10 Scientific Theories That May Be IMPOSSIBLE to Prove

<h4>10 Scientific Theories That May Never Be Proven</h4>

A scientific theory is defined as a testable and verifiable prediction, using the scientific method to observe, measure and evaluate specific aspects of nature. Experimental verification is how we determine a theory’s truth, but not all popular theories are easily testable. 

This is Unveiled, and today we’re taking a closer look at 10 scientific theories that may never be proven. 

White Holes

Of course, we’ve all heard of black holes. These are objects in space with a density so extremely high that even light can’t escape from them. But there are also predictions to a black hole’s exact opposite, called a white hole. White holes are hypothesized objects which can’t be entered from outside, but light and matter can still escape. And, in fact, it endlessly escapes, much as it endlessly gets drawn into a black hole. The problem is that, to an observer, it’s believed that white and black holes could well appear identical. The white hole is spewing matter out, yes, but the difference from our perspective may well be impossible to confirm. And, on top of this, if white holes were to exist, then they violate the key principles of thermodynamics, which say their contained mass has to have come from somewhere originally. That said, for those who claim white holes to be real, that might not be a problem… so long as we accept that that “somewhere” could be outside of the universe we live in.

The Inner Workings of a Black Hole

While the existence of black holes is a complete certainty by now, we remain almost entirely unaware of what happens within them. To us, black holes have two main components - the event horizon and the central singularity. The event horizon marks the point of no return. Once crossed nothing at all can exit from the black hole, not even light. We can then predict what it would be like to approach the horizon, which involves a grisly process called spaghettification. However, we have no idea about what lies after; between the horizon and the singularity, or at the singularity itself. A few theories attempt to explain. For example, some think that black holes may contain universes of their own. Others say that the center might actually be a bridge to a separate universe entirely. But it may forever be impossible to actually test whether any theory is close to the mark.

Wormholes

Always popular in science fiction, these ultimately derive from the same overriding theory as black and white holes do - that of General Relativity. Wormholes are tunnels between distant places in spacetime. They potentially link up the universe in infinite ways, and could therefore offer a solution to the seemingly unscalable immensity of space. It’s exciting then that certain solutions to Einstein’s equations do predict wormholes to exist. But it’s disappointing that we’ve yet to actually observe them. One of the greatest issues is that for them to exist (and be traversable) they need to be made out of exotic matter. This is essentially an entirely unknown product, and so it’s also a huge mystery. In theory, wormholes would enable us to travel to a completely different location in the universe. It’s thought that they would also, inevitably, send us forwards and backwards in time. But, in reality, we simply may never unlock them. And, as well as everything else, it’s predicted that they may only ever exist on microscopic scales. Which, if nothing else is… impractical.

The Big Bounce

How, when, why and where did the universe begin? In terms of big questions, it’s arguably the biggest of them all. Famously, the Big Bang Theory has a strong amount of evidence in its favor… and is therefore the most widely accepted theory for creation. But, despite this, we still have very little understanding as to the very, very first moments of it. There’s a crucial gap that needs to be plugged, and one interesting answer arrives out of the wider ekpyrotic universe theory. It claims that the Big Bang wasn’t a bang, so much as it was a bounce. The material of the universe didn’t erupt out of nothing, but rebounded out of something. This is a cyclic model, meaning it predicts the universe to follow infinite, self-sustaining cycles, beginning with a Big Bang and closing with a Big Crunch - which is where the expansion of the universe reverses and collapses in on itself entirely. Currently, observations show that the universe is expanding out at an accelerating rate, which means that we’re certainly not approaching a Big Crunch. However, that’s not to say that the situation will never change. Many believe that it inevitably will, and a crunch-to-bounce will ultimately unfold. From a human perspective, though, this will most likely be long, long, long after we’ve disappeared.

The Fermi Paradox

OK, so it’s not a theory but it is a major problem that may never be solved. The Fermi paradox questions the disparity between the high probability of alien life, and the complete lack of evidence of such life. Originally proposed by Enrico Fermi during his lunch break in 1950, it has since baffled astronomers. Humans evolved roughly 300,000 years ago, and the solar system is 4.5 billion years old. So, statistically, life should have done the same on other planets. But, despite this, we have zero definitive evidence of extraterrestrial life. A few explanations exist to explain this, the simplest being that space is simply too big to travel. Another says it’s extremely unlikely to develop basic life in the first place. Whereas the more pessimistic answers suggest that global civilisations struggle to survive meaning that, eventually, we will fail, as well. This could be due to global warming, nuclear war, or thanks to an endless list of other gloomy factors. However, the fact remains that any answer to the Fermi Paradox will only ever amount to an unproven theory until such time as we do find alien life. If that ever happens.

