Introduction

Science evolves through the efforts of researchers. New advancements build upon the discoveries of predecessors. Our understanding of the structure and development of the universe, galaxies and stars, planets, and comets has only emerged through increasingly in-depth investigations. Often, new technologies and measurement methods have significantly contributed to this understanding. New models that can explain known phenomena and predict new ones become genuine “discoveries” once their predictions are confirmed.

Sponsor – https://fusemonterey.com/

Looking back, we find many ideas that seem “strange” to us today regarding the properties of nature and the universe. These ideas often persisted for centuries because the explanations at the time were not questioned, primarily due to a lack of verification options, as well as because these phenomena had little significance for daily life. Additionally, there were times when “holy books” seemingly provided adequate instructions for explaining incomprehensible phenomena.

From today’s perspective, many of these old concepts are hardly comprehensible as accepted beliefs of their time. Two relevant examples include:

1. Shells found in mountains far from the sea were thought to have grown there in the ground, like everything that grows from the earth. (Today, creationists believe that the Earth and its fossils were simply created as is.)
2. Until the 19th century, the universe (the solar system plus the sphere of fixed stars) was largely thought to be about 8,500 years old. This age was calculated around 325 AD (Council of Nicaea) based on genealogical data and timelines in the Bible.

Both examples relate to the understanding of time and, consequently, evolution. Their refutation was made possible only through the development of a critical attitude among scientists and a clear objectification of research through theory and evidence.

Development of Two Concepts – Time and Evolution

Paleontological and geological studies have significantly contributed to changing people’s perception of time. The Danish scientist Nils Stensen (Nicolaus Steno) and the Englishman Robert Hooke, around 1670, provided the correct explanation for the shells and shark teeth found in the mountains: mountains do not grow like trees but arise through uplift, such as from ancient sea floors—a concept that lacked supporting facts at the time. The discovery of numerous fossils and the compelling calculations regarding the potential thickness of sediment deposits indicated that the Earth must be much older than previously calculated. The interpretation of geological strata containing fossils later clarified that dinosaurs roamed the Earth hundreds of millions of years ago and largely went extinct around 65 million years ago.

Steno and Hooke (and later others) began to doubt the truth of the Biblical creation narrative, leading to internal conflicts with religious doctrines. Hooke also recognized that fossils indicated extinct species and that the Earth might now be “drier” (climate change…?).

However, both scholars still forced their ideas into the biblical chronology, which necessarily required the postulation of short-term changes in the Earth’s structure in the past, such as significant (grotesque) geological changes due to the Great Flood. This led to catastrophic theories in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Astronomy showed in the 19th century that the sun was likely older than 8,500 years. The most efficient known energy source at the time, coal, was also used to calculate the minimum age of the sun. With a known mass of about 2 x 10³⁰ kg (derived from the Earth’s orbit around the sun and Newton’s laws), it was estimated that if the sun had always shone in the same manner, it could be at least 1 million years old. Today, incorporating insights from nuclear fusion, we know that the sun is approximately 4.5 billion years old.

Finally, Darwin’s publications firmly established the concept of evolution. It became logical to conclude that the Earth has a history and that geological evolution exists—implying also the evolution of the universe.

New Theories and Their Acceptance

The evolution of many ideas, of course, did not always proceed without problems. Some theories were incorrect, others were disbelieved, while some achieved immediate success. Numerous examples can illustrate this variety.

Around 1920, Wegener proposed, based on the morphology of the coastlines of Africa and South America, that the continents move apart and that Africa and South America had been driven apart. He was not believed and was even ridiculed. It wasn’t until around 1960, when studies of the residual magnetic field strength of the ocean floor revealed stripes of alternating magnetic polarity symmetrically distributed around the elevated Mid-Atlantic Ridge, that evidence for the activity of the Earth’s crust (plate tectonics) emerged, leading to the movement of continents.

An example of a prediction that was soon and convincingly confirmed by measurements is the curvature of space predicted by Einstein’s theory of relativity. Light passing close to large masses is deflected in their gravitational field (tracing a curved path from an Euclidean perspective). This led to the prediction in 1915 that it might be measurable during the next solar eclipse. This was achieved in 1918 (though it was hardly recognized afterward), confirming the theory and making Einstein famous.

Science operates under a few fundamental principles. One is that every idea should be traceable and verifiable or, at the very least, refutable. Another foundational thought (dating back to Occam in England, 13th century) is that a simple theory with as few “parameters” as possible is better than a complicated one with many assumptions and “free” parameters.

Furthermore, there is a belief that certain models may be unified through a more general (or “higher”) theory. A good example is again the theory of relativity in the realm of motion and gravitation: it is generally applicable, but at “small” speeds, the equations simplify to Newton’s form.