Ask and Get Answers
Can science ever tell us why something happens?
Can science only describe and never explain? For example, can science tell us why light travels at 186,000 miles per second and not 176,000 miles per second or why subatomic particles either attract or repel one another?
| Print article | This entry was posted by admin, and is filed under Science & Mathematics. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed. |
about 1 year ago
Nice observation! It’s the reason why science has never really intrigued me. It is the statement of “facts” rather than any real explanations. Furthermore, these “facts” are usually just assumptions made by an individual who has only encountered one possibility to explain a certain phenomenon. Just because you only see one reason does not mean there are not more out there, herein lies the fault of science.
about 1 year ago
light can travel slower under the right conditions, subatomic particles attract and repel accourding to their polarity
about 1 year ago
Yes, science can tell you anything…it just depends on what it is..
about 1 year ago
I’ve think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Science is a process of modeling our environment. We build a model and as long as if fits our situations we are happy. Then one day we pass the boundaries of where our model fits and we have to scap it. We build a better fit for our new situation and we are happy again. Lucky thing about models is that once built to a specific situation turns out to fit many situations. For example the stress strain relationship for steel works for aluminum just by changing a constant. But if we start stretching it too far or to fast the relationships are no longer suitable and we have to make more complicated models.
Einsteins E=MC^2 is a model. So far it fits what scientist expect so the theory holds. One day the E=MC^2 may have to be modified to a new model.
Evolution is a model of humanity. Is it fact? God knows. Can it be proven? No. Can data be found that builds confidence in the theory? Yes. But data is not always correctly interpreted. (After all we are just advanced one cell creatures). Is it logical? Like beauty is in the eye of the beholder so is wisdom. Ever watch someone significantly younger than you ( a child). Their version of wisdom and confidence sometimes lack the maturity you’ve come to know. But don’t be proud, Your elder looks at you with the same eyes.
An interesting thing about models. It can help predict the weather. It can explain why the sky is blue. It can predict very specific phenoma. But is was built on actions reactions of an observerd world and not from the fundalmental knowledge of this universe. The real truth, God only knows!
about 1 year ago
Science can investigate and detail the workings of the universe as best as we know.
Water, for instance, boils at 100 degrees C at sea level. And light travels at 186,000 MPS – both of these phenomenon can be proved and verified. As far as why water boils at this temperature and not, for instance, 125 degrees C, or why, as you ask, light doesn’t travel at 176,000 MPS is really not important. We could easily have assigned different criteria of measurement or different units for our measurements, but that would only change the numbers – the reality of the relative speed or temperature would still be exactly the same.
It is simply the consistent way in which these phenomenon take place – the numbers just assign a common measurement that can be used for our own consistency and enable us to verify the results with repeat experiments in different labs and locations.
about 1 year ago
Science explains a lot, but it has limits. Those limits are extending over the years. If string theory turns out to be a meaningful and useful theory, it might shed some light. Until then, we can calculate with incredible detail how charged particles behave, but we don’t know why there is an electromagnetic or even a gravitational force.
We know precisely the speed of light because we define miles in terms of meters and the meter in terms of the second and the speed of light. There are also theories that the speed of light might have been different in the earliest nanoseconds of the big bang.
about 1 year ago
The speed of light is instantly reached, there is no acceleration period, that’s just the way it is. Subatomic particles possess an eclectic charge, like charges repel, unlike charges attract.