In fact, it doesn't mean that all the existing theories can't be overturned, but it is necessary to find out whether the existing theories are wrong or not. If there is nothing wrong, why do you want to overthrow it? And how did human science develop? To put it simply, does science depend on you to overthrow my theory, and I to overthrow your theory, or to constantly improve a theory through the efforts of predecessors and descendants? Then we need to understand, if you put forward a theory, what conditions do you need to have if you want this theory to succeed?
First of all, let's take a look at how science develops step by step into today's sky, which is our window to observe and study the universe. The development of human science stems from the ancients' explanation of the law of starlight movement in the sky. In the era before the telescope appeared, as long as we had a pair of discerning eyes, we could all see the rising and setting of the sun and the alternation of stars at night. What is this? The ancients said it was the sun waiting for a group of brothers to orbit the earth again.
This is the earliest understanding of the laws of the universe, that is, geocentric theory, but Copernicus did not agree with this view. Especially after the retrograde phenomenon of planets was discovered again, serious problems appeared in the geocentric theory, and the concepts of current wheel and even wheel had to be introduced. In this way, Copernicus felt that the operation of the universe could be so chaotic, so he published his masterpiece 1543 as I lay dying, but Copernicus did not put forward a convincing mathematical basis for his theory.
The main reason is that Copernicus thinks that the orbit of the planet is still a perfect circle, which makes planets of the solar system's prediction accuracy less accurate than Ptolemy's geocentric calculation. Copernicus went to Tycho after his death? Brad, he was considered as the greatest astronomer before the telescope appeared, because his naked eye vision was unparalleled at that time.
Tycho accumulated a lot of astronomical data during his years of observing the sky, but his mathematical ability was poor. He thought Copernicus and Ptolemy were wrong. He combined these two theories and thought that all the other planets in the solar system are revolving around the earth, but the sun revolves around the earth with these brothers. He created his own theory. After Tycho's impressive death in 160 1, Kepler inherited a lot of precious observation data from Tycho, and he agreed with Copernicus's Heliocentrism. 1609, Kepler released the famous three theorems of planetary motion, and built a perfect solar system model for people for the first time with its precise mathematical model. Later, Galileo's observation of Jupiter's satellite and Venus' phase more strongly confirmed Heliocentrism's position.
Although Kepler explained the motion of planets, he couldn't tell why planets revolve around the sun and what forces make the solar system move. Time is up 1687, and the greatest, most sensational and epoch-making paper of mankind, Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, has been published. Newton put forward gravity, which not only explained all the physical movements that can be seen and thought of on the earth, but also explained the historical problems left by Kepler. For the first time, mankind can perfectly describe the operating laws of all celestial bodies in the solar system with a complete set of theories. Moreover, this theory is also very predictive, allowing people to discover the planet Uranus, which is invisible to the naked eye.
However, Newton's theory dominated the world outlook of human beings for 200 years, but there were problems. At this time, the time has reached19th century. With the improvement of human science and technology and observation ability, people have discovered the precession problem of mercury orbit. According to Newton's theory, no calculation can smooth out the error of 43. 1 1 arc seconds per century, and Newton can't explain why two mass objects have universal gravitation and the way of gravitational interaction until his death.
The solution to this problem is well known to all, that is, the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity in 19 16 not only solved the problems left by Newton, but also perfectly accommodated some phenomena that Newton's theory can explain, and also made the most amazing prediction in the history of human science: starlight will bend when passing through massive objects. In 19 19, Sir Eddington was confirmed in the observation of solar eclipse.
Seeing this, I think you have summed up a law, which is not only the law of scientific development, but also the necessary condition for a correct theory.
How did science develop? What are the conditions for a correct theory? From Copernicus, Kepler, Newton to Einstein, I believe you will find that science is a process of continuous progress, not a process of mutual overthrow! Today, can you say that Copernicus' theory is wrong? Kepler's three laws are wrong? Newton's theory is wrong? Neither, they are still fighting for it, even though they have been replaced by higher theories. But we are still learning the previous theory. Therefore, if we want to surpass Einstein, we should not overthrow the theory of relativity, but perfect and supplement it.
So what conditions must your theory meet in order to succeed and transcend relativity?
1. First of all, your theory must explain all the phenomena that the theory of relativity has proved so far. Including: starlight bending, gravitational lens, gravitational redshift, gravitational time expansion and so on.
2. Second, your theory must solve the dilemma that relativity is facing now, that is, the problem that cannot be solved. For example, describing the abnormal rotation curve of galaxies on a large scale (dark matter problem) cannot be perfectly combined with quantum mechanics, that is, your theory must quantize gravity, mention that gravity is mediated by micro-fame, and solve the reason why gravity is so weak.
3. Third, your new theory must meet the above two points and put forward new falsifiable predictions. That is to say, according to your theory, you can put forward a new prediction, which can be falsified by experiments and observations.
After reading the above conditions, what I want to ask is, can you surpass the theory of relativity? Overthrowing is impossible, as long as it can surpass you, it will go down in history.
What about quantum mechanics? As a contemporary theory of relativity, the perfection and success of quantum mechanics are not attributed to one person. It is estimated that all the scientists you can think of in the 20th century contributed to the development of quantum mechanics. This theory is rarely criticized by people because ordinary people don't quite understand it. You want to say that people are wrong and don't know what to say.
However, the success of quantum mechanics is obvious. At present, the particles in the standard model and their modes of action can basically explain some micro-level phenomena we can see. But this theory is not perfect, which is generally accepted. You can never overthrow the whole quantum mechanics, but you can perfect it.
For example, the particles in the current standard model cannot explain all the phenomena in the universe. The most familiar thing is that there are no dark matter particles in it, and the problem of neutrino oscillation cannot be solved, because according to the particles in the current standard model, neutrinos are predicted to have no mass, but in fact neutrinos have three flavors (electron neutrinos,? Neutrinos and? Neutrinos can be transformed into each other, which means that neutrinos have mass, and it also means that there must be unknown particles in the universe that can give neutrinos mass.
Moreover, the current standard model cannot solve the mystery of antimatter disappearance, which is also the reason for the asymmetry of positive and negative matter. At present, we find that some mesons have weak interaction symmetry breaking, but there are no strong interaction symmetry breaking particles.
So at present, there are many problems waiting for us to solve and improve, rather than waiting for us to overthrow the existing theory. Because the existing theory is correct, you insist on overthrowing others. Isn't this a lever essence? ! So according to the law of scientific development in the past, even for a century or two, Newton's theory, Einstein's theory, and now quantum mechanics are correct. But in the future, there must be a more perfect scientific theory to let us reject all the unknown problems at present.