We constantly say that Einstein’s General and Special theories of relativity have passed many different tests, insenuating their accuracy.
Before Einsten, we tested Isaac Newton’s theories, which also passed with accuracy until Einstein came along.
What’s to say another Einstein/Newton comes along 200-300 years from now to dispute Einstein’s theories?
Is that even possible or are his theories grounded in certainty at this point?
In: 593
>What’s to say another Einstein/Newton comes along 200-300 years from now to dispute Einstein’s theories?
Well, nothing, but you’ve got some misconceptions. First, science isn’t about “knowing what’s right” with 100% certainty forever. Science is about what we know right now based on our observations and whether our predictions match them. If something works now, it’s right until something better replaces it. We don’t say “we can’t conclusively prove relativity is 100% perfect and correct for all time therefore we must assume it’s wrong.”
Second, is that you’re not really understanding what “right” means. That’s not really a well-defined term the way you’re using it. Newton’s laws of motion are still remarkably accurate and we use them every day. 99.9% of the time that you use Newton’s laws of motion, they will be “right.” It’s not that often that new theories completely overturn old ones. More often than not, new theories build on older ones by improving and refining them, which makes the old ones less accurate, but not “wrong” per se.
Latest Answers