Is Science Truly Objective or Just Another Dogma?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ikonoclast
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Science
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion critically examines the objectivity of science, asserting that many scientists are constrained by authority and orthodoxy, leading to stagnation in certain fields. Participants argue that established theories, such as the Big Bang Theory, are defended at all costs, even in the face of contradictory evidence like the isotropic Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR). The conversation highlights historical examples of scientific suppression, such as the cold fusion controversy and the dismissal of alternative theories, emphasizing the need for open debate and the acceptance of revolutionary ideas in scientific inquiry.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Big Bang Theory and its implications.
  • Familiarity with Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) and its significance in cosmology.
  • Knowledge of scientific methodology and peer review processes.
  • Awareness of historical controversies in science, such as cold fusion and alternative energy theories.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of isotropic vs. anisotropic CMBR in cosmological theories.
  • Explore the history and impact of cold fusion research on scientific credibility.
  • Investigate the role of peer review in scientific acceptance and the challenges faced by revolutionary theories.
  • Examine case studies of scientists who faced ridicule for proposing unconventional ideas.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for scientists, researchers, and students interested in the philosophy of science, the dynamics of scientific progress, and the challenges of introducing innovative theories in established fields.

  • #31
The laws of thermodynamics apply to everything, there are no exceptions (well, except on a microscakle, but this merely reflects the statisical nature of the laws).

Why not on a microscale?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Imparcticle said:
Why not on a microscale?
On the microscale, quantum uncertainty breaks the symmetry for brief periods of time.
I think we've found Ikonoclast's source anyway...
That's not a source, that's a research facility. Ikonoclast has provided nothing but allegations.
 
  • #33
The problem with a discovery of something sensational like lightspeed excess from mass particles in an accelerator experiment is the mission of the experiment. The experiment is probably not about exceeding lightspeed but about something else. The effort is always a team effort with different goals. Making a fuss about lightspeed excess would distract attention and delay completion and publication. In other words, other people would be affected. I would expect that the raw data would be saved and the surprise event would remain uncommented. At a later time someone could reference it and perhaps make a case, when the experiment is already documented history.

---

There was an experiment around 1964 that did a lightspeed measure on backward-directed gamma rays from pion decays in an accelerator. I wish experiments like this would get updated, repeated and re-reported from time to time. The conclusion was that the speed of the gammas was unaffected by the high speed in the opposite direction of the center of mass of the pions.

Oh, Here it is-
Alvaeger F.J.M. Farley, J. Kjellman and I Wallin, Physics Letters 12, 260 (1964).
Measured the speed of gamma rays from the decay of fast pi0 (~0.99975 c) to be c with a resolution of 400 parts per million.
 
  • #34
Ikonoclast has provided nothing but allegations.


"I resent the allegation and I resent the allegator."

— From the Amos 'n' Andy
classic 1950's television series


at least this topic has succeeded in making an issue of accountablilty
as well as unleashing a gassy stinkbomb
 
Last edited: