ChatterBank9 mins ago
Are Scientists too narrow-minded?
Given the results of the neutrino tests at OPERA and CERN, which apparently show that the speed of light can be exceeded, do you think that scientists' firm belief that the laws of physics are constant, prevents them from opening their minds to endless possibilities?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Arti. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Nope.
The laws of physics are constant - our knowledge and understanding of them changes. That's exactly what research is all about. If they thought they knew it all already, then there wouldn't be a CERN.
The very fact that the physicists are putting this stuff out and asking for other scientists to help with the investigation demonstrates quite clearly that they are open to new ideas, explanations and discoveries.
And don't forget that everything at the moment turns on the word "apparently".
The laws of physics are constant - our knowledge and understanding of them changes. That's exactly what research is all about. If they thought they knew it all already, then there wouldn't be a CERN.
The very fact that the physicists are putting this stuff out and asking for other scientists to help with the investigation demonstrates quite clearly that they are open to new ideas, explanations and discoveries.
And don't forget that everything at the moment turns on the word "apparently".
I'll generally agree with Vascop but sometimes scientific progress doesn't occur until someone 'takes a sideways look' at things.
An example is that scientists used to consider these three statements:
A: Light is made up of waves
B: Light is made up of particles
C: A & B can't both be true, so either A or B is false.
It was only after many years of arguing about whether it was statement A or statement B which was false, that scientists finally came to realise that nobody had really challenged statement C (which, as we now know, is actually the false one).
Chris
An example is that scientists used to consider these three statements:
A: Light is made up of waves
B: Light is made up of particles
C: A & B can't both be true, so either A or B is false.
It was only after many years of arguing about whether it was statement A or statement B which was false, that scientists finally came to realise that nobody had really challenged statement C (which, as we now know, is actually the false one).
Chris
If you read the detailed comments by the lead scientist involved you'll appreciate the level of commitment and openness displayed. The people involved would hate to have made a simple error in their methods but are fully aware that such errors can occur. They know they are in real danger of not seeing the wood for the trees and are making their findings, and doubts, public in the sincere hope that the truth will out.
Arti ..it is quite possible that the 'laws of physics' are different in other places and at other times. However until we have evidence of that, it is safest to assume that they are not. If you allow the possibility of everything or nothing being true then it makes the application of logical deduction impossible or nearly so and we wouldn't be as advanced as the middle ages.
-- answer removed --
Arti //I just think that it is arrogance/ignorance in the extreme for any human to declare that the laws of physics are constant throughout the universe. //
They don't. In fact there are many experiments and observations devoted entirely to determining the physical constants in other parts of the Universe and at different times in the history of the Universe.
The ignorance/arrogance is displayed by those who assume that science is taking such an important thing for granted.
To date no discrepancy has been found in any observation but scientists are continuing to conceive increasingly sensitive ways to make the measurements.
They don't. In fact there are many experiments and observations devoted entirely to determining the physical constants in other parts of the Universe and at different times in the history of the Universe.
The ignorance/arrogance is displayed by those who assume that science is taking such an important thing for granted.
To date no discrepancy has been found in any observation but scientists are continuing to conceive increasingly sensitive ways to make the measurements.
If scientists had not been open-minded we would not have Quantum Mechanics or Relativity because they both conflict sharply with normal human experience.
Many of the concepts involved in these monumental centrepieces of our understanding of the Universe come from innovative theoretical considerations that took decades to be confirmed by observations.
Suggesting that scietists are not open-minded to other possibilities is ridiculous. They are constantly contemplating what most ordinary folk would never comprehend even if they devoted years trying.
Many of those considerations would not only surprise the uninitiated that scientist even attempted them. For example, manifesting a single atom in two places at the same time, demonstrating that an atom can both exist and not exist at the same time and teleportation.
Not only have these things been attempted, they have already been demonstrated as very real phenomena. Does that sound to you like the work of closed minds?
Many of the concepts involved in these monumental centrepieces of our understanding of the Universe come from innovative theoretical considerations that took decades to be confirmed by observations.
Suggesting that scietists are not open-minded to other possibilities is ridiculous. They are constantly contemplating what most ordinary folk would never comprehend even if they devoted years trying.
Many of those considerations would not only surprise the uninitiated that scientist even attempted them. For example, manifesting a single atom in two places at the same time, demonstrating that an atom can both exist and not exist at the same time and teleportation.
Not only have these things been attempted, they have already been demonstrated as very real phenomena. Does that sound to you like the work of closed minds?
A waste of money?
You know what - I can see that if you feel insecure about your menatla limitations you might well not like seeing billions spent on something you don't understand.
If however you're more confident you can appreciate seeing the furthering of Human knowledge.
Einsteins General Theory of Relativity was once only understood by a few, It was trigerred by an expensive experiment bouncing light between mountains.
No doubt many at the time said it was a "massive waste of money"
You Sat Nav wouldn't work without it.
Once the Arab World was at the forefront of Technology, researching Astronomy, Maths and Medecine when Britons lived in mud huts.
They stopped
You know what - I can see that if you feel insecure about your menatla limitations you might well not like seeing billions spent on something you don't understand.
If however you're more confident you can appreciate seeing the furthering of Human knowledge.
Einsteins General Theory of Relativity was once only understood by a few, It was trigerred by an expensive experiment bouncing light between mountains.
No doubt many at the time said it was a "massive waste of money"
You Sat Nav wouldn't work without it.
Once the Arab World was at the forefront of Technology, researching Astronomy, Maths and Medecine when Britons lived in mud huts.
They stopped
Scientists think that time only started at the moment the big bang happened there for everything came from nothing because there was no time for owt to happen before the big bang! How do they know time started at the big bang! We could be one of many big bangs and other ones happened far away from ours! and time have been going before our big bang but we just started usig numbers to measure it from the big bang coz we dont know a further away starting point to measure time from. They make up stuff from other made up stuff,they don't know the truth! no one does! untill they know why and where the big bang came from they only base everything from that. It's like a suduku puzzle you can get all the numbers right until the last one is wrong and have to start again!
That's not really right Rav1d
We know time slows as gravity increases and as speed increases - that's demonstrable - as I said it's necessary for GPS to work - that is not speculative.
As you go further and further back time will slow until it stops. -It's like a black hole in reverse.
This is not really contraversial.
The other stuff about multiverse and many big bangs is speculative - theoreticians playing around with ideas to see what might answer questions and whether the numbers work out.
Unfortunately some of this stuff gets picked up in the media and muddled up.
All of it get's lumped into a "Scientists say....." stories - the wackier the better.
It means that people often end up getting confused by what really is known and understood, what is good theory looking for evidence and what is speculation.
We know time slows as gravity increases and as speed increases - that's demonstrable - as I said it's necessary for GPS to work - that is not speculative.
As you go further and further back time will slow until it stops. -It's like a black hole in reverse.
This is not really contraversial.
The other stuff about multiverse and many big bangs is speculative - theoreticians playing around with ideas to see what might answer questions and whether the numbers work out.
Unfortunately some of this stuff gets picked up in the media and muddled up.
All of it get's lumped into a "Scientists say....." stories - the wackier the better.
It means that people often end up getting confused by what really is known and understood, what is good theory looking for evidence and what is speculation.
The Earth is Flat mentality?
Look, this is not proven yet and credit to the scientists to ask others to punch holes in their work.
I dont think it degrades Einstein either, if proven to be fact. Einstein's theory would be seen to be a brilliant advancement to the knowledge of physics and astrophysics and may still have relativity (no pun meant) to the performance of light and most matter.
I dont know how the intricate science works but the bloke I heard what whittling on about the ability of time to reverse and that implications for energy management were huge. I am supposing it leads us closer to fsuion energy and isn't that one of the purposes of CERN?
Then from that short leap for mankind to the Star Trekky dream of time warping and continual energy.
Look, this is not proven yet and credit to the scientists to ask others to punch holes in their work.
I dont think it degrades Einstein either, if proven to be fact. Einstein's theory would be seen to be a brilliant advancement to the knowledge of physics and astrophysics and may still have relativity (no pun meant) to the performance of light and most matter.
I dont know how the intricate science works but the bloke I heard what whittling on about the ability of time to reverse and that implications for energy management were huge. I am supposing it leads us closer to fsuion energy and isn't that one of the purposes of CERN?
Then from that short leap for mankind to the Star Trekky dream of time warping and continual energy.
Latest Posts
Crosswords26 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles49 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles53 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles55 mins ago
Body & Soul85 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.