms.
Darwin’s theories that are considered wrong
Thus, as you can see, Darwin provided convincing evidence to back his theory of evolution. Yet, many people didn’t accept it because there was a missing link in his theory. Even though Darwin postulated that evolution happened due to the variations that occur in individuals, he couldn’t say why it happened. And in his attempt to explain why these variations occurred, Darwin postulated a theory, which turned out to be very wrong.
Pangenesis
Darwin lived at a time when genetics wasn’t invented. So, to explain the missing link in his theory, Darwin proposed the theory of Pangenesis.
Darwin’s theory
According to this theory, the cells in our bodies shed super-tiny particles called Gemmules. When provided with the proper nutrition, these particles can grow into the cells from which they were shed. These Gemmules are dispersed throughout our bodies. The sexual organs collect gemmules from all parts of the body.
So, when individuals of opposite sexes copulate, Gemmules from both individuals mix. If the Gemmules from a body part of one parent has superior numbers, the corresponding features of the resulting offspring resemble that parent. When an offspring develops inside its mother, Gemmules must grow and attach to one another in the proper amount and right order for the baby to be born healthy. If that doesn’t happen, the baby may be born with congenital disabilities.
Darwin’s Pangenesis initially helped explain why children born to the same parents differ from each other. It also helped explain why children inherit features from parents, like hair color and diseases.
Darwin’s theory and Lamarck’s theory
But Darwin’s Theory of Pangenesis doesn’t end there. It also states that when a parent’s organ changes as a result of its behavioral changes, its Gemmules could be altered. These Gemmules could multiply and replace the old Gemmules. When these Gemmules are inherited by its offspring, their organs, too, are altered. The driving force behind this aspect of Darwin’s Pangenesis was Lamarck’s Theory of Acquired Characteristics. Lamarck’s theory of Acquired Characteristics states that when an organism changes its behavior in response to the environment, its organs change as a result. These changes are then inherited by its offspring.
We can also easily observe this in human beings. Even if a person works hard to build his body and runs marathons for several years, his children do not inherit these characteristics. They still need to work equally hard to achieve the same level of fitness.
Darwin tried to prove his theory through experiments. To prove Pangenesis, his cousin, Francis Galton, took the blood of a rabbit and injected it into another rabbit. If Darwin was right, then the offspring of the second rabbit should show the characteristics of the first rabbit. But that did not happen, and Darwin couldn’t prove his theory.
Moreover, Lamarck’s Theory of Acquired Characteristics was disproved several years later. And with it, Darwin’s Theory of Pangenesis, too, was disproved.
The correct reason behind genetic variations
But we now know that evolution has nothing to do with Darwin’s theory of Gemmules mixing together. It actually happens due to the genetic variations that occur in individuals. The cells in our bodies contain DNA, which contains genes from our parents. Every time a baby is formed, the genes of the parents mix together in a unique way. So, even siblings differ from each other significantly.
Moreover, when cells divide, they make copies of the DNA they contain. But this copying process is not always perfect. Sometimes, the copies of the DNA don’t come out perfect, thereby introducing mutation. Every person probably has so many mutations in their body that they can’t possibly keep track of.
These mutations and the genetic shuffling at birth create variations in individuals that make evolution possible.
Earth’s age
During the time Darwin lived, most Europeans believed in Bible’s statement that the earth was 6,000 years old. But Darwin did not think it was enough time for life to form and evolve to an intelligent life form. He believed that earth was definitely much older.
So, when a Scottish engineer called William Thomson proposed that the earth was 100 million years old, Darwin immediately embraced it. But Darwin’s bet turned out to be wrong since we know now that the earth is more than 4.5 billion years old.
The Tree of Life
Another thing that Darwin got wrong was the Tree of Life. The Tree of Life is a diagram that Darwin drew in 1837, portraying evolution as a single tree branching and re-branching. Darwin might have been correct in thinking that complex organisms evolved from simple organisms. But his idea of evolution as being a single tree, where one big branch (Of course, each branch denotes a species) branches into several small branches, and each of these small branches then branches into even smaller branches, turned out to be wrong.
Recent genetic tests on plants, animals, and bacteria reveal that several species frequently cross-breed with other species. This means that instead of genes being passed down from one big branch to several smaller branches beneath it in the same evolutionary path, they are also transferred between species on different evolutionary paths.
To make it easier to understand, Darwin thought that only individuals within a species (say A) breed with each other. So, when new species evolve from A (say A1, A2, A3), they contain genes from the individuals in species A. But in nature, individuals in species A breed with individuals from other species (say B) as well. So, the species that result from this cross-breeding (say AB1, AB2, AB3) will have genes from both species A and B.
An illustration showing the correct way to depict evolution (Left – Darwin’s method, Right – Recent method)
Hence, instead of representing evolution as a tree, it would be more apt to represent it as a web.
