In this article, the author shows how scientific progress is made through a series of ideas that seem provocative, baseless and even irritating.
will advance
Provocation:- the act of teasing, teasing, a deliberate act to get a certain reaction.
(The New Dictionary, A. Ibn Shushan)
In this article, the author shows how scientific progress is made through a series of ideas that seem provocative, baseless and even irritating.
The author agrees with the fact that the scientific literature is full of baseless provocations.
This creates problems for scientists who come up with innovative ideas, which are always received first of all as an unfounded provocation to the existing paradigm.
The purpose of the article is to define and analyze the process of receiving provocation, and to show its importance in scientific development. They will also examine ways to help filter out the casual, unfounded provocations.
The scientific provocation
The scientific provocation is achieved by presenting a scientific fact known to all, as incorrect.
For example: an astronomical scientific fact - everyone knows that the earth attracts as a result of gravity. A provocation for this would be to say that there are no gravitational forces at all.
In the process of determining the provocation, there are several steps:
A. Presentation - presentation of the known scientific fact.
B. Provocation - presenting the scientific fact in a way that is radically different from what is accepted.
third. Doubtful - the listener is skeptical, disdainful and sometimes not even willing to listen (sometimes rightfully so).
d. Explanation - explaining the provocation and presenting examples that should change the listener's attitude.
God. Result - opinions on the provocation are divided - from complete opposition to complete agreement.
The scientific provocation can only act on consolidated and accepted scientific facts, otherwise it is only an accepted scientific debate, for example: will a certain particle move to the left or right, will the liquid boil, etc.
The most problematic stage for the narrator is to go through stage C with the listener: (the listener is skeptical and disdainful and sometimes not even ready to listen). The listener's resistance to provocation can be personal-subjective, or objective, fear of a higher authority.
We will give an example of a scientific provocation:
A. A known scientific fact - the size of an astronomical unit is about one hundred and fifty million km.
B. Provocation - So-and-so claims that the size of the Earth is only one hundred and twenty million kilometers.
third. Doubt - the listener is disdainful, and maybe not ready to listen either.
d. Now so-and-so should explain the provocative statement.
God. Result - according to the explanation, the listener should decide on his attitude to the provocation.
We will also note an interesting fact that not everyone will treat the provocation with the same intensity, and what is provocative for one does not necessarily mean so for the other.
For example:- That so-and-so claims:- I have proof that man was created by God.
For many (especially the religious among us) this is a statement that has nothing of the provocation in it. Many others would like to hear proof of this.
Scientific provocation is very important in the development of science.
We will give an example of two provocations from the past that changed our physical world.
First example: Everyone knew that the earth is the center of the universe. And here Copernicus stands up to him and announces that the sun is the center of the universe. This was so provocative that the publisher of his book found it appropriate to comment that this is the author's opinion only and has nothing to do with this announcement.
Second example: until Galileo's time, the opinion was accepted that a large body falls faster than a small body.
Galileo declares that everyone falls at the same speed. He dispels the doubts of the spectators in one of the well-known experiments he conducted from the Tower of Pisa. From here the path to a new theory is short.
The scientific provocations are always heard with mixed feelings. The response depends on the mental openness of the listener and the environmental framework in which he is found. For example, in the rigid church rule that prevailed in the Middle Ages, it was dangerous to express ideas different from what is written in the Holy Scriptures or what is agreed upon by the church institutions.
It goes without saying that Copernicus and Galileo even risked their lives by raising their provocations.
Examples of contemporary astronomical scientific provocations
We will move on to a number of known and accepted astronomical scientific facts today and the author of the article will make provocative statements about them for the readers to judge.
For the attention of the readers:- the author of the article stands behind all the following provocations:-
First example: Newton's gravitation formula.
A. The known scientific fact - gravitation acts on all parts of the universe and the formula that expresses it is Newton's gravitation formula.
B. Provocation: Newton's formula is only proven up to fifty astronomical units only. Using it at significantly greater distances is done without any factual basis.
third. The listener is skeptical. It is hard to ignore the fact that for three hundred and fifty years Newton stars with his formula in all parts of the universe.
d. Explanation of the provocation:- In fact, there is no proof of a distance greater than fifty astronomical units. (the distance to the planet Pluto).
