News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Scientists find first evidence that many universes exist by Zaak on Saturday December 18, 2010 @01:26AM (#2019043)
A theory isn't completely abandoned just because of a single contradicting observation. The theory may explain a host of other phenomena very well, in which case then new observation merely shows a limit past which the theory no longer applies. As an example, we know of many observations which contradict the predictions of Newtonian gravity, but we still use that theory for planning space probe trajectories.

I would like to know what you mean when you say "big bang theory". I think that would help ensure we're all talking about the same thing.

When I say "big bang theory", I mean the idea that the universe we live in was in a very hot, dense state roughly 13.7 billion years ago, along with some other details such as a brief period of cosmic inflation.

Re:Scientists find first evidence that many universes exist by davidj on Saturday December 18, 2010 @04:26AM (#2019217)
"A theory isn't completely abandoned just because of a single contradicting observation."

Uhhh, yes it is.

Re:Scientists find first evidence that many universes exist by ceejayoz on Saturday December 18, 2010 @10:45PM (#2021017)
> Uhhh, yes it is.

Did you not see the bit about Newtonian physics in the post you're replying to?

Every scientific theory gets revised as new information comes out. Our understanding of evolution, physics, biology, etc. have all changed drastically over the last few decades, but we didn't throw out the theories - we adjusted them were necessary to more accurately include new data.

Re:Scientists find first evidence that many universes exist by Zaak on Saturday December 18, 2010 @04:29PM (#2020363)
You've just demonstrated that you're not interested in a conversation.

Welcome to my killfile.