When Christopher Columbus landed in the Caribbean more than 500 years ago, he did not know that the American continent existed. He thought that he had landed in the Indies, which is how the Europeans used to call Asia back then. So, he referred to the people he met there as Indians.
Columbus made four voyages to the Americas. During these four voyages, he explored the Caribbean in great detail. He also explored the coastal areas of Central and South America to some extent.
The Spanish (and other European) explorers who came after him ventured deeper into other parts of the American continent as well – North America, Central America, and South America. They met different kinds of people there, like the Aztecs, the Maya, etc. These native populations were the original inhabitants of the Americas. But the Europeans defeated them, displaced them, and settled in the Americas.
As a result of this colonization and the European diseases, most of these native populations were almost wiped out. Only a very small portion of them remain today.
Over the past 500 years, these people have been given various names – Native Indians, Native Americans, American Indians, Amerindians, etc.
Today, we refer to these people as the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas.
But who were these people? Where did they come from? And, Why did they come to the Americas? Continue reading to find out.
Where did the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas come from?
The first humans came into existence more than two million years ago. Since then, our ancestors have evolved, moved to other parts of the world, and even created some impressive civilizations.
But while our ancestors were busy leaving their mark all around Europe, Asia, and Africa, the American continent remained untouched. It did not even see a single human for the most part of this human history. But all this changed in the last ice age, which ended around 11,700 years ago.
During the last ice age, the average global temperature was around 8°C lower than it is today. So, several countries were completely covered in ice and tall glaciers, and hence, were uninhabitable. But since so much water was in the form of ice, the global sea levels were significantly lower. As a result, a large area of land appeared between Alaska and Siberia, where the Bering Sea is today. You could consider this area as a bridge between Asia and America. Hence, it was called the Bering Land Bridge, or simply Beringia.
Beringia was a bit damper than its neighboring Siberia. So, it would have had lots of woody shrubs and trees. Hence, Beringia became an ideal environment for large herbivorous animals like bison and mammoths, according to Scott Elias, who reconstructs past climates and works as a professor in Royal Holloway, University London.
The early humans, who were hunter-gatherers, could have easily survived by hunting these animals. Moreover, they could have used the woody shrubs and tree barks to ignite the bones of these animals. After all, the bones of big animals have a lot of fat in their marrows, and fat can be burned.
Four types of woody plants: (A) Shrub, here with five stems, branching as in the basic model (about 50 cm tall). (B) Tree with the main stem throughout the plant. (C) Tree with a short main stem with many branches, forming most of the plant. (D) Tree with multiple stems. (C,D) are from Ceco.NET, (B) is from Natural Resources Canada (red alder; tidcf.nrcan.gc.ca), and (A) is from Researchgate.
But when did these people move to Beringia? How long did they live there? And when did they leave Beringia and move to the Americas?
These were some of the questions that were puzzling historians for the most part of the last century. But two significant discoveries made in the last two decades have helped them find the answers they were seeking.
But for them to become so genetically different from their Asian counterparts who stayed back in Siberia, they must have stayed somewhere completely isolated for thousands of years.
So, Erika and her colleagues theorized that the Asians who traveled to Beringia did not move to the Americas immediately. Instead, they stayed in Beringia for thousands of years. During this time, their genes changed completely. Their theory came to be known as the Beringian standstill hypothesis. It is one of the most widely accepted theories regarding the peopling of the Americas.
In 2017, Lauriane Bourgeon and her team found evidence of human life 24,000 years ago in the Bluefish caves in Western Canada. Since this is where Eastern Beringia was located, it proves that early humans moved to Beringia almost 24,000 years ago.
But at that time, the icy sheets covering various parts of the world were at their maximum heights. So, they couldn’t enter North America because Canada, completely covered in ice, would have blocked their entry.
Therefore, they might have stayed in Beringia for almost ten thousand years. Then, around 15,000 years ago, they started moving rapidly and settled in different parts of America.
Migration from Beringia to the Americas
There are different theories as to how they moved to different parts of America. When the ice started melting and the sea levels started rising 14,000 years ago, a corridor opened through the ice sheets in Canada and the northern USA.
This corridor was about 1500km long. But it wouldn’t have been suitable for human travel until 12,600 years ago. And when it became traversable 12,600 years ago, the Beringians could have walked through it and reached the southern part of North America.
So, these early humans might not have walked through the ice-free corridor, after all. Instead, they might have built primitive wooden boats and sailed along the Pacific coast long before the ice melted. Eventually, they would have reached the habitable parts of North and South America. There they settled and, several thousands of years later, became the Indigenous Inhabitants that Columbus saw.
Now that we know where the Indigenous people of the Americas came from let’s find out more about the different Indigenous Peoples and where they were located.
Caribbean Islands
Columbus met two types of people in the Caribbean. He named them the Caribs and the Arawaks. The Caribs were those who were friendly to him, and the Arawaks were those who were hostile to him.
