Quote:
Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0
I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to address here, so I don't know what you mean when you say something doesn't work at a certain scale, but there are differences between theories and Theories in science. While string theory has been around for a long time, and while it can be used to explore mathematical concepts (often requiring extra dimensions of 10-26 levels), so that scientists can design experiments, it isn't a Theory; it isn't a theory that has been demonstrated to be valid, repeatable, predictable, etc like Germ Theory, Theory of Relativity, Evolutionary Theory, etc. In fact, most scientists consider it to be a failed theory.
This is where science can be confusing for the scientifically illiterate or for those who aren't up to date on science. Unlike laws and postulates, people get confused about hypothesis vs theories vs Theories for obvious reasons. A hypothesis is a prediction. A theory is a model for explaining observations. A Theory is a well supported model that is valid, repeatable, predictable, robust, etc. It is true that Newtonian physics doesn't work well at the scale of the solar system and beyond, but that doesn't make Newtonian physics wrong. That model just can't be applied to explain everything just like Newtonian physics can't be applied well to explain Germ Theory either, which is why we have Germ Theory.
|
Bear with me here, it has been awhile since I've read up on this kind of stuff and my train of thought is a little jumbled today.
Quantum physics breaks down when you apply gravity. We can predict a lot of things very accurately with it otherwise.
Same with general relativity, it works very well at a local level, but on a macro scale it stop giving us correct predictions. We can predict orbits, mass, ect of planets and stars huge distances away. But when you take the orbit of a local region of a galaxy and look at it's mass, distance from galactic center, and orbital speed. The equation stops working unless you add an X factor to the equation, which right now is dark matter. And they are able to estimate that X factor and get reasonable predictions again, but we have no idea what it is or it's exact value. Same with the expansion rate of the universe. Without adding another X factor, dark energy, it doesn't accurately account for the rate.
We still trust these theories but we can't explain everything with them. That was all I meant.