How to challenge a well established theory?

  • Thread starter abhijitp88
  • Start date
  • #26
Chi Meson
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
1,789
10
Not locked yet? Amazing. I think the OP has saved his/her thread by being at least a little aware of the precariousness of the situation. I wanted only to add that the use of the word "paradigm" here is incorrect. Any challenge to a full-fledged, law-without-exception is not a "paradigm shift."

It would be a monumental breakthrough in human history.

Weekly, if not daily, someone without any thorough background in Physics takes their misunderstanding and runs directly to the nearest journal to cash in for the first-ever combined Nobel Physics and Peace Prize.

With much respect to the OP, and the good intentions therein, I repeat that to take your work any further, you will have to show some RESULTS. Either from direct experimentation on your part, or by way of careful calculation showing exactly how your idea can be supported AND how it might be proven false.

If you do not know how to do these calculations, then I'm going to insist that you probably are mistaken in your understanding.

Please do not stop your efforts. I would love to see a working PMM! Honestly, I would. A heat engine that surpasses Carnot efficiency is exactly that, by the way.
 
  • #27
Chi Meson
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
1,789
10
Do you mean you have to have experimental support for your assumptions, or experimental support of your theory's consequences?
Preliminary assumptions, if they are not commonly accepted among the scientific community (or at least by those who know the difference between force and power), should have unequivocal experimental support before even proceeding.

Any other way would allow merely "thinking up something wild" to be a hypothesis, or at the very least "scientific speculation."

For example, I'm going to think up something right now. There might be some situations where the law of conservation of electric charge is violated. But I won't say it like that; instead, I'll say that "Kirchhoff's Junction Rule is invalid" (because I think no one has yet checked every circuit junction in the universe yet).

For anyone to give that statement any credibility, I will have to show the data for the circuit I created where the current flow into the junction is not equal to the current flow out.

Or, if I find that I am the only one who truly understands electro-magnetism, and I can produce a theoretical condition that will create more electric current out of a junction (or even make some disappear), I will need to be very specific what conditions a laboratory must produce to either validate or disprove the conjecture.
 
Last edited:
  • #28
4,464
65
Excellent posts Chi, it certainly beats the Chinese rejection letter

Should we print it, His Majesty the Emperor would order us to take it as a criterion, and never against to print anything which was not equal to it. As that would not be possible before Ten Thousand Years, all trembling we return thy Manuscript, and beg of thee Ten Thousand Pardons. See! My hand is at my feet, and I am thy Slave.
Anyway, I'm unhappy with the crackpot witchhunt, maybe we are just dealing with a 12 year old eager genius, who just needs more guidance.
 
  • #29
Chi Meson
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
1,789
10
Excellent posts Chi, it certainly beats the Chinese rejection letter

Anyway, I'm unhappy with the crackpot witchhunt, maybe we are just dealing with a 12 year old eager genius, who just needs more guidance.
I still have some tact left, although even as only a high school teacher of physics, my patience is already strained by these claims.

I can only add that for anyone who wants guidance in these matters:
Listen to ZapperZ

just don't begin the conversation with PMM.
 
  • #30
AlephZero
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
6,993
291
Anyway, I'm unhappy with the crackpot witchhunt, maybe we are just dealing with a 12 year old eager genius, who just needs more guidance.
Well, you might get lucky, or you might not.

But I've lost count of the number of times that apparently intelligent PhD students (and even post grads) tried to convince me they just found a schoolboy error in industry-standard software that have been used by thousands of engineers for decades, without anybody else noticing the mistake...

... and so far, the "genius count" is still stuck on zero.
 
  • #31
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
35,464
4,229
Referring to an informational post as "garbage".
I refer to the reference as "garbage" because it really has nothing to do with the OP! And not only that, I've countered it sufficiently with Dan Koshland's article.

Not understanding the concept of paradigm shifts
I understand paradigm shift very well! I've seen it first hand. If you don't think the discovery of High-Tc superconductivity was a paradigm shift, then you don't know physics.

Calling the original poster a crackpot, without even knowing
anything about his "theory". He is just asking for advice.
What kind of mentoring is that? It's NOT.
You need to pay attention to what you read. This is EXACTLY what I said:

ZapperZ said:
you are exhibiting the same symptoms of a crackpot
I called no one a crackpot. I pointed out similar characteristics of a crackpot. I even gave a link where others have also encountered similar traits.

It is my personal experience, having been on the 'net since 1987, that people who can't even figure out what journals are what, and suddenly claim to have discovered the next best thing since sliced cheese, 100% of the time have such characteristics. The number of years I've been on this forum only reinforced such a view, because I haven't seen anything to the contrary to change my mind.

Zz.
 
  • #32
OmCheeto
Gold Member
2,114
2,483
hi all, thank u for all the responses, this theory I am proposing is serious and in the system that is proposed, the entropy of the universe increases, so the system is totally possible. The only obstacle in the actual construction is the availability of suitable materials. If this theory is published, then research would lead us to an actual working system eventually. I have sent the abstracts to the popular journals. Most of them aren't commenting anything. If anyone is aware of theoretical journals that publish such papers, then pls help me out here.
So this is a system you can build, but you don't have the suitable materials.

Perhaps what I'm working on is something similar. It's an energy storage device which almost completely circumvents the second law of thermodynamics. Though I wouldn't characterize it as contradicting anything. Carnot still comes into play, but just barely. Kind of like a spring, only with a much better energy/kg ratio. (no magnets involved!)

I've not submitted a paper as it is much too simple a device, and I'll simply just patent it.

What kind of suitable materials does you system require? Or would letting us know that divulge too much of your secret?
 
  • #33
22,097
3,278
Hi all, need some help here. If I wish to contradict a well established theory in physics (namely the Carnot theorem), then what would be a suitable platform? I've tried a few journals but most of those publish experimental papers & won't accept my paper because it’s theoretical. Pls suggest a suitable platform (journals, conferences etc.) where new theories can be forwarded for scientific criticism. Thanks in advance.
Why does the Carnot theorem need to be changed?? Why do you think it does not accurately describe reality?? Remember, that question needs to be answered with experimental data. Some philosophical explanation is not sufficient.
 
  • #34
1,564
6
I don't mean to derail this thread more than it already has, but why is it everyone immediately jumped to the idea of a perpetual motion machine? The OP never made such a claim and divulged no information about the details of his hypothesis. For all we know, his idea mandates an even lower limit to the amount of energy a thermal engine may be allowed to convert. Has the scientific community really become that aporetic to new ideas?
 
  • #35
378
2
This thread should have been put to rest long before. OP got his answer in 8th posts or so.
 
  • #36
Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
18,705
1,720

Related Threads for: How to challenge a well established theory?

Replies
17
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
663
Top