Columbus claimed that the Caribs were cannibals who ate humans. But Caribs did not practice widespread cannibalism. They did not eat humans because they liked the taste of it. They did so as a part of a ritual. The Arawaks, too, had a similar custom.
But even if it wasn’t true, Columbus used his claim of Caribs being cannibals as a pretext to get permission from the Spanish monarchs to enslave these Indigenous Peoples.
Once he got permission, he enslaved these people. Then he demanded them to produce a fixed amount of gold or cotton every 3 months. Those who failed were tortured, raped, and killed. As a result, the populations of these two Indigenous Populations reduced considerably.
Today, only around 3,400 Caribs and 10,000 Arawaks are in existence today.
South America
Even though many Indigenous Peoples lived in South America, the most significant among them was the Inca. The Inca began as a small pastoral tribe in Cusco, in present-day Peru, around 1200 AD.
For the most part of their history, they were a small tribe. Only in the 15th century did they start expanding. But they expanded rapidly and became the most dominant culture in South America very quickly. But they didn’t stop there. They went on to establish the largest empire on earth at that time – The Inca Empire. And they did all this within a span of 100 years.
But even the largest empire on earth couldn’t escape from the evil clutches of the European colonists. Suffering from the European diseases and the torture inflicted by the colonists at the same time, the population of these native people fell by almost 93% within a century.
Today, the descendants of this native population live in South America. They are spread out across various countries – Columbia, Ecuador, Peru, and Chile.
Central America
The most significant Indigenous Peoples who lived in Central America were the Aztecs and the Maya.
A map of the Inca, Maya, and Aztec Empires (Picture credits)
Like the Inca, the Aztecs, too, rose to prominence very quickly. But they, too, were decimated by the European diseases and the Spanish conquest.
Today, in the 21st century, the descendants of the Aztecs live in the rural areas of Mexico. They mostly work as farmers or sell handcrafted items to make a living.
Unlike the Aztecs and the Inca, the Maya have a long history. They started as a small agricultural tribe in 1800 BC. But they gradually rose to prominence and established several powerful city-states around 250 AD. Each of these city-states housed 5,000 to 50,000 people. But even though these city-states shared cultural traits, they did not unite politically under a single empire. Instead, they competed among themselves as well as with other empires for power. Today, we collectively refer to these Indigenous Peoples as the Maya.
But despite the prosperity of these city-states, the Maya eventually abandoned most of them in the 9th century. The reasons for their actions are still not clear. But this native population crumbled far before the arrival of the Europeans. By the time the Europeans arrived, the remnants of a once-great civilization were trying to rebuild. So, it was easy for the Europeans to overpower them and defeat them.
Today, the descendants of the Maya can be found in several countries in Central America.
North America
Several Indigenous Peoples lived in North America before the arrival of Columbus. Among them, the Mississippian culture was the most prominent. It originated in the Mississippi River valley around 800 AD and slowly spread outwards.
But the Mississippian culture wasn’t a single tribe. Rather, it was a collection of several societies. Some of them were agrarian societies, while others were hunter-gatherer societies. In stark contrast, there were also societies whose people followed a sedentary lifestyle. But despite their differences, the peoples of the Mississippi culture followed similar traditions, like building large earthen mounds.
The Mississippian culture comprised a series of cities and satellite villages, which were interlinked by loose trading networks. Among these cities, the largest one was Cahokia, which would have been an important religious center back then.
But unlike the civilizations of Central and South America, the Europeans were not able to defeat these people easily. Indeed, they suffered high casualties and had to withdraw their attack. But the diseases they brought with them stayed back and decimated these peoples, who had no immunity against them. Each individual tribe in the Mississippi culture suffered greatly due to these diseases. This undermined their social structure, and many of these tribes later collapsed.
So, when the Europeans returned a hundred years later, many of these tribes had completely vanished, leaving vast areas of North America uninhabited.
Some of the societies which survived formed new tribes to respond to European colonization. In order to keep track of these different groups, geographers have classified them into different ‘culture areas.’ These culture areas are:
The story of Columbus‘ landing is one that most people in the American continent would be familiar with. Most people know that Columbus set sail with three ships from Spain in the fifteenth century. Upon landing in the Caribbean, he met two types of native peoples there – the Caribs and the Arawaks. The Arawaks were friendly people. On the contrary, the Caribs were hostile cannibals who ate human flesh. Most of us know that.
Columbus meeting the Indigenous People of the Caribbean (Picture credits)
But these were Columbus’ views, not the truth.
So, was Columbus actually telling the truth? Were Caribs really cannibals? Who were the Arawaks and Caribs really, and how did they live? Read on and find out.
Caribs and the Arawaks
The indigenous people who inhabited the Caribbean at the time of Columbus’ arrival were the Kalinago and the Lokono. Both these native populations came to the Caribbean islands from South America. They survived by fishing, hunting, and farming.
