In its future development science will most probably confront a number of obstacles and limitations of various kinds. In the present essay these limitations are described and classified into two main groups – limitations of the physical nature and limitations of the human factor. The overcoming of the above-mentioned problems will fully or partially change the science framework to which we are accustomed. But by accumulating knowledge and developing our imagination we can overcome all obstacles and limitations upon the future development of science and even arrive at things which would otherwise remain hidden from us forever.
How might science be different in the future?
6 days later
- Edited
- Do you agree with Einstein's metaphysical maxim: "God does not play dice with the universe"?
- "What is the nature of space and time?" This question is also raised by Carlo Rovelli in the article "Physics Needs Philosophy / Philosophy Needs Physics".
Do you have answers to these questions, taking into account the philosophical testament of Pavel Florensky:
“The problem of space lies at the center of world understanding in all emerging systems of thought and predetermines the composition of the entire system. With certain limitations and clarifications, one could even recognize space as a proper and primary subject of philosophy, in relation to which all other philosophical topics have to be evaluated as derivatives. And the more closely this or that system of thought is worked out, the more definite becomes the peculiar interpretation of space as its core. We repeat: worldunderstanding is spaceunderstanding.”
I enjoyed how the essay made its case. I agree that imagination is important for scientific theories to develop. The not so useful side of imagination is taking some unprovable axioms for facts instead of taking them as what they are, assumptions. However, if such a theory does predict something and the latter can be confirmed by experiment, then the theory is at least useful for predicting certain things which may enable us to further widen our perspective on reality.
I only disagree on your last statement, namely that accumulation of knowledge and devlopment of imagination is sufficient to overcome all problems and limitations of science in the future. Because the objective part of science is nature which dictates what is possible and what not, and the subjective part are the scientists who may also in the future take unprovable axioms for facts, and thus, self-limiting scientific progress.
14 days later
quote
The scientific method is a system of principles with which the objective knowledge about
reality can be achieved. The scientific method includes several basic steps: forming a question,
a hypothesis, and a prediction; testing by conducting the appropriate experiments and analysing
the results of the experiments. Тwo important moments, which we will examine again further
on, should be noted here. A modern theory (hypothesis) is accepted as being scientific if it is
falsifiable, i.e., in principle, there is a possibility that it can be disproved by an empirical test.
Hence, a scientific theory cannot be “proved” conclusively. The only thing that can be done is
to arrive at the conclusion that on the basis of the experiments performed, the hypothesis cannot
be rejected. We will consider a number of limitations which arise on applying the scientific
principles. We have divided them into two main groups – limitations of the physical nature and
limitations of the human factor. The overcoming of these problems will fully or partially change
the science framework to which we are accustomed.
end of quote
As a person whom sees competing cosmology models as to Dark Energy in Physics, and attempts to argue them out I am at times bemused and horrified as to a bloody football match mentality between opposing teams taking place. As an example I have seen string theorists and Loop quantum gravity proponents go head to head . One of the iconic memories I have is of seeing LQG presentations as to a prior universe, and its re emergence into the present universe. I.e. the LQG attempt is magnificent, and I like it. However, in this case, taking into account the territoriality issue certain String theorists decide in the sake of being part of an "opposing" team will refuse to even consider such a possibility. A great deal of damage can be avoided if opposing camps of theorists recognize the mathematical limitations as to their approaches, and to work with other scientists to at least entertain the possibility of other consequences. It is very human to batten down the hatches and to go back to "safety'. I have been there myself, But if we are to make real headway this football match mentality has to be at least tempered to have opposing sides talk to one another.