Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="freyar" data-source="post: 8247736" data-attributes="member: 40227">Wow, I'm kind of sorry I added anything to the thread. How did we get on the Ptolemaic vs Copernican models? That's not really analogous to the muon g-2 measurement. As others have noted, the shift between Ptolemaic and Copernican/Keplerian/Newtonian systems is not really geocentrism vs heliocentrism. It's that heliocentrism makes use of the more natural language, which in turn aids theoretical understanding, which actually allows you to make predictions (that's why the Newtonian part is so important!). They're two different frameworks. Ptolemy described planetary motions by fiat. Newton actually gave you a set of laws that explain planetary motion.The current situation with the muon is very different. If the Standard Model prediction and experimental measurement are in fact different*, the resolution doesn't require any sort of change in framework. It just needs a new type of fundamental particle or maybe a few. And there are plenty of other reasons to believe that we need more anyway. It's worth noting that the measurement and prediction are quite close:experiment: 2.00233184122vs prediction: 2.00233183620*See my first post: there are reasons to think the Standard Model might actually predict the experimental results correctly anyway, if we know how to do the math correctly.</blockquote>