Neither of these American Indians had a written language. So, most of their faint history from this time comes from stories that were passed down orally through generations.
The Lokono was the indigenous population who inhabited the Caribbean initially. The Kalinagos and the Kalinas originally lived in South America. But centuries before the arrival of Columbus, the Kalinagos started migrating to the Caribbean. After hundreds of years of warfare, they managed to seize the southern islands of the Caribbean from the Lokono. Eventually, they started living there but were perpetually engaged in warfare against the Lokono.
The Lokono (Arawaks)
The Lokono lived by fishing, hunting, and farming. They used trickery to catch birds like ducks. The technique they used to catch these birds is fascinating.
The Lokono first let a number of calabashes, a tropical American fruit, float on the river. Then, he waited until the ducks got used to these fruits and considered them harmless objects. Once that happened, a Lokono male placed a calabash over his head and slipped into the water silently. Then, when he neared the duck, he pulled its legs until the bird drowned and died before putting it in a bag and taking it away.
Interesting, isn’t it?
Most of the Lokono were naked. But they wore gold in their noses and painted their faces and bare body parts. In some of the Caribbean islands, married women wore skirts around their waists.
Social organization
Their society was patriarchal. They practiced polygamy, with each man having two or three wives. The leader of the Lokonos was called Cacique and had as many as 30 wives. It was a great honor to be married to the leader. Hence, his wives wore longer skirts, portraying authority.
They built their houses using wooden posts, grass, and other materials. Around 10 to 15 men lived in each house, with all their wives and entire families. So, each house had around 100 people. Only the Cacique, the Lokono chief, lived in a separate house with his wives. But since he had a lot of wives and children, his house would have around 100 people. The title of Cacique was passed down from father to son.
The Lokono were people who loved peace. But since they had to fight the Kalinagos often, they had to defend themselves. So, they had weapons like poisoned arrows, war clubs, and spears with fish hooks attached on one end.
Despite being peaceful folk, the Lokono had slaves too. They used their prisoners as slaves. These slaves were made to do jobs, which the members of the tribe were not expected to do. But slavery was not passed on to successive generations. Slavery was just a way for the Lokono to make their prisoners work hard before accepting them into their tribe.
The Kalinago (Island-Caribs)
In contrast, the Kalinago were people who emphasized on fighting. Their culture honored physical powers and individualism. Kalinago groups often fought against other Kalinago groups and also against the neighboring Lokonos. After their battles, they took the Lokono women as slave-wives and killed the men.
Like the Lokono, the Kalinago, too, wore little to no dress. But they painted their bodies to appear fierce and ate a lot of pepper to become fierce. They used weapons like poisoned arrows, burning arrows, and other weapons deadlier than those of Lokono.
The Kalinago started training their children to fight from a very early age. Almost always, the initiation began by teaching the children to bear the pain.
When a boy reached puberty, the Kalinago scratched his body with animals’ claws and rubbed pepper in the wound. If the boy flinched, he was trained to become a priest. If he didn’t, he was trained to become a warrior.
Social organization
The Kalinago chief was chosen based on his skills in battle. The Kalinagos lived mostly separated by gender. The men in the village lived together in a large building, where they trained. The women, on the other hand, lived in many smaller houses. The women mostly met their husbands only when they brought food for them.
The Kalinago were expert swimmers for whom fishing and sea trading were very important. They were also skilled boat-builders, sailors, and navigators who could remember the way to several islands by heart.
The Kalina (Mainland-Caribs)
The Kalina was an indigenous population who lived in the northern coastal areas of South America. They may have been related to the Kalinaga. But they were not as aggressive as the Kalinaga.
They spent their day growing crops like cassava and hunting using a bow and arrow. They lived in small settlements.
Historically, the Kalina and Kalinaga were thought of as being related to each other. So, the Europeans started calling them as Mainland-Caribs because they lived in the mainland of South America, whereas the Kalinago were called Island-Caribs because they lived in the Caribbean islands (More on why Kalinago came to be known as Caribs later on).
The Lokono, The Kalinago, and the Spanish conquest
When Columbus came to the Caribbean, he first met the Lokono, who were friendly to him. As he sailed further south, he met the hostile Kalinagos, with whom he did not get along well.
There was a Lokono settlement in a village called Aruacay. The people he met there were very friendly to the Spanish explorers and offered them gifts. For reasons unknown, the Lokono people who lived in Aruacay started calling themselves as the Aruacas to differentiate themselves from the hostile Kalinagos and show to the Spanish that they were a friendly group. With time, the term Aruaca became Arawak, the peace-loving people of the Caribbean.
The term ‘Carib’ was supposed to mean brave. And the Kalinagos were brave for standing up against the Spanish conquerors. So, they came to be known as Caribs. But for Columbus, brave meant aggressive. So, he created a myth that Caribs were people-eating savages to get the authorization for acquiring them as slaves. He even used their name to create the term Caniba, which would eventually become the term Cannibal in English. But in reality, Caribs were not cannibals.
