We are all relatively familiar with the works of Einstein and the broad change in understanding of the universe it caused.
His ground breaking work flipped Newtonian physics upside down and displaced many other leading theorists of the past.
Fewer know of the holes he left in the grand understanding of things, from the way the universe expands down to the predictability and laws that govern sub-atomic particles.
Modern theorists have found ways to explain Einstein's holes with such ideas such as dark energy and dark matter to explain the reasons why the universe is speeding up, but nobody, including Einstein (who spent his last decades of life trying to figure it out) have found an all encompassing law that marries quantum mechanics to classic mechanics. Instead, we have two separate schools and two separate thoughts on the different worlds of physics.
What if Einstein is wrong?
How could Einstein be wrong? I'm sure for hundreds of years people said the same of Newton.
You can claim M theory or even string theory, but again, why are we trying to take an idea and make everything fit into it however we can? What if the idea was wrong to begin with?
I was excited when they found out about some neutrinos that traveled faster than light, but they recently disproved this and are claiming faulty wiring and a bad single signal from a GPS.
So I can't use this.
...but a small group of physicists have been tinkering with Machian theories and have come up with an alternative theory
of a non-relative theory of classic mechanics that are as accurate as Einsteins in predicting energies and movements. Claiming that time is the ultimate weakness between the two schools of thought and our understanding time may be completely false.
I want you to meet Julian Barbour and some of the radical/controversial work his doing on the subject. I heard about him in an article that I read, but haven't been able to locate online, but Discover had an equally appealing article describing the work in non-technical terms for laymens like myself.
Why wouldn't it be possible that one of my favorites thinkers was on to something, but possibly completely wrong?
Granted I usually have no point to my topics, but why can't we think about Einstein in the future like we presently think about Sir Isaac?
discuss. I may have knowledge of the subject, possibly more than most, but I have no formal education on the subject and
would like to learn more.
I realize that it must be a monumental task to take on a giant
like Einstein, but if people are too afraid to even try, how will we progress any further.
I like the fact that these guys are challenging the status quo, even if they turn out to be wrong, they have at least giving alternatives a shot.
As far as Dark energy and matter are concerned, why would we
rely on something we cannot measure or observe? Sounds like faith and I believe the idea of the scientific method is anti-faith. Why makes things up to help explain the unknown.