Peter Kafka (astrophysicist)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peter Kafka (born June 29, 1933 in Berlin ; † December 23, 2000 in Unterföhring near Munich ) was a German astrophysicist who was later known primarily as a technology critic.

Life

Kafka studied physics in Erlangen and Berlin from 1952 to 1957 . After a break in his studies until 1962, he obtained his diploma (in astrophysics) from Arnulf Schlueter in Munich in 1965 and then worked for a year as an assistant at the university. From 1965 to 1998 he was a research assistant at the Max Planck Institute for Physics and Astrophysics in Munich, later in Garching .

In the 1970s, Kafka worked in Heinz Billing's department with gravitational wave experiments - among other things, he was one of those who tried in vain (with the search for coincidences in detectors in Munich and Frascati) to reproduce Joseph Weber's experiments and thus had doubts about the results pulled.

In addition to scientific work in cosmology and relativistic astrophysics (e.g. quasars ), Kafka has worked as a journalist on the nature of progress since the 1960s . He warned of a "global acceleration crisis" that was laid out in the creation principle of evolution and would be realized in our time through the accelerated and at the same time globalized progress of human civilization.

In view of his extensive lecture activities on this topic, Peter Kafka self-ironically called himself a “traveling preacher”. However, he was not a culturally pessimistic “doom preacher”. He emphasized that crisis does not mean “doom”, but “decision”, and that the decisive reorientation in the consciousness of a sufficiently large number of people, which until now could only have been a utopia, would be likely at the height of the crisis .

In 2000, shortly before his death, Kafka was awarded the Munich Glow Medal.

Criticism of progress

Kafka diagnosed an increasing destabilization of the life-friendly ecosystem of the earth due to the changes brought about by the globalized, accelerated progress of human culture. To explain this, he subjected evolution on earth - the “principle of creation” - and the effects of cultural progress to a system-theoretical approach. He identified two stability criteria for “upward” progress, which he summarized under the catchphrase “variety and leisurely”. If these stability criteria were violated by the ever accelerated progress of a globally more uniform civilization, progress would no longer lead to “higher” complexity, but would tumble “downwards” into an increasingly complex chaos. Mankind has now reached this critical stage of earthly evolution.

Principle of creation

The reality on earth is a complex dynamic system that organizes itself. The history of this system is not predetermined. Since the earth is not an energetically closed system in which the entropy can only increase, but an open system with a constant inflow of free energy (from the sun) and unblockable outflows for the generated entropy (in the dark night sky), the observed rise to ever greater complexity and order was probable from the outset because it was possible to feel for attractive figures ( attractors ) for a very long time with many independent experiments .

Kafka describes an essential system-theoretical aspect of evolution using the picture of the “days of creation”: “After opening a new area in the space of possibilities, one has to 'fidget' for a long time until everything is 'very good', namely 'fits together in a viable way'. When a 'new day' dawns, the building blocks that were developed on earlier 'days' and held together by stronger forces of interaction are not abolished, but are joined together with weaker forces of interaction to form larger, more complex structures ”.

Diversity and comfort

The variety of tried and tested design or reaction options is a prerequisite for the error-friendliness of the system and its "resistance" (resilience) to malfunctions. A disruption can probably be compensated for or even open up new possibilities. The “goodness” of an innovation is proven by its time-tested reliability. There is no other criterion.

Leisurely means: time to prove yourself. A system that is dependent on organizing and regenerating itself needs time for learning and testing processes. If a complex dynamic system changes so quickly that more and more innovations are based on the untried, then the error rate increases exponentially with each innovation, and the probability that the system can cope with the increasing problems quickly approaches zero. There is a critical upper limit to the speed with which a spatially self-contained system such as the biosphere can change globally without falling into instability.

Global acceleration crisis

In a spatially closed area, this successful creation principle must lead to a crisis, because the organization on a large scale and the higher speed of innovation have a selective advantage - until the corresponding critical limits are reached. Then accelerated global innovation lets reality in the realm of possibility rush forward so quickly that it is unlikely to find any more reliable attractive figures.

The spatial critical boundary of the earth is its "globality"; The critical limit of the speed of innovation is defined by the cycle duration (generation duration) of the "leading figures" themselves (it is probably exceeded if the world they got to know as a child appears to be "outdated" before they themselves have children) . This limit was not yet achievable with the principles of biological evolution, but it was after the development of the cerebrum and the discovery of scientific and technical possibilities. The high speed of innovation makes testing and proving impossible, the race between problem solving and problem generation becomes unstable, the “mismatch” of the new and the old is spreading faster and further into the hinterland of the evolutionary front. Not only do powerful social guiding principles prove to be no longer sustainable, but even the radiation budget of the atmosphere and the entire biosphere are threatened.

