Chapter 7

This chapter traces paradigm changes that

result from the invention of new theories
brought about by the failure of existing
theories to solve the problems defined by that
theory.
This failure is acknowledged as a crisis by the
scientific community.
As is the case with discovery, a change in an existing theory
that results in the invention of a new theory is also brought
about by the awareness of anomaly.
The emergence of a new theory is generated by the persistent
failure of the puzzles of normal science to be solved as they
should.
These failures can be brought about by observed discrepancies
between theory and fact or changes in social/cultural climates.
In early stages of a paradigm, theoretical alternatives are easily
invented. Once a paradigm is entrenched (and the tools of the
paradigm prove useful to solve the problems the paradigm
defines), theoretical alternatives are strongly resisted.
Crises provide the opportunity to retool.
1. Emergence of Copernican Astronomy
Its predecessor, the Ptolemaic system was admirably
successful in predicting the changing positions of
both stars and planets.
Domenico de Novara- held that no system so
cumbersome and inaccurate as the Ptolemaic could
possibly be true.
Copernicus himself said that the astronomical
tradition that he inherited had only created a
monster.
Technical breakdown is the core of the crisis.
External factors are principally significant to
determining the timing of break down and the area
where the breakdown first occurs.
2. Emergence of Lavoisiers Oxygen theory of
combustion
1770: Many factors have combined to generate a
crisis in Chemistry.
Cavendish, Priestly and Scheele believed in
PHLOGISTON THEORY.
Although they believed in Phlogiston Theory, they
were unable to apply it constantly due to elaborate
results of their experiments
When Lavoisier began his experiment on airs, there
were almost as many versions of the Phlogiston
Theory as there were Pneumatic Chemists.
The proliferation of versions of a theory is a very
unusual symptom of crisis.
3. The emergence of Relativity Theory
Leibniz criticized Newtons maintenance of
classic conception of absolute space

The proliferation of versions of a theory is a
very unusual symptom of crisis.
Their critics were purely logical.
Theyre not able to show the absolute position and
motion w/o any function in Newtons system
They did not succeed in hinting a fully relativistic start of
space and motion would later come to display.
Theory of space enters normal science with the acceptance of
wave theory of light
this theory says that if light is a wave motion transmitted in a
mechanical ether directed by Newtons laws, then celestial
observation and terrestrial experimentation can detect drift
through the ether
the detection of drift by aberration
measurement become a problem in normal science
they built a special equipment but this did not detect observable
drift (experimentalist and observers to theoreticians
Maxwells (Newtonian) electromagnetic
theory
light and electromagnetism were due to
variable displacements of the particles of a
mechanical ether
He believed that his theory compatible
with some articulation of the Newtons
mechanical view but he finds it hard to
develop a suitable articulation
As a result, his theory despite its
Newtonian origin produced a crisis in the
paradigm from which it had sprung
Maxwell theory proved such drag was very
difficult to introduced in his theory