In conclusion
The Etruscans believed that clouds collide to create lightning. In contrast, the ancient Romans claimed that lightning occurs because clouds collide.
Science and Scientific Thinking
Science and scientific thinking have their limits, shaped by various factors. Scientific investigation is influenced not only by strict rules and methodologies but also by ingrained superstitions and cultural beliefs.
For example, it is difficult to imagine a physicist who is also a devout Muslim accepting a discovery or finding that contradicts Islamic teachings. The same applies to adherents of other faiths. In such cases, a scholar must choose between objective scientific thinking and their faith.
A system that aims to be compatible with all its subsystems faces challenges if it attempts to incorporate superstitions or myths. It is unrealistic to expect a scientist who considers themselves a charlatan or is strongly influenced by some superstition to embrace such a system. Conversely, a system adapted to any superstition or myth will not be able to remain compatible with its subsystems and, therefore, will not be effective in the realm of scientific investigation.
Limitations of Scientists' Abilities and Knowledge
When examining frequently cited objections, we find that many have been debunked as incorrect since the previous century. Therefore, scientists working with such outdated or inaccurate knowledge cannot accurately assess the validity or errors in current theories, works, or hypotheses. It is thus challenging to expect experts with insufficient or outdated knowledge to objectively evaluate new theories or discoveries.
Limitations Imposed by Political Regimes
Political regimes often influence scientific progress by suppressing or censoring certain findings. For instance, Einstein's theory of relativity was not recognized in some regimes in the past. In our case, any mention of this theory was censored and removed from books. The Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences also participated in this censorship. By doing so, regimes hinder the recognition and development of new scientific knowledge and theories.
Other Limitations
There are also other factors that can restrict the dissemination of new discoveries and findings. Primarily, powerful organizations or influential individuals may intervene to prevent new discoveries from being published. This effort often stems from a fear that revealing new knowledge might challenge long-standing theories and necessitate a reevaluation of existing scientific understanding.
Consider, for example, a prominent university professor whose academic reputation is built on current hypotheses and textbooks. If it were demonstrated that these hypotheses are incorrect, the professor might find themselves in a position where they would need to reassess their entire approach and possibly discard part of their work. Such a professor might use their influence to prevent the publication of information that could undermine their work. This issue is common in the academic environment and contributes to maintaining the status quo, even when new discoveries could advance the field.
Funding and Personal Biases
Various influences related to the funding of scientific journals and publications can also play a role. For instance, journal editors may face pressure to reject certain papers or articles under the threat of losing funding. Such decisions may be made under various pretexts, whether related to content, quality, or other reasons.
Personal animosity towards the author can also be a factor. If editors or reviewers hold a negative view of the writer, it may affect the decision on publication.
The final decision on whether to accept or reject papers often lies with institutions such as academies of sciences, which can result in even brilliant discoveries remaining unrecognized or unnoticed until they are discovered and acknowledged abroad. Many significant breakthroughs only come to light due to the international scientific community.
Society and science must evolve to be open to new knowledge. Scientific progress can be slow. Just as the ancient Romans transitioned from believing that lightning was caused by colliding clouds to understanding that clouds collide to produce lightning, modern science continues to evolve. Our scientific understanding is capable of moving from a steady-state universe hypothesis to the "Big Bang" theory, even if the latter may challenge established natural laws.
Unfortunately, the current state of scientific thinking shows that the path to new, progressive hypotheses is still very distant. This is reflected in the ranking of Czech science, which is rated as low as 43rd internationally.
Author of Reciprocal Physics - Vladimír Vašek