The human flesh-eating Ritual of the Caribs
The Caribs ate human flesh only during rituals. The Caribs believed that eating a small amount of human flesh would give them the characteristics of the deceased person. This belief was central to their culture.
So, they ate small amounts of flesh before wars so that their warriors can obtain the characteristics of their enemies, and during initiation, so that young boys can become brave like deceased heroes. They also kept the bones of their victims as trophies.
But these customs were not practiced by the Caribs alone. The Arawaks had similar customs as well. But neither of these indigenous groups practiced widespread cannibalism, as Columbus claimed.
But Christopher Columbus’ propaganda, despite being untrue, helped him obtain permission from the Spanish monarchy for procuring slaves. In 1503, Queen Isabella gave permission to capture the so-called cannibals. She believed that it was the only way to protect the Arawaks, who, according to her, were now her subjects. It was also the first step to convert the Caribs into civilized human beings.
But we all know what happened after that. Her permission created an urgency among the Spanish explorers to find as many Caribs as possible. And since Arawaks had similar customs as well, Arawaks were also captured. Then the captured Arawaks and Caribs were made to work as slaves in their own homeland. Most of them died due to abuse, the inhuman working conditions, and the diseases the Spanish brought with them, to which they had absolutely no immunity.
Are there any Caribs and Arawaks left today?
Today, not a lot of Caribs and Arawaks are left.
Where do the Caribs live today?
Only around 3400 Caribs are alive today. Of these, only 60 consider themselves pure Caribs. They live as one of the minorities in Dominica.
A picture of some Caribs in 1892 – By Roland Bonaparte – Photothèque, Musée de l’Homme, Paris. (Photo scanned from the book Pau:wa itiosan:bola: Des Galibi à Paris en 1892.), Public Domain, Link
The Dominican government has built primary schools, water, and health facilities for these people in their territories. They also have a police station that employs three people, who are mostly Caribs.
But there are no secondary schools in the Carib territories. So, understandably, the unemployment rate is very high there.
As a result, the incomes of these people are lower than the Dominican national per capita income. They survive mostly by farming their land collectively and selling handicrafts they made to tourists.
They are primarily concentrated in Venezuela, Suriname, Guyana, and French Guiana. More Arawaks live in the interior parts of South America as well. Unlike other indigenous communities, the population of Arawaks has been growing steadily in the last few years.
The Inca were one of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas who established the Inca Empire. By 1400 AD, they were a small tribe. But by the time Christopher Columbus landed in the Caribbean a hundred years later, they had established a mighty empire in South America. Their empire stretched across parts of Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Chile. It was the largest empire on earth at that time, with almost 10 million people living under its banner.
But how did such a small tribe rise to prominence so fast? How could they defeat the other kingdoms in that area so easily? Read this blog post to find out.
Origin
The ancestors of the Inca were the People from Siberia who first migrated to Beringia 24,000 years ago. These people stayed in Beringia for thousands of years and then moved to different parts of the American continent.
Some of these people reached South America too. There, they learned to cultivate crops like corn, potato, and cotton. Then, between 3000 BC and 2500 BC, they started to domesticate animals like llamas and alpacas. These animals served as a good source of meat and wool and could carry almost one-fourth of their weight. So, they proved highly beneficial for food, clothing, and carrying goods.
Thus, keeping farming and animal husbandry at their core, several complex societies originated in this area. These complex societies eventually gave rise to different cultures, which are collectively called the Andean civilizations.
The Inca were one of such different cultures that began as a small tribe. In the 12th century, searching for land to farm, they came to Cusco, a city in present-day Peru. Since the soil there was fertile, they settled there.
But even though the Inca came to Cusco in the 12th century, nobody knows where they were before that. We only have the Inca origin myths to rely on, which were passed through generations of the Inca orally.
According to this myth, the Inca were created by their sun god Inti. After creating them, Inti sent his four sons and four daughters to earth. They came to earth through a cave. This cave was located in the center of the line along which two other caves were located. From the other two caves, people carrying seeds came out. These people would eventually become the ancestors of the Inca today.
These four brothers and four sisters were supposed to lead the Inca and show them where to settle.
One of these brothers had magical powers and was too strong. So, afraid of him, the other brothers tricked him into entering a cave and closed its entrance. After this incident, one of the other brothers climbed the cave and proclaimed that he would look after the Inca. Once he proclaimed that, he turned to stone. Looking at all this fuss, one of the two remaining brothers left the Inca and started his own journey. So, finally, only one brother, Ayar Manco, was left. He eventually married his older sister, who bore him a son.
Ayar Manco carried a magic staff made of gold. This magic staff would show the Inca where to settle. So, the Inca started traveling, searching for a place where this staff would sink into the ground.
