Do our present theories in quantum mechanics and astrophysics fail to provide fundamental answers?
Do our present theories in quantum mechanics and astrophysics fail to provide the answers we need? Why can’t our present theories provide us answers to natures most significant questions: What is dark energy? What is gravity? What is dark matter? Why does the universe expand in an accelerating speed faster than the speed of light?
This is questions we have tried to answer, without success, through decades of intense research.
Our theories in quantum mechanics and astrophysics do not reconcile. The theories only work within their specific field. A correct physics should work in all fields, it should work in both quantum physics and astrophysics.
If you have a problem you can’t solve, you might have to start over and attack it with a different approach. What seem insolvable often have a solution if you change the rules and your angle of attack.
This also applies to science. If researchers do not find answers to their problems, this might be because they work with the wrong set of rules. They work within an unsolvable research paradigm.
Professor Thomas Kuhn introduced the term paradigms. A paradigm is research shared and perceived as decisive within a research community. A paradigm contains rules for good conduct which governs research in the specific field. The paradigm limits possible theoretical choices.
If observations show anomalies, this can shake the paradigm, and result in paradigmatic debates. This might result in new ideas and dramatic changes in theories, a paradigm shift.
领英推荐
But should paradigmatic debates also occur in the absence of answers?
A correct physics should work in all fields. Our present theories, which include hypothetical elements, do not work outside their designated areas. The present theories can’t provide us with answers to some of natures biggest questions. Can this be an indication that current theories may not be correct, and that we therefore need paradigmatic debates?
If a problem remains unresolved after decades of intense research in a field, it is reasonable to assume that the research community is not working with the right pieces. They are probably working within a paradigm that does not allow a solution.
‘It is recognised that theories are only used because there are no better alternatives, not because they represent the final answer. One realises that it is not possible to come up with new solutions, and thus new knowledge, but that it is necessary.’ (Professor Per Arne Bjorkum)
I wrote an article around this:
Independent researcher, private teacher: Mathematics-Physics
1 年FROM THE ARTICLE: Gravity, dark energy, dark matter and the If you want new knowledge about nature, you have to think about how something is connected — about cause-and-effect. Even when we see that the observations do not match the theory, we are unwilling to depart from it until an alternative theory has been presented. This is a paradox that can be an obstacle to innovation in research: Most scientists prefer scientific news that underpins what they already know and not news that challenges what they have built their career and self-image on. When revolutionary news is launched, it can put the entire research community to the test, both intellectually and emotionally. When ideas are presented that go against the grain, they can bring about great and dramatic changes in theories about nature. Such dramatic changes can be called paradigm shifts (Thomas Kuhn).