Science dictates that a theoretical model of our environment must explain and predict all observations. If it cannot is must be modified or discarded.
However, history has shown that there is a reluctance in the scientific community adopt a new theoretical model even thought there is observational evidence the current one is invalid.
For example in the Ptolemaic or geocentric system of astronomy, the existence of epicycles were required to explain the retrograde motion of the Moon, Sun, and planets.
It was not until scientific investigations were stimulated by Copernicus and advancements in observational technology which allowed for direct observations of planetary motion did scientists realize epicycles did not exist.
This is true even though many Greek, Indian, and Muslim savants had published heliocentric hypotheses centuries before Copernicus.
However, why did it take almost two thousand years for science to realize that their ideas were correct?
The reason may have been because the scientific community assumed the existence of epicycles based on their predicative powers. Therefore, they were able to justify suppressing the correct Greek and Muslim ideas for almost 2000 years because, using them, they were still able to make accurate predictions a planet's position. This was true even though there was a more logical and accurate predicative methodology based on observations.
If one looks very closely one can see similarities between then and now.
For example, the fact that even with our advance technology, we have been unable to observe a baryonic or particle component Dark Matter. This contracts the assumption made by quantum mechanics that all matter is contained in particle.
While the anomalous accelerations NASA has observed in it Pioneer space probes appears to contract the assumptions of General Relativity.
The validity of Quantum and relativistic theory are based primarily on their ability to make accurate quantitative predictions of our environment.
However, as history has shown the fact that a theoretical model can make accurate quantitative predictions does not justify not looking for a new paradigm when there are observations that contract its foundations,
Perhaps science should attempt to develop a theoretical model that defines the quantum or baryonic properties of mass in terms of a non-baryonic form of mass as done in The Imagineer’s Chronicles.
Jeffrey O'Callaghan
an_imagineer@theimagineershome.com
www.theimagineershome.com/
Comment and add to the story without registration, but keep the comments meaningful please. Links are not accepted.
