I am surprised of the fact that nobody wrote neoclassical economics
Is there a prevailing study at the moment? I have been led to believe there are some more empirical models in heterodox economics?
That there is just one big bang happening at a time.
dark matter and energy are sorta placeholders and I think by then we will have a good idea of what they are.
You’re more optimistic than me, especially when it comes to dark energy
I feel like we have had some alternatives that have come close and hoping it all comes together.
The idea that human pharmaceuticals should be tested on animals before humans. The only real purpose animals serve is cost (you have to pay people to test your stuff and have insurance in case something goes wrong) and to ensure it’s not obviously lethal or has permanent side effects before going to human tests, and even then you can’t 100% prove it won’t be harmful to humans with just an animal test. Dfferent species have wildly different physiologies and biochemistries so an animal test means very little in the context of effects on humans. It’s really frustrating to see news outlets take a mouse test result and immediately assume it will work the same way in humans, not to mention the ethical implications. We’re already developing alternatives to animal testing and I’m really hoping it goes obsolete within our lifetime.
The only real purpose animals serve is cost (you have to pay people to test your stuff and have insurance in case something goes wrong) and to ensure it’s not obviously lethal or has permanent side effects before going to human tests,
Holy incredibly wrong.
or as it goes,
mice lie and monkeys exaggerate
It seems likely that simulated testing (in a computer) will be mature by 2050, it’s under development now.
The timeline of human civilization, specifically the Neolithic Revolution that brought farming. From what I understand there is growing evidence that is not yet accepted by mainstream scientists that humans were somewhat more advanced much further back in time than previously believed.
Reading Graeber’s Dawn of Everything and the history of the many “failed starts” of agriculture is so interesting. As well as why humans actively avoided it in many cases.
I think that all political theory will be replaced with the Pointy Stick theory, which states that “stay away from my food or I’ll stab you with this pointy stick.”
But what about the theory of the large throwing stone that states those tasty radiated cockroaches are my dinner and not yours?
Always felt the cosmic inflation theory was a place holder until we better understand the early universe.
Round earth…
I mean, “round” is a non specific term already not used in science to describe the Earth. The earth is not a sphere if that’s what you mean, they call it a spheroid because it’s slightly distorted from the centripetal force of rotation and the surface is kind of rough.
To be replaced with flat earth.
Is this sarcasm? I genuinely can’t tell.
The ancient Greeks came up with a pretty accurate estimate of the radius of the Earth just by looking at ships disappearing over the horizon. Literally anyone with even a cursory knowledge of geometry can prove its general shape. No one in science has any doubt. Zero.
The bigger question is why anyone would deliberately claim the Earth isn’t flat if it actually was. What benefit does that have? What lobby is behind the scenes keeping it a secret exactly?
Also, linear infrastructure beyond a certain size explicitly has to account for the curvature of the Earth. Long bridges have the pillars slightly offset from parallel and that offset needs to be constantly measured during construction to ensure it’s correct. High speed train viaducts have to be slightly curved to follow the shape of the Earth. Ships still use nautical miles because it specifically accounts for the curvature while SI units and regular miles are defined as straight lines only. Line of sight radio systems like microwave dishes don’t work past a certain distance because it’s impossible to get line of sight with the Earth in the way, necessitating repeater towers that break up the straight line into a chain of antennas that can change the beam direction, and the angles of the antennas are calculated to account for the shape of the Earth. Same with FM radio towers whose coverage is limited by the horizon. Same for radar. If the Earth was actually flat all along, why would we have to take curvature into account when it would have saved private trillionaire corporations who do control our world untold time and money to not pretend it’s round?
Finally, why is the Southern Cross only visible in the southern hemisphere? If the Earth was flat shouldn’t we be able to see all the stars from any perspective?
It’s a bleak joke about the future.
I wonder if there’s an exact definition of “round”, and if the Earth matches it. I mean, plenty of bumps in this sphere.
If you’re just looking at the bumps, then earth is flatter than a pancake. Literally.
Mathematically it is obviously not a perfect sphere, but then again I don’t think such a thing exists. Not one made of matter, at least.
I read somewhere that the bumps are way less than what is on a basketball were it scaled up. Each bump being taller than Everest.
that climate change fucked us
The model of the solar system as planets rotating mostly within a flat plane around the sun, will become something more like the sun being akin to a bullet with a ballerina dress (to represent coronal aura and discharge) with the planets spiralling along with it but slower and trailing just a little behind. It will also include more space properties that aren’t as well known like massive gas bubbles and a non-static gravitational floor, as well as man-made spacecraft and satellites. I don’t know actually know what the current prevailing theory is. there’s a lot of assumption here, plus imagination of how I believe things actually are, with no real certainty or any supporting evidence.
The model of the solar system as planets rotating mostly within a flat plane around the sun
This hasn’t been the prevailing theory in a while. Actually, that’s true for most of the simplified models we learned in elementary school. What you describe is quite a bit closer to the prevailing theory.
Oh, well that’s good to know. Thanks! I guess I need to update my own knowledge of what prevailing thought is.
Did you really think that what you were able to infer from basic knowledge about the motion of the planets was not realized by scientists?
I did not think it was a prevailing theory. Now I’m curious about what you wanted to accomplish by asking that question. Why would it matter either way?
Dark matter and by extension the general theory of relativity.
Einstein theory of relatively and the theory of evolution and the theory of space
Am curious, why replace them and would you have an idea of what should they be replaced with?
The theory of everything?