Overcoming the global acceleration crisis

Kafka saw this global systemic crisis, already based on the principle of creation and realized by man, as inevitable, but probably surmountable. The overcoming would lie in a “constitutional bondage to strong interactions”, that is, in the fact that the power of the “big and fast” would be limited by (democratically legitimized) guard rails for politics and economy and thus the logical prerequisites for “upward” progress globally remained secured. This included consistent ecological taxes (“entropy taxes” and “size limitation taxes”) as well as the “liberation of the market economy from capitalism ” in order to end the economic growth pressure and the competition for the appropriation of foreign livelihoods. Based on Silvio Gesell and Dieter Suhr , Kafka u. a. a reform of the monetary system through circulation security and the fair distribution of the income without performance.

“At the height of the global acceleration crisis it becomes clear that the organizational overcoming of the competition for livelihoods would also be more rational in the usual sense. It is no longer a dream or a religious utopia. Almost everyone, even today's representatives of power, would have more advantages than disadvantages. It would not require massive overturns. Relatively small regulatory interventions at some leverage points, especially in monetary, property and tax law, would be enough to let the whole of humanity tip 'almost by itself' into a more humane state. The obsessive notion that power competition between people is to a certain extent unavoidable under natural law and therefore cannot be hindered by cooperation must first be dispelled from the minds. - The overturning will happen in a similar way as we know it from 'phase transitions' in much simpler systems: When approaching a 'critical point', local conditions at some point first make it clear that the previously attractive guiding ideas are no longer applicable. Problems arise that lead to more violent fidgeting. With the associated probing of neighboring possibilities, reality finds its way into the catchment area of ​​a further idea, whose internal organization dampens the fidgeting so much that it is not easily abandoned again. The point at which this transition was successful then becomes the germ cell from which the entire system, which is also close to the critical point, is stimulated to overturn into the new, more viable form. - The reality that is at stake now - what is happening in 6 billion human brains - is unimaginably complex, and so we cannot foresee where and when the self-organization process that leads through the global acceleration crisis will begin. The nucleus will certainly not arise in the worldwide negotiations between government officials and 'global players', because there one continues to cling to the collapsing ideas. "

- Peter Kafka : Where are we actually running to?

Two ideologies

In view of the global crisis, Kafka sees the "citizen" as responsible for "deciding" which ideology should determine their life. He sums up these two ideologies in the epilogue to the book "Dispute Letters on Nuclear Energy" as follows:

"Mr. Maier-Leibnitz adheres to the 'ideology of large-scale optimism', even if slightly confused by experience, which I would like to summarize as follows:

Humanity faces enormous problems. Even if these have largely arisen through human action - unfortunately, human beings cannot be changed, and therefore the only way out lies in further, indeed accelerated and better targeted, rational action by experts and responsible governments. Accelerated and targeted planning are best guaranteed in large-scale research and large-scale technology.

In contrast, I advocate a more cautious ideology, which is now called "green" for short:

The system of life and human society is so complex that any centrally directed action directed towards superficial goals is almost certainly destructive. All the huge problems come from doing just that. The only way out therefore lies in the growth of adapted technology and decentralized social institutions that limit military and technocratic simplicity and frenzy and instead favor diversity and leisurelyness, the conditions for further evolution.

Obviously, one of the two ideologies must have more truth content than the other, but which one will determine the future development depends on you, the citizens. You have to be able to decide based on insight; otherwise the economic rulers "naturally" decide in their own interest. "

reception

“Mr. Peter Kafka has been well known as an outstanding stimulator and thoughtful opinion leader in the ecological debate since the late 1960s. He has appeared in numerous conferences at the Munich Adult Education Center and the Evangelical Academy in Tutzing and has fascinated his audience. Each time his concern went far beyond his specialist discipline, astrophysics. He is interested in the future of industrial society and the survival of human conditions in the constraints of a globalized economy. Peter Kafka fought in the sense of the 'principle of responsibility' of Hans Jonas for a resource-saving handling of natural creation and has achieved astonishing successes with this educational intention. His life's work, which is not in thick textbooks, but in unforgettable interjections and sarcastic comments, makes him a highly suitable holder of the medal 'Munich shines - The friends of Munich' "

