World Science Scholars

3.5 The Unmitigated

discussion Discussion
Viewing 3 reply threads
    • How do you feel about a theory that does not make testable predictions? Is it time to change how we think about the scientific method, or should we remain on the same track? Explain your answer.

    • Of course, testable predictions used to be a fundamental requirement for any scientific theory – so far. But then, we are (were?) in a similar situation with string theory. A parallel in the past? Of course: Albert Einstein thought that there was no way to one day measure gravitational waves – and look where we are now! (Similar thing with black holes.) As for strings, there has been a hint of a discovery of a cosmic string, following a relatively simple theory about what to look for. All of this amounts to the obvious answer that of course, scientific methods should not be changed; the challenges are just higher than ever before.

    • The key is that inflation is just a theory.

    • Science, especially Cosmology needs multiple view points a.k.a theories. Whether hey are testable or not is for the future generations. Floating a theory, however outlandish it is, shows the design of the human intellect and imagination. Many conjectures in Mathematics are yet to be proved. Fermat’s last theorem has been proved only recently. Like Law, an accused is not guilty until proven, should be applied to Cosmological Principles. Every Professor will have his pet theories and Dr. Paul Steinhardt is no exception. Stephen Hawking asserted that nothing escapes from Blackhole, but he observed the radiation emanating from a blackhole, which was later termed as Hawking Radiation. Even if we sum up all the humanity’s total intelligence and apply it to cosmology, still it will be short by 95% as most of our laws are tried in the visible spectrum only. We hope that some spark like a Big Bang will occur in the sub conscious state of human mind which may explain the state of nature. Incidentally, the Rishis of East have been advocating that one needs to look inwards to understand the outwards.

You must be logged in to reply to this discussion.

Send this to a friend