Is What we Know for Now Certain?

  • B
  • Thread starter Bumpeh
  • Start date
In summary, scientific theories and laws are not set in stone and are constantly evolving and being refined as our understanding of the universe expands. Even well-established theories like Newtonian mechanics have been found to have limitations and be incomplete. The goal of science is not to find a single, ultimate truth, but rather to approximate reality and provide better explanations and predictions. Therefore, it is possible that in the future, we may discover ways to break or surpass our current understanding of the laws and theories of physics.
  • #1
Bumpeh
32
2
So my question delves more into the metaphysical and philosophical than super scientific, but it relates back to what we know about physics and science. Recently a friend and I had a mentally stimulating conversation and it got me wondering about something.

Since the beginning of time, people have said they can do something, and the general public has denied that said person would be able to do it. The Wright brothers with flying, someone probably told Magellan he couldn't circumnavigate the world, and plenty have times has the mass public denied scientific postulates and theories that either later turned out to be true after refinement, or turned out to be true from the beginning.

We now live in an age where we know more than ever before, there's so much to learn out there about ourselves, the Universe, the laws that bind us. We can use the internet, go to College, research, visit the library, there's so many ways to learn new things.

My question comes back to this, now, I haven't delved much into physics yet. I am a physics major, but I have yet to take a physics class because of a few prerequisite conflicts and all that, but I'm highly interested in the subject.

Certain scientific theories pose that certain things are impossible, Special Relativity says an object can not accelerate to the speed of light, right? Laws of thermodynamics state that as time goes on, entropy increases, the law of conservation of energy and mass says that mass nor energy can be created or destroyed.

The scientists who came up with these laws are clearly not your basic nay sayers on the side of the street saying it's impossible because they don't believe it's possible, they're saying it because there is evidence and scientific proof. But as we all know, sometimes theories turn out to be wrong, or need to be adjusted, as we gain more information and insight.

Are these laid out theories and laws set in stone? Excluding loop-holes like the theoretical Alcubierre drive which would bend space for transportation at "FTL" speeds, even though it's not technically traveling at the speed of light but bending space around it, will these theories and laws always be there for us to fall back on? Or will we someday learn that Einstein was wrong? That maybe there's a way to reverse entropy, that matter or energy could possibly be created? As impossible as these things sound, I would like intelligent individuals with an open mind to share their thoughts on this matter. Am I crazy, or will these theories and laws forever be in place and we will never actually be able to directly break or ignore them?

I apologize if my basic understanding of Physics and Science isn't enough to articulate what I'm trying to ask. Hopefully if it's not, you guys can extrapolate.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Bumpeh said:
will these theories and laws forever be in place and we will never actually be able to directly break or ignore them?
Consider what happened to Newtonian gravity after Einstein. Is Newtonian gravity still taught in schools? Why or why not?

Be advised that philosophical discussions are often curtailed or deleted. We can discuss the philosophy of science from a mainstream professional viewpoint only.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Bumpeh said:
Are these laid out theories and laws set in stone?

No, they are not!

As scientists, ALL of us are aware that our understanding, as reflected in the accepted theories and ideas, are, in some ways, provisional. However, when we say that, we mean it in terms of scientific certainty, which is MORE certain than any other aspect of human life. After all, if our ideas are "set in stone", then how do you explain the fact that science have gone through several major "revolutions" and "paradigm shifts" through its history, and several major ones just in the last century alone!

Our understanding and ideas continue to improve, to encompass larger boundaries, and to be refined to even higher precision. That has been going on throughout the history of science, and continues to this present day. That is not a characteristics of something "set in stone".

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes Isaac0427 and russ_watters
  • #4
Physical theories are not meant to live forever. I think that if we wait long enough, any physical theory will be broken somehow. That includes modern theories like relativity or quantum theory. That doesn't mean these theories are wrong, it means that they are very accurate approximations of certain realities.

Many newcomes say that Newton's theory has been disproven by Einstein. I think that is wrong. It is more accurate to say that Einstein found certain boundaries for Newton's theory. The classical mechanics theory is still heavily used in science and physics. It's just that when we use it, we need to be sure that it's applicable. In the same way, GR or QM should be used whenever it is applicable.

I don't think it is the goal of science to come up with a theory that is true. I think the goal of science is to approximate reality and to give better numerical answers to problems. In that sense, no theory is correct or incorrect.

Anyway, could we ever go faster than light? Sure, it's not set in stone that we cannot.
 
  • #5
@ZapperZ is completely correct. Just to add, for a theory to be set in stone, it must experimentally be proven to not break down at any level and it can't conflict with other accepted theories that don't, at least to our knowledge, break down at any level. How do you prove this? You can't. There always will be a bigger scale to test he theory out on. Think about all the current theories. Are there any that are even in contention to be "set in stone"? Maybe special relativity, but nothing else. General relativity and quantum mechanics have limitations that we actually know of, let alone being each other's limitations (they conflict with each other at certain levels). They both have been more or less proven to be incomplete. Many of Newton's laws, including F=ma, have been found to break down at very large or very small scales, and they were once "set in stone". Studying these incomplete theories, however, is essential to trying to complete them, and studying theories we think to be complete is essential to finding their boundaries. Also, even the incomplete theories are true at some level. Newtonian mechanics is a very good approximation of relativity and quantum mechanics when dealing with regular masses, regular sizes and regular velocities. Any new theory that wishes to be considered to be accurate needs to simplify basically to Newtonian mechanics for regular masses, sizes, velociteis, etc.
 

What does "Is What we Know for Now Certain?" mean?

This phrase refers to the idea that our knowledge and understanding of a particular topic or concept may be subject to change as new evidence or information is discovered. It suggests that our current understanding is not absolute or definitive, but rather the best we can know at the present time.

How do scientists determine what is certain or uncertain?

Scientists use the scientific method to gather evidence, conduct experiments, and make observations in order to test and refine their understanding of a particular phenomenon. Through this process, they can determine the level of certainty in their conclusions based on the strength of the evidence and the consistency of their findings.

Can something be considered certain in science?

In science, nothing can ever be considered 100% certain. This is because scientific knowledge is always open to revision and change as new evidence emerges. However, some theories and principles may be considered highly certain or well-supported based on the available evidence and the consensus among the scientific community.

Why is it important to acknowledge uncertainty in science?

Acknowledging uncertainty is important in science because it allows for continuous improvement and advancement of knowledge. By acknowledging that our understanding is not absolute, we can remain open to new ideas and evidence, and continue to refine and expand our understanding of the world.

How does acknowledging uncertainty affect the public's perception of science?

Acknowledging uncertainty in science can actually increase the public's trust in the scientific community. It shows that scientists are honest and transparent about the limitations of their knowledge and are constantly working to improve their understanding. It also helps to dispel the misconception that science provides definitive answers to all questions, and instead promotes a more nuanced and critical approach to interpreting scientific information.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Other Physics Topics
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
537
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
69
Views
10K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
1
Views
873
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
3
Views
451
Replies
1
Views
638
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top