The Simulation Hypothesis

First put forward in its current guise by the Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom in the early 2000s, the Simulation Hypothesis is actually a specific, potential answer to the Fermi Paradox. However, more than that, it suggests that our reality is fundamentally false. Or, at least that there are higher dimensions above us, directly pulling the strings. It argues that our entire universe is simulated by something else, with some suggesting that this might be an inevitable conclusion to draw. The idea goes that, if a reality like ours can be simulated… then statistically we are almost certainly in one ourselves. Such simulations would require extremely powerful computing technology, far beyond that which we currently have or (arguably) can imagine. But, because we can’t know if there is a limit to what computing can do, we can’t truly know if the sim is real. There’s no realistic way to measure if we’re in it or not. So, if it feels real, we might as well accept it as such. Because we’re unlikely to prove anything else.

String Theory

Elementary particles, such as electrons and photons, are the smallest particles known to humanity. But, are these really as small as matter gets? String Theory famously ascertains that we have even smaller bits - or strings - that then make up the smallest particles that we’re aware of. The key is that these strings vibrate, and it’s their vibrational frequencies that determine what particle they will form. Mathematically, it could be said that string theory makes a great deal of sense. But, physically,  for it to work we would need many, many more dimensions to house and explain it. In the most widely debated variations, we’d need 10, 11 or 26 in total. Some then think that these extra dimensions might be too compact to see, and therefore to prove the existence of strings could be beyond human technology. In some imaginings, to do so would require a particle collider much grander than the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland, and potentially even bigger than the solar system. It’s a theory, then, that may never be finalized.

Many Worlds

Alternate dimensions, parallel to our own, are common in science fiction. Increasingly, they’re commonly debated in science (fact) and various models to generate them do now exist. However, perhaps none has caught the imagination quite so much (nor for so long) as the Many Worlds Interpretation, put forward by Hugh Everett III in 1957. In short, It says that all possible scenarios come true in at least one world. If you ever find yourself choosing between left and right, an apple or an orange, to get up or stay in bed… the one that you don’t choose still happens, elsewhere. Dial it down to the very smallest parts of reality, though… to the quantum superposition of a wave or particle between two states… and the possibilities are truly endless. Now, the implication is that there’s an incredible quantity of parallel universes out there. Perhaps the most famous depiction of Many Worlds comes via Schrödinger’s cat, which is notoriously both dead and alive simultaneously, until it’s observed. The problem is that because, theoretically, both outcomes will become true in their own, branched-off universes, Many Worlds is (by its nature) completely unprovable. And, at the same time, completely unfalsifiable.

Dark Matter and Dark Energy

One of the more bizarre realizations of modern times is that most of everything is… invisible. Observations show that the majority of all the galaxy’s matter (all the universe’s, even) is unseen and not directly measurable. The universe’s expansion is also effectively driven by an invisible energy. These phenomena have come to be known as dark matter and dark energy, respectively. And, while all evidence shows there to be something there when we gaze out reality as we know it, we know almost nothing more than this. Currently, we think 95% of the universe is made of dark matter and energy. Only 5% (or just less than) is everything we see and know. This is pretty mind blowing, especially as we have almost zero idea toward learning how to start seeing what we can’t at the moment. Yes, we can muster up some level of understanding through indirect observations, but we just can’t seem to interact with dark matter or energy in any clear, understandable way. It’s a mystery that’s so entrenched in what it means to be alive in our universe, that many believe we might never, ever solve it.

The Fate of the Universe

How, when, why and where will the universe end? Or, indeed, does it need to ever end, at all? Just as with the start of all things, the fate of the universe has long been a topic for serious consideration. And, unsurprisingly, more than a  few ideas have been proposed. So-called Heat Death ranks amongst the most popular. It says that the cosmos will expand until all particles are an infinite distance away from each other. Which, eventually, should lead to a total loss of energy and to a somewhat disheartening end to nature, as the final stars and objects fizzle out. Dark energy again rears its unknowable head, as the primary driving force of the expansion towards Heat Death. That said, such infinite stretching out isn’t the only solution. There’s the Crunch and Bounce, as mentioned earlier, but also the Big Rip. Here, it’s said that expansion will eventually tear the fabric of spacetime itself. Exactly what will happen to the remnants of this place… is unclear. What we can say with a decent degree of confidence is that, if the universe does end, then humans are unlikely to be alive for it. But, of course, that means that whatever happens, we’ll potentially never be able to prove that it’s going to happen, either.