Dear Jim, dear Tejinder,
Let me try to simultaneously answer the question by Jim at 2021 and your question to him. Indeed, I almost completely agree with you both. We are however focusing on different aspects. I don't like science fiction, and sometimes my position is slightly different. For instance, Jim wrote:
"Though [Newton's] ideas flew in the face of the dominant religion, the force of curiosity and learning progressed so that his concept of gravity helped pave the way for the Industrial Revolution, one vital discovery being steam power, which finally led to the locomotive and other steam-powered engines of commerce."
The steam engine goes back to the curiosity of Otto de Guericke [1602-1686] who demonstrated that the pressure of air can move a piston. Newton [1642-1727] and his concept of gravity were not required for Huygens, Papin, Newcomen and Watt, Lenoir, Otto, Benz, and Diesel.
While we all agree: "we must join the effort to steer humanity toward a non-suicidal future", I don't see this a question of "applying scientific discoveries for the global betterment of mankind." Following Alfred Nobel's logic, I rather see the steering already in the scientific progress itself. For instance, invented and worldwide available possibilities of contraception will help ordinary people in poor nations with too much children getting as rich as those with less children. Of course, acceptance of this means a very basic change in our value systems, something worth to be dealt with by FQXi. I was told, the newly elected ruler of India was born into a low caste and admires Otto v. Bismarck. The latter was worldwide the first to implement care insurance for all elderly workers. Under Muslim rule, as many children as possible are still considered necessary for feeding their parents.
Kindest regards,
Eckard
