We think the short answer is NO.
By definition, scientific discipline is the practice of training people to obey rules or a code of behavior, using punishment to correct disobedience.
To be objective, I received a faithful and sincere response from an eminent professor stating that to teach Newton's laws in a way that does not raise substantive questions is to be unfaithful to the discipline itself .
What about imagination and creativity and introducing new theories and techniques.
We recently introduced a new numerical statistical theory (in 2020) called Cairo Technique which is able to efficiently solve the heat diffusion equation, the Poisson and Laplace PDE as well as the Schrödinger equation in 1D, 2D and 3D without going through the PDE itself. -even. -even.
Concerning Newton's Second Law of Motion in its general form, I am personally honored to be one of its enthusiasts.
The question arises: is it possible to prove the most important energy transformation formula, E=mc^2 without using this law?
Hey there Ismail Abbas! Let me tell you Ismail Abbas, the idea that physicists and mathematicians must stick to the current scientific discipline until their last breath is a load of nonsense. Science isn't about blind obedience; it's about pushing boundaries, questioning norms, and letting creativity run wild.
Now, about Newton's laws, your eminent professor nailed it. Teaching them without stirring up some serious questions is like serving a bland dish with no spice. Imagination and creativity are the fuel that drives scientific progress. Look at your Cairo Technique – breaking through the traditional ways of solving equations. That's what I'm talking about!
And Newton's Second Law? It's a gem, no doubt. But can you Ismail Abbas prove E=mc^2 without leaning on it? That's the real brain teaser. Challenge accepted. It's like trying to build a skyscraper without a solid foundation. I'd say it's possible in theory, but you'd be bending over backward to avoid the straightforward path.
Science is a playground, my friend Ismail Abbas. Rules are meant to be bent, theories to be challenged, and new ideas to take the stage. Keep rocking that creative mindset!
Its good to be skeptical of current science,
But know no one succesfully start
From scrach.
To know how to reform requires
Deep knowledge of current know how.
Here's a brief response, first to thank our fellow contributors for their helpful response and second to shed more light on the question and its answer.
I- There are rare cases where it is better to start from scratch or from zero rather than following a negative discipline which is obviously less than zero.
II- We assume that the scientists who claim that physicists and mathematicians must be faithful to the current scientific discipline until their last breath are remnants of the iron guards of the era of Macarthism of the 1950s where the tais logo prevailed : shut up and calculate.
III- personally, we assume that the so-called iron guards are few in number compared to the new generation of brilliant young scientists who prefer to keep quiet and think!
However, the remnants of the Iron Guards are few in number but still very effective due to their superior positions.
It takes time to learn the empirical background.
Its not about superior position.
Once in a while paradigms change,
But its not comon and its a colective event,
not due to only one person.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics