 |
| Titel |
Inseparability of science history and discovery |
| VerfasserIn |
J. M. Herndon |
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| ISSN |
2190-5010
|
| Digitales Dokument |
URL |
| Erschienen |
In: History of Geo- and Space Sciences ; 1, no. 1 ; Nr. 1, no. 1 (2010-04-12), S.25-41 |
| Datensatznummer |
250000127
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 copernicus.org/hgss-1-25-2010.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| Science is very much a logical progression through time. Progressing along a
logical path of discovery is rather like following a path through the
wilderness. Occasionally the path splits, presenting a choice; the correct
logical interpretation leads to further progress, the wrong choice leads to
confusion. By considering deeply the relevant science history, one might
begin to recognize past faltering in the logical progression of observations
and ideas and, perhaps then, to discover new, more precise understanding.
The following specific examples of science faltering are described from a
historical perspective: (1) Composition of the Earth's inner core; (2) Giant
planet internal energy production; (3) Physical impossibility of Earth-core
convection and Earth-mantle convection, and; (4) Thermonuclear ignition of
stars. For each example, a revised logical progression is described,
leading, respectively, to: (1) Understanding the endo-Earth's composition;
(2) The concept of nuclear georeactor origin of geo- and planetary magnetic
fields; (3) The invalidation and replacement of plate tectonics; and, (4) Understanding the basis for the observed distribution of luminous stars in
galaxies. These revised logical progressions clearly show the inseparability
of science history and discovery. A different and more fundamental approach
to making scientific discoveries than the frequently discussed variants of
the scientific method is this: An individual ponders and through tedious
efforts arranges seemingly unrelated observations into a logical sequence in
the mind so that causal relationships become evident and new understanding
emerges, showing the path for new observations, for new experiments, for new
theoretical considerations, and for new discoveries. Science history is rich
in "seemingly unrelated observations" just waiting to be logically and
causally related to reveal new discoveries. |
| |
|
| Teil von |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|