Is 'Frontiers of Science' redundant?

[luckyme]

One major leg of the scientific method is the ongoing challenging/testing of what has been put forth as a useful theory. Other than what topic is hot in the public eye at any given time, what makes any one area of science more on the edge than any other?

Is there a point where it's so far from that challenging edge that it's actually a form of engineering and becomes deductive rather than inductive? Scientific graveyards of sorts.

luckyme

[bunny]

I think so - although I dont think it is inconceivable that a previous "graveyard" becomes cutting edge again. Newtonian physics seemed like the be all and end all for so long until our understanding progressed deeper and it was found to be incorrect and in need of research.

I think lots of medicine falls into this category to - there is a "tried and true" treatment for years and years, then along comes some deeper understanding and it all changes.

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
I think so - although I dont think it is inconceivable that a previous "graveyard" becomes cutting edge again. Newtonian physics seemed like the be all and end all for so long until our understanding progressed deeper and it was found to be incorrect and in need of research.

[/ QUOTE ]
I was trying to think of an area of science that would not be considered a frontier anymore, but I'm not a scientist, and every area I could think of had exciting pebbles being found on the beach.
If there's one where we can dust are hands off with a 'that's it then' ... is it still science?

luckyme

[chrisnice]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think so - although I dont think it is inconceivable that a previous "graveyard" becomes cutting edge again. Newtonian physics seemed like the be all and end all for so long until our understanding progressed deeper and it was found to be incorrect and in need of research.

[/ QUOTE ]
I was trying to think of an area of science that would not be considered a frontier anymore, but I'm not a scientist, and every area I could think of had exciting pebbles being found on the beach.
If there's one where we can dust are hands off with a 'that's it then' ... is it still science?

luckyme

[/ QUOTE ]

Plate Tectonics...done

edit-of course the scientific community would certainly look at and reevaluate if contradictory info came in. But its done.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
Plate Tectonics...done

edit-of course the scientific community would certainly look at and reevaluate if contradictory info came in. But its done.

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont know how true this is, actually. There are still gaps in our knowledge as to how plate tectonics actually works.

For example, plate tectonics plays a key role in regulating the Earth's temperature in that it regulates CO2 in the atmosphere. The way it was explained to me (by a qualified geophysicist waving his hands a lot) is that CO2 gets washed out of the air by rain, it corrodes rocks making Calcium carbonate which sinks to the ocean floor, plate tectonics subducts it down to the centre of the earth thus removing atmospheric CO2. But, the high temps and pressures then convert the calcium carbonate back into CO2 and CaO and volcanoes then spew it out into the atmosphere again. Without the CO2 being replaced, the Earth would freeze - when the CO2 builds up lots and the Earth heats up, it turns out that the rocks corrode quicker and CO2 is removed from the atmosphere faster (it also dissolves into the ocean quicker) creating a pretty nifty feedback mechanism.

The point I am laboriously getting to is that this cycle is very poorly understood (the initial research is only twenty or thirty years old) and although plate tectonics is an integral part of it all - there are still questions as to exactly how it all hangs together - so I would hesitate to say that an area of science ever becomes truly "finished".

[guesswest]

Phrenology?

[bunny]

Well - obviously the hard sciences, who could argue with that.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
Phrenology?

[/ QUOTE ]

Even modern analysis of brain function can be argued to be a successor to phrenololgy.

I cant think of anything that we inarguably know everything about.

[guesswest]

Obviously I was joking when I mentioned phrenology. Though I do agree it'd be quite sensible and logically coherent idea if we didn't know some of the things we do now, and likely took various lines of enquiry in a useful direction.

But, the question was concerning what is and is not 'cutting edge' - whatever phrenology may be, it is clearly not cutting edge!