Cusco
When they reached the valley near Cusco, Ayar Manco’s staff sank into the ground. So, taking it as the divine sign they were waiting for, the Inca decided to settle there. But there were people already living there. Therefore, the Inca fought against these people, chased them out of their land, and settled in Cusco around 1200 A.D.
After this victory, Ayar Manco came to be known as Manco Cápac, the one who founded the Inca.
This is one of the four myths that explain where the Inca came from. The Inca didn’t have a writing system. These myths were only passed down through generations of the Inca orally. So, nobody knows which of these myths to believe in.
The Inca Empire
But regardless of which myth was true, the Inca settled in Cusco around 1200 AD.
Initially, the Inca were a pastoral tribe. They were shepherds who tended to Llamas and Alpacas. They roamed far and wide, looking for a place for these animals to graze.
But the place where the Inca settled, Cusco, was located between two empires that existed earlier. These empires had already built the infrastructure needed to expand and maintain the areas under their control. So, when the Inca started expanding, they didn’t have to build everything from scratch. The roads, the hydraulic systems, and other systems the Inca needed to establish an empire were already partly in existence.
So, utilizing this already available infrastructure, the Inca started to expand.
Viracocha
The Inca’s expansion began during the rule of their fourth emperor Mayta Capac. This expansion continued over several generations, and by the time their eighth emperor Viracocha Inca came to power, they had become a truly expansive tribe. Viracocha is the Inca ruler who introduced the custom of leaving some of his soldiers behind in conquered lands. This practice helped the Inca make sure that the conquered lands were loyal to them.
Pachacuti Inca Yupanqui
In 1438, when Chancas, enemies of Inca, attacked Cusco, Viracocha escaped to a military outpost. His son Urco, who was to become the next Inca king, also fled the capital with his father.
But for Viracocha Inca’s third son, Cusi Inca Yupanqui, who had no claim to the throne, it was a brilliant opportunity to display his talent. So, he refused to abandon the capital. Instead, he and his other brothers rallied the armies and launched a desperate defense.
The Inca revered Yupanqui greatly for not running away even when fighting was futile. So, they stood up against the invaders and fought alongside Yupanqui very bravely. Yupanqui was able to inspire the Inca so much that it was said that even the stones in Cusco rose up to fight on his side. As a result, the Inca defeated the Chancas decisively and captured many of their leaders.
After winning the war and the hearts of his people, Inca Yupanqui demanded to be made the next emperor. But his father Viracocha refused and tried to assassinate him instead. When the assassination attempt failed, Viracocha fled the country.
Inca Yupanqui became the next Inca emperor and renamed himself Pachacuti, which meant the ‘Earth Shaker.’ Pachacuti would eventually become one of the most influential Inca rulers, transforming the Cusco kingdom into Tawantinsuyu, the far-reaching Inca Empire.
Expansion of the Inca Empire
Pachacuti expanded the borders of his empire through both conquest and friendship. He used a simple process for this purpose.
First, he sent spies to the kingdom he wished to conquer. Once his spies returned with information about the kingdom, he sent luxurious gifts to its ruler, stating the advantages of joining the Inca Empire. If the ruler accepted the gifts, his kingdom was peacefully annexed into the Inca Empire. The rulers of most kingdoms accepted Pachacuti’s proposal.
But If the ruler refused to accept his proposal, Pachacuti sent a threat of war.
If the ruler still did not give up, Pachacuti defeated the kingdom through military conquest. He then executed its leaders and brought their sons to Cusco to teach them about the Inca culture. Once they have grown up and learned about the Inca culture, they were sent back to rule their kingdoms. Thus, Pachacuti converted his enemies into Inca nobility, and at times, even married off Inca women to them to ensure their loyalty.
But as Tawantinsuyu grew larger, the chances that a conquered tribe would rebel increased. So, in such cases, when Pachacuti sensed that a conquered ethnic group would rebel, he allegedly displaced thousands of its people and redistributed them into the farthest regions in his empire so that they could have no chance of organizing a rebellion.
Thus, Pachacuti and his successors expanded the borders of the Cusco kingdom and transformed it into the mighty Inca Empire. But conquering the regions was only one aspect of a great empire. The more important aspect was to incorporate the conquered lands into the empire.
Pachacuti knew that very well. So, he reorganized the government by transforming the Cusco kingdom into Tawantinsuyu.
The Inca government
In the system of Tawantinsuyu, the Sapa Inca, the sole ruler, was at the core. He had absolute power in the Empire. He lived in the Inca capital Cusco, which was practically an impenetrable stronghold because of the fortresses Pachacuti had built there to withstand enemy attacks.
Surrounding the capital on four sides were the four Suyus, the four regions of the Inca Empire.
Each Suyu was further divided into provinces called Wamani. Most of these provinces were actually tribes that had previously been conquered by the Inca. Each of these provinces, in turn, was subdivided into several factions. The smallest entity of the Tawantinsuyu was the Ayllu.
