The Origin and Its Meaning

Facts, Theories and Copernicus

    n   Data from experiment and observation become fact when sufficiently confirmed.

However, while confirmed data is fact even hypotheses that are long-accepted can still be opinion.

Geocentric astronomy was the archetypal non-recognition of that difference. It gave correct results for millennia. Yet it was wrong.

 Near its end it could not explain new observations even with revisions and elaborations.

 But, in spite of those failures a more correct alternative was strongly opposed.

    n   The lesson of that experience in astronomy is that there is something wrong in a scientific theory if:

 its hypotheses are ever more complex and they require continuous further adjustments,

 bypassed problems are ignored and unrealistic positions are maintained.

    n   That is precisely the situation with 20th Century physics. Consider a few of the indications.

 The many "fundamental" particles of high energy physics and the constant revision of the "building blocks" of matter.

 Ridiculous assumptions as that conservation does not apply to quantities less than the related Heisenberg uncertainty.

 Bypassed problems such as:

- why the "stable" atomic orbits are stable,

- the wave / particle problem of light never resolved,

- field as an explanation of action-at-a-distance without dealing with what it is or how it does what it does.

The inability:

- to successfully grapple with gravitation,

- to reconcile relativity and quantum theory.

The Origin and Its Meaning

does for physics what Copernicus did for astronomy -- it supersedes the exhausted old theories with a new theory that is realistic, simple and direct, and that overcomes all of the above problems.