quote:
The laws of fundamental physics are the most solid and reliable laws known in the scientific realm.
About a hundred years ago, Michaelson and Morley did a series of experiments, the results of which violated the then-known laws of physics. But observations are observations, and data cannot simply be dismissed without explanation. What happened was that Einstein eventually realized that the "laws of fundamental physics" needed to to be revised.
The laws of physics are not absolute laws. They are merely descriptions of how we have observed nature behave, and are subject to change if new observations warrant it.
But it is not always necessary to make a change in the fundamental laws of physics to accomodate new observations. Sometimes new phenomenon are discovered that explains the observations within the old laws. An example, Lord Kelvin used the known temperature-vs-depth data of his time with the known laws of thermodynamics to calcate an age of the earth that was, I believe, only a few hundreds of thousand of years, or maybe a few million years old -- far too young according to geology. The discovery of radioactivity resolved this problem -- by adding a new heat source Kelvin's data, thermodynamics, and geology could be resolved.
Observation
always trumps theory. Period. To say otherwise indicates a profound misunderstanding of science.
™ Version 4.2