 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| English__---> | Espanol____/ | Deutsch____/ | Francais____/ | Italiano____/ | Portuguese |
A General Image Theory of science theories.
2. Conflicts around 'There is only one valid theory'.
Homepage .
Albert Einstein .
Isaac Newton .
Rene Descartes .
William Gilbert ..........
GIT 1 .
GIT 3 .
GIT 4
  |
This 'General Image Theory of science theories' challenges the most basic principle of science, the claim that there can be only one valid theory which disproves all others. Yet this most basic challenge is undoubtedly correct, despite that principle being supported by every scientist ever to date. In the spirit of William Gilbert this is not addressed to that crass multitude of career-scientists content to kick around the narrow range of ideas that today's science journals consider fashionable, but to that free spirit happy to labour hard and dig deep to find real truth. | |||
Given that that one thing can clearly have more than one description,
and that any science theory is basically an attempted description of some aspect
of a universe, it seems clear that any valid science theory should allow of
other valid compatible image theories.
Yet all four major scientists
especially considered on this website, and indeed every scientist to date, have all
claimed that there can only be one valid theory and it disproves all other
theories. Yet it is to be noted that there have been some science ideas like
wave-particle duality theory, and to a lesser degree blackbox theory, that
indicate some scientific unease with the 'only one valid theory' principle.
Isaac Newton hit what he saw as a major dilemma in finding that the two
basic physics theories of William Gilbert and of Rene Descartes failed to
disprove the other and that both seemed basically consistent with the known
mathematical laws of physics of the time. Newton side-stepped that dilemma by
claiming that science is really limited to blackbox mathematical laws concerning 'seens', so that
the Gilbert and Descartes explanation theories based on different 'unseens' were really philosophical
hypotheses including untestable unseens that could not be validated and so were outside science where
'only one valid' did not apply. Newton was acutely concerned about
this dilemma and saw his blackbox science position as essential if science was
to hold to the 'only one valid theory' principle to which he was fully comitted.
He concluded that some one form of either Gilbert physics or Descartes physics
must be true - though it might never be possible to prove which.
Modern
physics blindly ignores Newton's Dilemma by taking everything previous as
disproved. But another physics theory dilemma, that Newton had a small issue
with, has persisted and expanded around wave theory vs particle theory. This
dilemma began with light theory, which in Newton's time had both a particle
theory (Newton's 'corpuscular' theory) and a wave theory. Newton felt
that only the maths mattered, and the different explanations were really
untestable philosophic hypotheses. But the wave theory of light seemed to
prevail perhaps without actually disproving the particle theory. Then Einstein
showed that some experimental light behaviour was particulate, or 'quantal', and
claimed that light was both a wave and a particle. Several formulations of this wave-particle duality theory
have not give anything agreeable, and some experiments claiming to follow light paths may involve
light absorbtion and re-emission or combine responses to light with responses to some Gilbert signal emitted by light photons ?
Variously formulated 'dualist' theories of
light have been extended to all particles, now claimed to be also waves, so that what
should be two different theories are claimed to be some one dualist theory. Things
are something, and are also not. So physics can hold on to 'only one theory' but
only by allowing basic contradictions within it.
Bohr's principle of complementarity, that the observation of two properties such as position and momentum requires mutually exclusive experimental arrangements, has been taken as meaning
that mutually exclusive modes of language or theories (such as the language or theory of particles and the language or theory of waves are assumed to be) can be used in the description of an object, but not simultaneously. [Omnès, 1999 - Afshar experiment]. Of course some like Heisenberg have taken it as only meaning that no description or theory of an object can be certain and the only valid description or theory must be a probabilistic one.
It is certainly clear that at
least physics theory does contain substantial logical conflicts, and that these
might be resolved by a General Image Theory of science theories that allows of
sets of valid compatible image theories instead of doggedly trying to hold to
the clearly false 'only one valid theory' principle.
For
enquiries, or if you have any view or suggestion on the content of this site,
please contact :-
New Science Theory (e-mail:-vincent@new-science-theory.com)
Vincent Wilmot Wilmots
166 Freeman Street Grimsby N.E.Lincs UK DN32 7AT.
Or you may want to learn a bit about Kissing, dating, love and marriage.
You are welcome to link to any page on this site, eg http://www.new-science-theory.com/albert-einstein.html
IF you like this site then
OR maybe make a small donation ; (it will help with site development, and just possibly with some experiments long planned but never afforded.)
© new-science-theory.com, 2008. - taking care with your privacy, see Privacy Policy or About Us or Sitemap.