We examine
Science vs. Technological Methods: Approach to Hypotheses
Scientific Methods vs. Technological Methods: Approach to Hypotheses
Scientific methods should be based on the facts available to us. When these facts are lacking, assumptions, hypotheses, and theories are often used instead. This approach, which differs from technological methods, involves seeking the simplest possible explanation.
Generally: If we cannot determine the correct option from several assumptions, we consider the one that seems the simplest to be the best. This assumption holds until we can disprove it. However, it may happen that surrounding phenomena adapt to support this assumption.
Such an approach can resemble a form of belief system. It can be very difficult or even impossible to refute a hypothesis created in this manner, as demonstrated during the Middle Ages and other historical periods.
In contrast, engineering methods provide a better foundation for justifying the development of various systems, such as Reciprocal Physics.
Construction Methods Using Systemic Approaches:
If it is possible to build physics based on questioning Einstein's theories, as contemporary scientific physics does, then it is also possible to create a physical system that aligns with these theories. This is a fundamental principle of engineering work.
The Reciprocal Physics model was developed using systemic methods, which differ from conventional scientific methods. Verified natural laws and rules were applied in its creation. Importantly, facts must not be sacrificed for any assumption or hypothesis lacking evidence. These hypotheses must be examined using systemic analysis methods, which evaluate their consistency with other objective, natural, or mathematical laws.
Where the result is not clear, it is necessary to determine which hypothesis aligns with the sought model. Systemic methods operate on the assumption that all interactions between individual elements, subsystems, or entire systems must be entirely harmonious.
Thus, it is not possible for two hypotheses to come into conflict, as sometimes happens in scientific physical models (for example, the law of conservation of energy and quantum physics hypothesis).
In engineering methods, no hypothetical explanation for a natural phenomenon can be simply dismissed without thorough investigation and evaluation. A detailed systemic analysis of the interactions between individual elements and subsystems of the entire system must be conducted.
Example:
The "redshift of the light spectrum" from distant objects can have two possible causes. Similarly, the phenomenon of gravity can arise in two real ways: either through pushing or pulling. It is not possible to favor one mechanism without evidence of its correctness. The same approach applies to magnetism, electricity, and other phenomena.
Technological Fields and Infinity
Technical fields cannot handle infinity. Infinity cannot be incorporated into mathematical formulas used in engineering. No sum, product, or power of any numbers results in infinity.
Similarly, infinity cannot be manipulated like regular numbers—it cannot be added, divided, or multiplied in the traditional sense. Moreover, the hypothesis of the universe's infinity has not yet been supported by any evidence.
Mathematics, although not considered a natural science, follows the same rules of systemic methods as natural sciences. Therefore, it is possible to create mathematical systems that fully align with Einstein's theories (though this is not the aim of this text).
Systemic Synthesis
After systemic analysis, systemic synthesis must follow. This means that after each step of analyzing an element, it is necessary to try to integrate this element into the overall system. If integration is not possible, the problem may lie either in the analyzed element or in the entire system. In such cases, the step (iteration) must be repeated in a new quality.
It is not enough just to uncover deficiencies in interactions between elements; it is also necessary to combine all elements into a compact system without deficiencies in their mutual interactions. One cannot assume that a system with a vast number of elements has more than one correct solution.