Each Ayllu functioned as an individual unit. Therefore, even though each Ayllu consisted of several families, in reality, an Ayllu was just like a big family.
The government allocated land to each Ayllu based on the number of people in that Ayllu. In return, each Ayllu had to pay tax to the government.
Inca taxation system
There were two types of taxes that the Ayllu paid to the government. The Inca didn’t have a currency. So, they didn’t pay money to the government. Instead, they paid taxes in other ways.
The first tax they paid to the government was a portion of their crops. The crops they gave as the tax was then divided into three parts. The first part went to the government, the second part went to the priests, and the final part went to the people.
The second tax they paid to the government was in the form of labor. They paid this tax by working for the government. They built roads, constructed buildings, mined gold, and even worked as warriors for the army.
In return for their labor, the Inca people were provided feasts on special occasions by their ruling authority. After all, the Inca didn’t use any form of money. And they didn’t need it either, because there were no markets or shops in the Inca Empire. So, there was nothing they could buy. All their requirements, like food, clothes, and tools were provided by the government. Therefore, the feasts served as the payment for their labor.
Thus, by establishing such a well-defined hierarchical government, the Inca emperor was able to rule such a vast empire.
The Inca social structure
The vast empire of the Inca was formed by conquering various tribes. So, even though it was just one empire in name, more than a hundred ethnic groups lived under its banner. Hence, to bring all of its 12 million inhabitants with varied ethnic origins into one system, the Inca followed a strict social structure.
This hierarchical social system assigned each person in the empire to one of the four classes:
At the top of the hierarchy was the Inca emperor. The Inca believed that their king was the son of their sun god. So, he was the wealthiest, most powerful, and most respected person in the entire kingdom. He had several wives and children. The Inca called him Sapa Inca.
The Royalty
Below the king was the Royalty. The king’s family and his relatives formed this class of the Inca. They enjoyed all the luxuries in the kingdom and were the most respected people after the king.
The Nobility
The next class in the Inca social system was Nobility. Nobility could be achieved either by blood relations or by showing distinction in one’s service to the empire. This category included high priests, the army commander, army generals, other special military members, architects, artisans, and local leaders. These people enjoyed several privileges.
For example, the local leaders were considered important, and hence, commoners brought gifts to them often. The king considered them essential as well. Therefore, he exempted them from paying taxes. Thus, local leaders enjoyed several privileges both from the king for whom they worked as well as the commoners whom they governed.
The Commoners
Most of the population of the Inca fell under the remaining social class – the Commoners. This was the lowest class in the social hierarchy of the Inca. As the lowest social class, the commoners received only low wages even when they did all the hard manual work in the empire. Farmers, shepherds, servants for nobles or royal families, and slaves were considered commoners.
How did the Inca Empire grow so rapidly?
Besides their efficient government, strict social structure, and intimidating military, there were also other factors that contributed to the Inca’s rapid growth.
1. Extensive roadways
The Inca had an extensive network of roads, whose length added up to 15,000 miles. But strangely, commoners were not permitted to use Inca roads. Only the King, Royal people, and Nobles were allowto use the roads. The other category of people who were permitted to use these roads were Relay runners. They were messengers who covered almost 150 miles/day, to relay information from one corner of the empire to another.
2. A superior farming system
The Inca Empire spread over four different climate zones. Hence, their agricultural produce was diverse. The Inca were initially a pastoral tribe. But as they conquered nearby tribes and their empire grew, they learned and developed several farming techniques. These techniques helped them maximize their harvest.
They transformed the land by creating canals, irrigation networks, terracing, and draining the water out of wetlands. They also fertilized the land with llama dung, fish heads, etc., and rotated their crops regularly. These techniques helped them increase their agricultural produce and feed more people easily.
But despite their innovative techniques, storms, floods, and droughts destroyed their crops. In such cases, Inca’s talent for preserving food came into play.
The Inca built tens of thousands of stone storehouses across their empire. They were circular or rectangular in shape and were built in such a way that food items could be stored there for two to four years. The Inca didn’t have a writing system. Yet, they kept perfect track of the food items stored in these storehouses by using a recording device made using strings and knots.
3. Expertise in architecture
The Inca were expert architects. They utilized the natural landscape and the locally available resources to build long-lasting structures.
Machu Picchu, one of the seven wonders of the world, stands testimony to the Inca’s expertise in architecture. The Inca built the entire site just by cutting stones and placing them one over the other with nothing but gravity to hold them together. And the fact that they did it without using wheels or iron tools makes it an even more astonishing feat. Yet, even though they built it using a simple technique, Machu Picchu has survived for more than half a millennium.
Stone walls of a building in Machu Picchu
The Inca built this city on a hill that receives almost two meters of rainfall every year. So, they created a perfect drainage system that not only drained the water effectively without eroding the soil but also used a part of the water for irrigation.
