Welcome to the World of Modern Science!

 

Proven Science

Leading Theories

Astrophysics & Geophysics

Health Science

Standards

Monthly Newsletter

Recent Changes

Research/Debates

Guidelines

Methodology

Physics

Astronomy

Geophysics

Meteorology

Biology

Psychology

Sociology

Other

It's a really exciting time to be studying science! A little over 300 years ago, Sir Isaac Newton changed the way everybody thought about the physical world. Since then, scientists have mainly been just working out the implications of his work. But science is poised for another great leap forward. In the 1800s, the laws of electromagnetism were defined, and in the 1900s, nuclear forces were discovered. Inertial, gravitational, electromagnetic, and nuclear forces appear to make a complete set, at least judging by the success of the atomic theory, which shows how these forces combine to create all manner of elements, chemical reactions, and macroscopic properties of matter. Yet many disciplines are still dominated by concepts that predate the modern atomic theory.

 

For example, in ancient times the heat & light from the Sun was thought to be evidence of some sort of fire. That idea persisted until the late 1800s, when scientists realized that the Sun was at least a couple million years old, and no fire could last that long. In the 1920s, Sir Arthur Eddington asserted that the Sun had to have some sort of internal heat source. When nuclear fusion was discovered in the 1930s, it seemed to validate Sir Arthur. But laboratory experiments with nuclear fusion done since the 1950s, combined with space-based measurements of the Sun's mass beginning in the 1960s, have revealed intractable problems in the Eddington model. So it's back to the drawing board. Interestingly, we now have something that Sir Arthur did not have: a mature atomic theory upon which to build macroscopic models. So it's time to dispense with the abstract conjecture of the early 1900s, and to see if we can work all of the way through the construction of a solar model using just mechanistic physics.

 

Similarly, geophysics has long-standing issues that should have been resolved by now, but which haven't shown any progress in a long time. Volcanos erupt in erratic, inexplicable spurts, and earthquakes occur without warning, except of course for the strange phenomena (e.g., earthquake lights, ground-hugging fog, etc.) that scientists insist are unrelated, but which only occur before earthquakes. If we merely take a step back, we can clearly see that when nothing makes sense, and the experts are dismissing entire classes of data, the solution can only be in the data that were dismissed. In other words, if somebody announces that the car keys simply cannot be found, because the entire house has been thoroughly searched, except for the kitchen counter, we have enough information to deduce precisely where the car keys might be hiding (i.e., on the kitchen counter). The application of such simple logic to otherwise intractable problems is revealing possibilities for break-through advances in geophysics.

 

Curiously, we're seeing this same pattern (i.e., old, crusty paradigms with intractable problems, and categorical dismissals of certain kinds of data) in a lot of disciplines. This has led us to believe that it's time to start systematically challenging deep-set assumptions in all of the sciences. The results are startling.

 

So we're in the process of building up this website, to provide the framework for these new endeavors. If you just want to know the current consensus within a particular discipline, you can get that from Wikipedia, while on this site, you can find intractable problems in the mainstream models being tackled.

 

Other Sites with Useful Information