Theoretical Physics Debate

[MagicalH0b0]

My friend and I need to do a project for physics, and we're thinking about a debate about different theories of Physics.
We just need two really good theories that conflict with each other

[scarecrovv]

How about string theory vs. string-theory-is-silly theory? I'm simplifying, but you could probably go on for hours about this if you were significantly more knowledgeable about the subject than I am.

[poxic]

Dark matter vs. MOND (modified newtonian dynamics)? Though I think the latter has been kinda ruled out now.

[yurell]

TeVeS is the relativistic equivalent of MOND, but it has been relegated badly in terms of what values it can take to be true ... the evidence for dark matter just keeps getting bigger. To be honest, I can't think of any big debates about different theories that are going on in physics at all ... what level are you aiming the debate at, any way? No doubt there are some moderate field-specific debates going on that someone can tell you about.

[Dopefish]

It's not strictly a theory debate, but theres definitely room for plenty of debate on what the 'best' interpretation of quantum mechanics is. (Although, there are some subtle details that might render different interpretations altogether different theories perhaps, but thats one of the things that could be debated.)

[MagicalH0b0]

It's just an AP Physics project, but I really don't mind reading up on the subject to understand, that's actually what I want to do. And the differences in the theory really doesn't have to be that much. It could be two different types of the same theory, we just need one to disprove the other

[idobox]

The thing with currently opposing theories is that they are, by definition, cutting edge. The knowledge can change, people disagree and you need to reach a high level to know how to use the right mathematical tools.
You could examine past theories, and show how they made perfect sense until well thought experiments showed one was right, and the other wrong. Examples could be the particle/wave nature of light or the luminiferous ether.

[The Geoff]

The Ptolemaic v Copernican debate is pretty well resolved by now, but as a historical debate it's very interesting, pretty easy to understand the arguments, and demonstrates the use of observation and Occam's Razor very nicely.

[yurell]

If you're going to do such a debate, I suggest you show how the wrong side was not a stupid view point — when they were suggested they were the best and simplest explanations that fit the observations.

[eSOANEM]

IIRC Newton's first law of motion was not universally accepted when he first started going on about it because everything we see around us stops if you push it. That could be an interesting debate.

[tooyoo]

I agree that you should aim for something historical. Since you're at AP level, it might be best to go back to the 1900's, since anything more recent than 1920 will be unfortunately too advanced for you to get a deep understanding of the problem. If I can recommend some literature, what about taking a look at the scientific chapters of Abraham Pais's biography of Albert Einstein - "Subtle is the Lord":
http://www.amazon.com/Subtle-Is-Lord-Sc ... 241&sr=8-1

Pais excellently discusses both the scientific as well as the non-scientific aspects of Einstein's life. Thus he gives a really interesting discussion of the birth of e.g. special relativity and the scientific establishment at the time. You'll have essentially to read chapter III, which is probably some 50 pages (or less, if you cut the biographical part).

[soggybomb]

BCS theory has its dissidents.

[EdgePenguin]

I'm glad that someone has already mentioned that the dark matter alternatives are not very strong hypotheses. I get rather annoyed at the number of non-astrophysicists who 'know' dark matter is just a fudge.

Far more interesting that DM vs. MOND/TeVes/Fractal BS are some of the debates within the field of dark matter itself. One thing that you might find interesting, if DM is an area you want to look at, is the cusp-core debate. Essentially, theoretical models and observations have clashed on the exact radial density profile that a galaxies dark matter halo should have, although now there looks to be some promising resolutions that keep both groups happy (Einasto profiles, for instance)