But it is not clear who built it and when they built it. But historians believe that Pachacuti might have built it in the 15th century as a summer resort house.
4. Religious tolerance
The Inca were highly religious people. Everything they did had a religious meaning behind it.
The Inca prayed to many gods. Among them, their sun god Inti was the most important. They built the Qurikancha temple for him at Cusco, where the first Inca settled. It was the most important temple in the Inca Empire.
The Inca believed in reincarnation. They believed that the body needed to be preserved so that the soul can peacefully pass on to the afterlife. So, they mummified their dead and buried them along with valuable jewelry, textiles, etc. During ceremonies, they took out these mummies and even fed them food as if they were feeding a living person.
Picture of an Inca mummy
The Inca also sacrificed people and even children, mostly during distressing times like the death of their emperor or severe drought.
But despite having such strict religious beliefs, they also let the conquered tribes follow their own religious beliefs. They even incorporated the gods of the conquered tribes into their religion. In return, the conquered tribes had to respect the Inca gods more than their own gods.
Thus, the Inca practiced religious tolerance to a certain degree. It was a prominent force in bringing people of different ethnicities together and making them feel like part of a big empire.
Thus, by using such methods, the Inca grew rapidly and established the largest empire within a span of hundred years.
The downfall of the Inca Empire
The downfall of the Inca Empire began with the Spanish arrival. When the Spanish invaders landed in Central America, they spread deadly diseases like smallpox and influenza. These diseases spread like wildfire and reached South America too.
As a result, a big portion of the Inca population died, leaving the Inca civilization crippled. As more and more people in the working class died, agricultural output reduced.
Moreover, due to the death of the relay runners who relayed information, Inca’s communication network was severely damaged. So, it became impossible for the ruling class to tell if their territories were attacked.
The Civil war
But the biggest thorn in the flesh came in 1527 when the then Inca ruler Huayna Capac and his eldest son and heir to the throne Ninan Cuyochi died due to smallpox. Due to their deaths, the Inca Empire was left without an emperor.
So, a fight for power began. The two people involved in this power struggle were Huayna Capac’s younger son Huascar and his illegitimate son Atahualpa. Even though Huascar had the right to the throne, Atahualpa was skilled than him in warfare.
Since they couldn’t reach an agreement, the country split into two factions, and a civil war started. After five long years, the civil war ended with the loss of several lives and the victory of Atahualpa.
Spanish Conquest
Thus, in 1532, the Inca Empire finally had a leader. But the empire was completely exhausted due to the diseases and the civil war.
It was at this time that the Spanish invaders led by Francisco Pizarro went to meet Atahualpa. Atahualpa thought it was a peaceful meeting arranged by the newcomers to show their respect to the king.
But the Spanish gave him a copy of the Bible and asked him to swear his allegiance to the Spanish monarchy instead. Atahualpa became angry and threw the Bible away. Taking his action as an excuse, the Spanish killed Atahualpa’s guards.
Atahualpa understood that the Spanish were not there for a peaceful gathering but only for gold and silver. So, he offered to give them a room full of gold and two rooms full of silver if they let him go free. But the Spanish took the money and arrested him.
One year later, the Spanish executed Atahualpa. Then, they attacked Cusco. Even though the Inca had superior numbers, the Spanish had better weapons. So, the Spanish defeated Cusco.
Then, wanting to maintain peace in Cusco, the Spanish installed Manco Inca, Atahualpa’s brother, as a puppet king. But the plan backfired, and Manco Inco was overthrown in 1536. Thereafter, Manco Inca escaped into the mountains. There, he created a government that survived for 36 years. In 1572, the Spanish conquerors captured and executed Manco Inca’s son, thereby bringing an end to his government.
Thus, the mighty Inca Empire came to an end.
Where do the Inca live today?
After the Inca Empire fell, the Europeans started abusing the Inca in all ways imaginable. They enslaved, tortured, raped, and killed the Inca people mercilessly. This resulted in the deaths of thousands, if not millions of the Inca.
But more Inca died due to smallpox and measles, the diseases the Europeans had brought with them. These diseases occurred in three outbreaks during the 16th century in South America. First, a smallpox outbreak occurred, then a measles outbreak, and then both of them occurred together. These diseases affected children as well, thereby affecting the succeeding generations too.
Moreover, in the name of converting the masses into Christianity, Europeans also destroyed the Inca religion and culture.
But despite the inhuman treatment leashed out against them, the Inca have not completely vanished. Their culture has also survived.
The Inca traditions and practices are still followed in some countries in South America. Up to ten million people in South America, from Columbia to Chile, speak the Inca language Quechua. The textiles and dishes they make are famous across the world. Their monumental archaeological site Machu Picchu also attracts millions of tourists every year. All these things are reminders of the great civilization that once flourished in these areas.