Some sciences develop a body of understanding over decades which is only relevant in its consistency of method

Question

Wat are examples of such?????? plzzz help . i am unable to think of an example.
god bless ya..thx

Answer 1

The word "relevant" is what is confusing about that question. Usually something is relevant *TO* something else ... some particular matter at hand.

Perhaps you mean "useful". (Some people mistakenly use "relevant" as a synonym for "useful". ... In other words, the main problem with this question is bad English.)

If that is what you mean, then I would offer astronomy and astrophysics as an example. How is it "useful" to study distant galaxies? To know how stars form (so we know the fate of our own sun 5 *billion* years from now? To measure red-shift of galaxies to see that the universe is expanding? To form testable theories about the origins of the universe?

Answer, these are not "useful". But we study these questions because ... well ... that's what humans do. And they provide a fantastic test-bed for the consistency of method ... the *scientific method*. We see some phenomenon (the expansion of the universe), we make a theory that explains that phenomenon (the Big Bang), and then we imagine a way to *test* that theory (looking for the background radiation from the Big Bang). If it confirms our theory, not only does this feel good ... but it confirms that our *method* works!

Answer 2

There are fields of mathematics which have been thoroughly studied and developed, even though there was no known use for it. But often, science comes along later for which it turns out to be very useful. I think Riemann geometry is one example, for string theory and M-brane theory. Imaginary and complex numbers (the square root of -1). It's hard to think of useless science, especially since it may soon be found useful.