The movement of the spiral galaxies that many see as a proof of Newton's gravitation formula at great distances is not like that either. The mass of the galaxy must be at least ten times greater for the formula to be correct. Even the movement of the comets that we measure cannot be a basis for proving that the movement of those, after which an astronomical follow-up was conducted, is only up to a distance of about fifty astronomical units. Regarding the more distant comets, there are no data for precise calculations.
God. Result - opinions vary from total opposition to complete agreement.
Second example: homogeneity and isotropy of the universe.
A. The known scientific fact:- Every physical law that is true in the Earth's environment is also true in any other region of the universe (homogeneity), and is also true in every direction of the universe (isotropy).
B. Provocation:- A law known to be true close to the earth is not necessarily true. His mistake may be revealed in another region of the universe or at another time.
third. Resistance to provocation:- If in another part of the universe all the conditions are the same here, is it not reasonable to assume that the laws will also be the same?
d. The explanation of the provocation: the main problem is whether the law known in the region of the earth as correct is really so? If not, a small deviation of it in our area, which is not detected within the uncertainty of the measurement, could be very significant at other distances or times!
For example: Is it possible to confidently use Newton's gravitation formula, which was only tested up to a distance of fifty astronomical units, regarding distances of millions of light years in distant galaxies? A distant body is a body whose behavior we see in the past when the universe was different and warmer. Can we be sure that the background temperature of the universe does not affect gravitation? After all, no experiment will be done to test the possibility of a connection between gravitation and the background temperature!
In other words, there is no objection to the rules of homogeneity and isotropy themselves, but to the laws they try to generalize.
Third example: the speed of light
A. The well-known scientific fact:- The speed of light in a vacuum is the fixed size in nature for every observer, it is about 300,000 km per second and so it was and always will be.
B. Provocation: The speed of light in a vacuum is about 300,000 km per second, but that is the case only today. Billions of years ago the situation was different and in the future it will be different.
third. Doubt:- It is difficult to agree with such a statement. Even Einstein himself stated that it was always constant. The whole theory of relativity is also based on this, so it must be true.
d. Explanation of the provocation:- A great speed of light in the cosmological past may explain the phenomenon of the inflationary universe, in which the universe inflated in a very short time and did so at a speed of over 300,000 km per second. A speed of light proportional to the background temperature is no less logical than an always constant speed. Such an approach does not necessarily contradict the theory of relativity.
Fourth example: Occam's razor.
It goes without saying that provocations are not the domain of scientific laws and facts alone.
To conclude the examples that will be analyzed in this article, we will bring the simple rule, scientific doubt, "Occam's Razor".
A. The well-known "scientific" fact: Occam's razor states in simple words that of two or more choices the simpler one should be taken. Occam's Razor is a rule of scientific doubt that is only generally correct and should not be given too much importance.
B. Provocation: Occam's razor is one of the most basic tools in science, it is always true and its importance for determining scientific formulas is enormous!
third. The reader is skeptical. What else could be important in choosing the simple? This does not mean giving kosher to the simple and the more complicated may be the right one.
d. The importance of the razor is great. There are always countless formulas that explain a certain phenomenon, and are correct within the measurement uncertainty. The only way to decide who to use is according to Occam's Razor. Choose the simplest one. Of course, the simplicity of the solution does not make it more correct, only more convenient to use.
So far, the author of the article has presented four contemporary scientific provocations, at least three of them on astronomical topics.
The author of the article also has something to say regarding the following astronomical scientific conventions:-
5. The intensity of light decreases in space in inverse proportion to the square of the distance.
6. Gravitation Prof. to the product of the masses.
7. Black holes.
8. Matter cannot move at the speed of light and more.
In the limited framework of this article, the author of the article will not deal with the aforementioned astronomical scientific provocations and will leave it for another article or lecture:
In conclusion: the importance of scientific provocation
The importance of scientific provocation being the first step in the collapse of an old paradigm. From here the path to transition to a new theory is short.
However, we should not forget that the provocation is not necessarily true. But even the small chance of its correctness obliges us to always discuss it with patience and seriousness and check it positively or negatively.
Comments, on the science website and also by e-mail: sevdermish@surfree.net.il Tel. 2570989-052
