World Science Scholars

3.4 Testing New Theories

discussion Discussion
Viewing 7 reply threads
    • To really test different proposed solutions to the black hole information paradox would require directly observing Hawking radiation. However, radiation emitted by astrophysical black holes is even colder than the cosmic microwave background radiation which permeates all of space! The radiation signal would be drowned out by noise, so directly observing Hawking radiation is something humans probably won’t be doing for a very long time. Do you think that new theories can stand on mathematical proof alone or is observational evidence absolutely necessary to accept new theories of nature? How much support do you think theories can get from computer simulations? Explain your answer.

    • Of course for an absolute understanding of the universe, theoretical and experimental science needs to go hand in hand. Simulations will definitely pave to way towards the truth but without observational evidence, we might get lost.

    • First get a quantumized computer to finalize pi, then prove/disprove dimensions, then create energy, then a black hole might be able to be analyzed definitively. Or ask n Tesla.

    • A theory is not an act of faith and surely does not stand, however it can have utility before it has been fully understood, and thus gain credence. The tools of science (maths and simulations) help give a theory it’s credibility until more conclusive evidence brings confirmation or repudiation.

    • I would “believe” a theory if it was right in other kinds of experiments and also predicted a way to solve the black hole information paradox. For example, if string theory could be found to work well in other experiments and also predicted fuzzballs, then I think it would be pertinent to take fuzzballs really seriously.

    • New theories and theoretical predictions are viable based on maths alone before confirming evidence e.g. cosmological constant, time dilation and black holes.

    • Hello Ladies and Gentlemen,

      History in all things can heal technology. This is the lesson of Prof. Neil Postman`s Technopoly.

      History of Astronomical science shows often great time gaps before answers occur amoung the public.

      It all depends upon the immediacy of the questions being answered.

      When we need to know why and what the science is for black holes, there will be revelations, perhaps such as this course.

      Everything seems to move so very slow in information sciences- and then the computer chip speed doubles every few years.

      Black holes are so immense that computers are required to explain their… Niche.

      So there is further hope in world science collaborations that we can pursue truth in science while hoping not to be lost in cultural differences…or speeds.

      If individuation is required, we may need to retrench and attempt to approach things in alternative manners.

    • Model’s and theories guide our knowledge quest, they can never be the end all. We work with what we have at the time then look and see if we got it right, The looking and seeing can never be entirely replaced by simulations that only rely on theory and not observation of actuality.

You must be logged in to reply to this discussion.

Send this to a friend