Quote:
Originally Posted by sheeny
Only to a point, Steve! 
It's a bit hard to accurately determine the speed of light from a thought experiment alone, for example. Ultimately, a practical experiment has to be done to measure it, and more to determine that it is constant relative to the observer. Then, the thought experiments can take place to develop hypotheses, make predictions and devise new experiments.
The two go hand in hand! 
Al. |
I agree 100 percent. The theoretical physicists make all sorts of grand predictions, none of which are on solid ground until the theoretical physisicts come along and test them. These tests then open up fresh new paths for the theoretical physicists to wander and so on...
Einstein was correct about special relativity, but until he was shown to be correct what was the point of it and why should someone prefer his theory to some other theory without a verifiable experimental basis.
It took literally thousands of years to rid the world of Aristotelian physics, it would have been discounted much sooner if someone earlier on could have shown it to be false.
Paul