Truth and the Essence of Science

One of the core challenges is that science does not provide absolute truths; instead, it constructs models. We can never fully grasp what is "true." As Indiana Jones aptly stated, "Archeology is the search for fact, not truth." If you seek truth, Dr. Tyree’s philosophy class is where you should go.

So, what is a model? Let's take gravity as a case in point. In introductory physics, the gravitational force is defined as:

This equation indicates that gravitational force is a vector that aligns with the gravitational field (g) and has a magnitude equal to the product of g and mass. The gravitational field is measured at 9.8 Newtons per kilogram. However, this is not "the truth"; it's merely a model—albeit a useful one. If you were to travel to the moon, you'd require a different model for gravitational interactions.

This model illustrates that gravitational force diminishes with distance from a planet or moon. While it’s a more accurate representation, it still doesn’t equate to the absolute truth. Einstein’s Field Equation provides more detail, yet it remains just a model.

Science is limited in its ability to prove truths; however, it can disprove ideas. For instance, if someone insists that the Earth is flat, and I present evidence that contradicts that belief, I effectively debunk it.

Take a look at the image at the beginning of this article, which captures a view of New Orleans across a lake. Notice how you can see the tops of buildings, not their bases. Why is that? It’s a result of the Earth's curvature. If the Earth were flat, our view would be different—although some might argue that the lake has a slight bulge.

Communicating Scientific Ideas

Another hurdle is that scientific ideas cannot exist in isolation; they require collaborative dialogue and development. The stereotype of a scientist toiling away alone in a lab is misleading. Scientists exchange ideas through publications, conferences, and other forums.

Ideas undergo a vetting process. In peer-reviewed journals, experts assess submissions for credibility. While this system is not flawless, it does provide a level of scrutiny.

Consider a conference presentation featuring a fringe idea—like the flat Earth theory. It’s unlikely such a concept would gain traction in a peer-reviewed journal, yet it could spread easily through platforms like YouTube or blogs, where sharing information is as simple as clicking a button.

This accessibility means that anyone can find support for their beliefs, regardless of their validity. The abundance of information can be overwhelming, akin to a buffet of ideas. So how do we discern credible information from misinformation? This is not a straightforward task. Fortunately, several fact-checking websites, such as FactCheck.org, Snopes.com, and Politifact.com, aim to verify claims. Even Wikipedia has become a valuable resource for checking facts.

As we navigate this era of disinformation, it’s crucial to differentiate between harmless beliefs, like the flat Earth theory, and more concerning misconceptions, such as climate change denial or COVID-19 skepticism, which can have significant societal implications.