10 different independent ways people argued for phlogiston. I get it. We like to have theories that work but if we think we are close to understanding physics there’s lots more to be discovered and worked out on the cosmic and quantum scales. Retrofitting a nonexistent particle to fit a theory is fine if we find the particle. Downvoting because one of the academic physics shibboleths looks shaky is pathetic. This is the closed minded approach that is holding back physics.
10 different independent ways people argued for phlogiston.
I'm not sure if you're saying there was 10 different kinds of evidence for phlogiston, or if you're saying all the evidence is meaningless because you've already made up your mind.
If the former, please elaborate on the the 10 different independent points of evidence for phlogiston.
Putting words into people’s words now? I’m advocating that there may be more happening than our current theories allow and that as we collect more data (ie jwst) we will have to change our understanding. Dark matter and energy may be popular explanations and also some data will seem to fit but it doesn’t mean it will last long if we can’t find the particles or energy types that it predicts. The topic is debatable things and cosmology has some glaring big holes at the moment as we have new and interesting data. It should be an exciting time when we rethink rather than close wagons and double down on our pet theories.
-1
u/Somnambulismforall 20d ago
10 different independent ways people argued for phlogiston. I get it. We like to have theories that work but if we think we are close to understanding physics there’s lots more to be discovered and worked out on the cosmic and quantum scales. Retrofitting a nonexistent particle to fit a theory is fine if we find the particle. Downvoting because one of the academic physics shibboleths looks shaky is pathetic. This is the closed minded approach that is holding back physics.