What was the most 'revolutionary' scientific theory of all time?

[RJT]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think there is a right or wrong answer - just thought it would be interesting to see different opinions on something other than the g word.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I wasn’t going to bring it up. But since you couldn’t let it rest: The Resurrection.

[SheetWise]

Theory of electricity and magnetism (in all of its various forms).

c'mon guys, quantum theory, from hiesenberg, and dirac

The idea that mathematics can be used to model the world and the scientific method itself, if you'll accept a metatheory.

[benkahuna]

I agree. Copernicus. Theology ruled that day so his theory was especially controversial.

Evolution has certainly been good for controversy in more modern time, but it's well accepted and has been from the get go. Darwin and Wallace never were under house arrest and had to pretend they diedn't believe what they believed.

Quantum theory sure made things strange (unintentional pun), but I don't see it being as revolutinary as Copernicus's theories.

[bocablkr]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree. Copernicus. Theology ruled that day so his theory was especially controversial.

Evolution has certainly been good for controversy in more modern time, but it's well accepted and has been from the get go. Darwin and Wallace never were under house arrest and had to pretend they diedn't believe what they believed.

Quantum theory sure made things strange (unintentional pun), but I don't see it being as revolutinary as Copernicus's theories.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for your agreement - Though I admit relativity is another good choice.

[mrgold]

Not entirely recognized as true anymore, but in terms of beeing revolutionary at its time I think Freudianism (and possibly Marxism) are the only things that can compete with evolution. Most scientific theories (relativity, heliocentricity, quantum mechanics, etc) might have been revolutionary ideas within their fields. But they were not nearly as strongly reacted to in the broader culture as the previous 3 theories.

[Cooker]

[ QUOTE ]
Theory of electricity and magnetism (in all of its various forms).

[/ QUOTE ]

In some ways I agree with you, but the theory wasn't particularly earth shattering. It was pieced together here and there and then pretty much accepted (I know that radio and light being the same thing took some getting used to but it was a relatively easy transition to the new thinking). Relativity was considered too risky to award the Nobel Prize to Einstein and took a fair amount of time to gain wide acceptance. Still, if you want to talk about what separates us from the pilgrams, you are talking E and M and the combustion engine (also many medical breakthroughs).

I would think that the idea of germs and small building block particles would rank very near the top.

[Cooker]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the above two have been the most "revolutionary" and anything else is probably a distant third.

Hopefully there is a number three on the way during our life time. Maybe some type of unified theory.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the grand quest for a unified theory in physics is more religious in nature than scientific. Isn't this similar to searching for a lowest order cause? Certainly it is a scientific pursuit, but many believe in it with no strong evidence that it even exists. I think a reasonable theory of non-equilibrium thermodynamics or statistical mechanics would be much more interesting and useful, but that is probably because I work in that field (or vice versa).

[goofball]

most revolutionary? Special relativity. One singel paper turned the scientific community on it's ear. "On the Electrodynamics Of Moving Bodies"

Copernicus is close second.