- Munich Press and Information Office

“Peter Kafka has not (yet) become famous; But he is one of the greats of the only original Enlightenment movement of the 20th century, which the Viennese evolutionary biologist Rupert Riedl called somewhat misleadingly 'clarification': the self-criticism of the (so far) unreflected idea of ​​progress and its dialectical one made possible by the achievements of science Further development. "

- Carl Amery

Fonts

Books

  • 1982: Dispute Letters on Nuclear Energy. Two physicists on science, progress and the consequences. Piper Publishing, 1982.
  • 1987: nuclear power, yes or no? An argument between two physicists. With Heinz Maier-Leibnitz , Piper, Munich 1987, ISBN 3-492-10739-7 .
  • 1989: The Basic Law of Ascent. Diversity, leisurelyness, self-organization: Paths to real progress. Hanser, Munich 1989, ISBN 3-446-15741-7 .
  • 1994: Against the downfall. Creation principle and global acceleration crisis. Carl-Hanser-Verlag , Munich 1994, ISBN 3-446-17834-1 .

Contributions

  • Two things , in: Eckhard Slawik / Uwe Reichert: Atlas of the constellations, Heidelberg / Berlin 1998, ISBN 3-8274-0268-9
  • Money or life? On the liberation of the market economy from capitalism , in: Müller / Müller (Hg.): Markt und Sinn. Does the market dominate our values? Ffm 1996, ISBN 3-593-35516-7 .
  • Law and Chaos - Are There Any Guidelines? in: Rainer Lindenmann, Hermann Glaser (eds.), From the Modern Age of the Renaissance - What to Expect in the 21st Century, Cadolzburg 1996, ISBN 3-931043-23-1
  • Does modern physics have a worldview function? or: The creation myth appropriate to our level of consciousness , in: K. Mainzer and W. Schirmacher (Hg): Quantum, Chaos and Demons - Epistemological Aspects of Modern Physics, Mannheim 1994, ISBN 3411163011
  • Omnis Scientia Ancilla Oecologiae or the end of abandonment. Approach to a recycling of education. In: What moves us, Beltz 1991, ISBN 3-407-85100-6 .
  • Can peace be organized? , in: Rudolf Steinmetz (ed.): The legacy of Sokrates. Scientists in dialogue about pacifying the world, Munich 1986, ISBN 3-423-10577-1
  • From the big bang to the final bang. A lecture for energy politicians , Tages-Anzeiger Magazin, Zurich, July 14, 1979, p. 8 ff.

About astrophysics:

literature

  • Hermann Scheer : The Entropy Tax , Chapter 8 in Solar Strategy , 1998, ISBN 3-492-22135-1 (Scheer takes up an “entropy tax ” or “reduced value tax ” proposed by Kafka. With the so-called eco - tax , the proposal is already partial In principle, any tax on energy consumption is already a tax on entropy production .)

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ^ From a summary by P. Kafka on the lecture series "Energy, Environment, Society - Current Problems from a Scientific Perspective" in the winter semester 1999/2000 at the Free University of Berlin
  2. ↑ Where are we running to? Doing business for life - Against the loss and sale of more and more areas of life to the total market. Extended subsequent written version of a speech by Peter Kafka at the "Political Saturday Prayer" in the Erlöserkirche Munich-Schwabing on November 13, 1999)
  3. ↑ Peter Kafka, Heinz Maier-Leibnitz: Nuclear energy - yes or no? Page 238 f.
  4. ^ Statement by the Munich Press and Information Office on the application for honoring Peter Kafka. The application was made by the Munich city councilor Constanze Lindner-Schädlich and Michael Krüger , Carl Hanser Verlag. Copy of letter dated December 12, 2000 in Kafka's unpublished estate.
  5. ↑ Carl Amery : The Preacher Who Came from the Stars. Obituary for Peter Kafka. Süddeutsche Zeitung of December 28, 2000.
  6. ↑ Kafka 1982 - book index at Weeber
  7. ↑ Kafka 1987 - Extended new edition of letters of dispute on nuclear energy with a foreword by Hubert Markl .
  8. ↑ Kafka 1989 - book index at Weeber
  9. ↑ Kafka 1994 - book index at Weeber
personal data
SURNAME Kafka, Peter
BRIEF DESCRIPTION German physicist
DATE OF BIRTH June 29, 1933
PLACE OF BIRTH Berlin
DATE OF DEATH December 23, 2000
Place of death Unterföhring