25 Jan The Return of Truth in Scientific Discovery
By: Jarom W. Sessions
“Without truth in science, there is no natural law. Without natural law, there is no science.”
In general, human beings have always been interested in learning more about the universe and the world in which we live. Questions concerning how or why things happen drove many great scientists, such as Galileo, Copernicus and Newton, to discover many important natural laws that have stood the test of time and are still applicable in our day. Their desire to find truth and test their theories resulted in the discovery of significant new natural laws, something that has not been done in modern science in over a hundred years.
Why were these men able to discover significant new natural laws and scientists over the last century have not? If we search the dictionary for the definition of science we read that it is a “a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truth systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws”. The purpose of science is and always will be to describe and explain Nature by establishing new natural laws so that we can understand and comprehend it. But if scientists are not searching for truth and discovering new laws but only stick with theories such as the theory of relativity, theory of evolution and the theory of uniformitarianism, then by definition they are not actually doing science.
So what has changed in the last century? Why has the scientific establishment abandoned the search for truth and new natural laws? Isaac Newton himself said, “A man may imagine things that are false, but he can only understand things that are true”. Imagination in science is still important, however it is only the beginning, it’s the theory. Years ago theories were correctly placed as a starting point in the discovery of new natural laws and now modern science believes that “theories are the endpoints of science”.(quote taken from National Academy of Sciences).
A well known physicist Roger Newton states, “Truth is always unknowable, the only certain knowledge is that of error.” Can we see the contradiction here? This assumption goes in complete opposition of the scientific discoveries from early scientists such as Galileo, Copernicus and Newton. All of which discovered testable, repeatable, observable natural laws or TRUTH, that we still use to this very day. As long as the scientific community chooses to focus more on theories and imagination rather than actual evidence and empirical facts, we will continue to have a broken system.
What should we expect from our scientific leaders? Should we concede to our schools teaching theories as factual discoveries with no observable evidences? What needs to change in order for true scientific discoveries to get made into natural laws? The Universal Model is the stepping stone for a scientific revolution to bring truth back into scientific discovery. The scientific claims made in the UM are backed up by empirical evidences and observable data with no ‘imagination’ required. Find out more by reading Chapter 3 of the Universal Model.
To learn more about the Universal Scientific Method click here
Jarom Sessions is a university student studying business management. Being the son of Dean Sessions, author of the Universal Model, has given Jarom a unique perspective of science and truth. In his free time Jarom likes to be outdoors and participates in various sports. Jarom loves meeting new people and enjoys spending time with family, friends, and his wife.
Rose Allred
Posted at 03:32h, 26 JanuaryThat’s an interesting interpretation of Roger Newton’s words. But what Roger Newton said is still applicable. Copernicus, Newton, and Galileo all discovered important elements to their field but they didn’t discover the whole truth, because as Roger Newton said, “Truth is unknowable.” He is speaking of truth as a continuum. We are always growing and learning from the past. Science today is built upon observable natural laws just as science from the past was, it’s just becoming far more complex. Consider theoretical physics, part of which is built on the idea that simply by observing something we can change it’s behavior. Remarkable! Saying that science has slown down is ridiculous. Just pick up your phone. It’s lithium-ion battery is a marvel unto itself, as is the capacitative touch screen that utilizes our fingers ability to hold an electrical charge. We live in an age where we’re are surrounded with scientific marvels, to combat the science that has made it possible for you to post this article is prideful and foolhardy.
Jarom Sessions
Posted at 13:53h, 26 JanuaryThe definition of truth is the knowledge of what is, was, and will be. So in reality Roger Newton’s words are not applicable because one can in fact know certain truths. 2×3 will always be 6 and will never be four. Because of experimentation and real observable facts (no ideas or imagination) we know all natural rocks were created from a water environment and not from a melt. These are just a couple of examples where we can find truth all around us. Realizing the role of truth in our lives gives us a basis for comprehending the importance of it. Science today is not built on observable natural laws and by simply using your example of theoretical physics using ideas we can conclude that modern science has thrown out the use of observation and experimentation and has in turn used their imagination to prove their theories. Technology and science are not the same. We base Natural laws on science and we base inventions on technology. We can not affiliate the rise in technological success to that of new scientific discoveries concerning Nature. Computers, batteries, and touch screens are not science, but are technological inventions. If you have not yet purchased the UM, take the time to read the book and discover for yourself why theories are only the beginning for TRUE science. You can find the topic of truth discussed in Chapter 1 and the topic of science and technology in Chapter 3. Thank you for your comments and happy reading!
Jacob Householder
Posted at 14:21h, 26 JanuaryRose, you made a remark that I think all advocates of the UM would wholeheartedly agree with. Science has become very complex, seemingly becoming more and more complex each year; so complicated, in fact, that the general public becomes dizzy trying to comprehend things popping in and out of existence spontaneously, a universe exploding into existence from nothing, intelligent life growing independently from chemicals, and many other bizarre concepts. So instead of trying to contribute to the scientific community, the general public decides to ‘leave the smart stuff to the smart people’. However, extraordinary discoveries and unique experiments in the UM have actually brought a lot of simplicity to models and concepts that have stretched the “brightest minds” of science for decades, even centuries. Occam’s razor suggests that the most simple explanation is most likely the best. We are convinced that simplicity is an attribute of truth, and the UM provides compelling evidence for extremely simple explanations to several scientific processes that are currently explained only by ideas and imagination. I personally believe that truth should be simple enough for a child to understand, at least on a broad level. According the the Universal Model, it is that simple.