473d6557@news.povray.org...
>  Finally they had to submit and admit that perhaps physics was not 
> complete
> and that there might be something else to it than what they thought.

There were only 20 years between Kelvin's claim of "There is nothing new to 
be discovered in physics now" and Einstein's Nobel Prize. In fact, there 
were 15 years between the publication of Einstein's paper on matter/energy 
equivalence and the Times's headline "Newtonian Ideas overthrown". Not too 
bad for overturning a "Holy Truth" and one wishes regular people would be as 
quick as scientists before accepting new ideas.

This phenomenon has been called a paradigm shift by Thomas Kuhn, who said 
that "successive transition from one paradigm to another via revolution is 
the usual developmental pattern of mature science". In other words, that's 
the way science works, and if you've been around scientists, you can see 
that at work even in lesser fields of science.

In any case, it seems that you've been reading some crappy blogs instead of 
actual books about epistemology. Modern science works along the principles 
layed out by Claude Bernard in 1865. Here are some quotes:

"When we meet a fact which contradicts a prevailing theory, we must accept 
the fact and abandon the theory, even when the theory is supported by great 
names and generally accepted"

"Theories are only verified hypotheses, verified by more or less numerous 
facts. Those verified by the most facts are the best, but even then they are 
never final, never to be absolutely believed."

If you haven't read his book "An introduction to the study of experimental 
medicine" you should, it's a fantastic read.

G.

Post a reply to this message