# Oldest outstanding scientific prediction? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 27, 2016, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696 "2016-12-27T13:10:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2016, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/41 "2016-12-29T16:39:15Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > That is so utterly, entirely, completely not true of the creation of gold _vis a vis_ what the alchemists believed that the two things are not even in the same realm. Making gold out of lead these days does precisely nothing to validate anything the alchemists believed. Right. Proposing that it might be possible to fly by means of magic spells would not be validated by the invention of the airplane. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2016, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/42 "2016-12-29T22:58:04Z")
Actually, the data from the Einstein-Eddington eclipse expedition was sufficiently noisy that it was consistent with both Newton’s theory (which also predicts gravitational deflection of starlight, just not as much) and with Einstein’s. But for whatever reason, it made a big enough splash in the public consciousness for people to accept Einstein’s theory. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2016, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/43 "2016-12-29T23:10:37Z")
In the 1600s, Galileo predicted that objects would accelerate at the same rate in a vacuum no matter their mass. This was directly demonstrated in the 1971 Apollo 15 mission. Admittedly the scientific community had long-since accepted that with Newton’s laws of motion and gravitation, so would this count? ---
**Author:** ![penultima\_thule](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/penultima_thule/32/3833_2.png) [@penultima\_thule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/penultima_thule)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2016, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/44 "2016-12-29T23:22:06Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Proposing that it might be possible to fly by means of magic spells. Indeed. In fact, I thought that Arthur C. Clarke’s Third Law would cover it nicely. ---
**Author:** ![Blue\_Blistering\_Barnacle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blue_blistering_barnacle/32/3386_2.png) [@Blue\_Blistering\_Barnacle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blue_Blistering_Barnacle)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2016, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/45 "2016-12-29T23:25:22Z")
> [@Rysto](#): > > In the 1600s, Galileo predicted that objects would accelerate at the same rate in a vacuum no matter their mass. This was directly demonstrated in the 1971 Apollo 15 mission. Admittedly the scientific community had long-since accepted that with Newton’s laws of motion and gravitation, so would this count? Was this never proven in a Bell jar prior? ---
**Author:** ![Francis\_Vaughan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/francis_vaughan/32/3093_2.png) [@Francis\_Vaughan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Francis_Vaughan)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2016, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/46 "2016-12-29T23:36:29Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Actually, the data from the Einstein-Eddington eclipse expedition was sufficiently noisy that it was consistent with both Newton’s theory (which also predicts gravitational deflection of starlight, just not as much) and with Einstein’s. But for whatever reason, it made a big enough splash in the public consciousness for people to accept Einstein’s theory. Yeah, that was why I wrote “appeared to show”. It has a special place in history, even if the details don’t really justify it. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/47 "2016-12-30T05:25:37Z")
> [@Rysto](#): > > In the 1600s, Galileo predicted that objects would accelerate at the same rate in a vacuum no matter their mass. This was directly demonstrated in the 1971 Apollo 15 mission. Admittedly the scientific community had long-since accepted that with Newton’s laws of motion and gravitation, so would this count? > [@Blue\_Blistering\_Barnacle](#): > > Was this never proven in a Bell jar prior? You don’t need a vaccum unless you want to really underline the point with something like a feather that would have huge drag in air. You just need to use objects and (low) speeds where air resistance is small, such as heavy metal balls of different sizes. Whether or not Galileo really did the legendary experiment off the Tower Of Pisa, a similar experiment certainly was done in the 16th century. > **[Galileo's Leaning Tower of Pisa experiment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo's_Leaning_Tower_of_Pisa_experiment)** > > Between 1589 and 1592, the Italian scientist Galileo Galilei (then professor of mathematics at the University of Pisa) is said to have dropped "unequal weights of the same material" from the Leaning Tower of Pisa to demonstrate that their time of descent was independent of their mass, according to a biography by Galileo's pupil Vincenzo Viviani, composed in 1654 and published in 1717.: 19–21  The basic premise had already been demonstrated by Italian experimenters a few decades ear According to t... It might be a better non-vacuum experiment to roll smooth balls of different sizes down a shallow low-friction slope, to keep speeds slow. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/48 "2016-12-30T19:09:51Z")
One prediction that took a long time to be confirmed was stellar parallax - predicted by Copernicus’s heliocentric theory in the late 1500s, but not observed until 1838. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/49 "2016-12-30T19:51:34Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > Have we proved that the number pi is irrational yet? … or it that too mathematical for the OP? As others have said this has been proven, but if you still want to keep pi mysterious its unknown whether or not it is[normal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_number) with speculation probably going back to the date that normal numbers were defined (1909). ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2016, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/50 "2016-12-30T20:25:38Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > Have we proved that the number pi is irrational yet? … or it that too mathematical for the OP? Yes, much too mathematical. ---
**Author:** ![eburacum45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eburacum45/32/8690_2.png) [@eburacum45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eburacum45)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2016, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/51 "2016-12-31T01:19:15Z")
Incidentally - do we know whether antimatter falls up or down yet? It is predicted that it would fall down - but I don’t know when, or if, the experiment has been done. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2016, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/52 "2016-12-31T01:34:35Z")
> [@eburacum45](#): > > Incidentally - do we know whether antimatter falls up or down yet? It is predicted that it would fall down - but I don’t know when, or if, the experiment has been done. No, we haven’t been able to run the experiment yet. The most recent big news from the world of antimatter is that we’ve managed to build one whole antihydrogen atom and verified that it has the same atomic spectra as normal hydrogen, which means positrons have orbitals and respond to photons the same way as electrons. Which we also strongly suspected, but it’s nice to verify things. (Not as nice as disproving them… ) Anyway, single atoms don’t fall appreciably, especially if you’re keeping them carefully contained so they don’t hit the walls of what you’re keeping them in. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2016, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696/53 "2016-12-31T03:11:28Z")
Experiments have been done on antimatter’s interaction with gravity, and so far the standard models have passed the tests to a large number of decimal places, but the tests aren’t anywhere near as straightforward as “drop a particle and see which way it goes”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oldest-outstanding-scientific-prediction/775696.md?page=2)