Mmm, a nice hot bowl of Phlogiston

Nothing beats a theory that was just plain wrong.
Should we love a theory any less just because somebody went and disproved it? I think not. You can learn a lot from a disproved theory. Take Phlogiston for instance. Have you ever heard of it? I hadn't, until I stumbled upon A Phlogistonic Vehmence Attenuator!?! Everybody needs one! Say Phlogiston out loud. Isn't it a great word? It sounds fake, doesn't it? Well, it is. People used to think that Phlogiston was the material that made something flamable. This was taught in schools and universities for nearly a hundred years, can you believe it? If some 17th century scientist told me to believe in a substance without color, odor, taste, or weight I would have been dubious. But to think they gave it such a fake sounding name, "Phlogiston." They should have been laughed right back into the Renaissance.

When I read about the Phlogistonic Vehemence Attenuator, I was pretty sure the word Phlogistonic was totally made up, but when I hit the dictionary there was an entry. Phlogiston was in the dictionary, so it was real. The dictionary told me that Phlogiston, a full fledged and well known word, actually stood for something that never existed. If you consider that for a moment you realize it is no great distinction among words. Many common and important words share that property: democracy, peace, political-correctness, spare-change (actually spare-change is two words, but I'm sure I've never had any). Phlogiston distinguishes itself from other things that never were because everyone has come to recognize that Phlogiston never existed. Alas, so many other things unreal are still held to exist by most people, but that is another discussion.

So what can we learn from an obsolete scientific theory like Phlogiston? Well for me obsolete scientific theories are stark and concrete illustrations of the non-linear path to knowledge. The road to our current understanding of the cosmos was not built in one long straight line. It is a meandering collection of separate roads that have intersected, forked off, been lost and found, and sometimes, as is the case with Phlogiston, run right off a cliff. Most educational curriculum dedicate very little time to the contemplation of obsolete theories. This is, to my mind, a mistake. Where is the best place to get a good view of a majestic and elegant scientific theory? Why, from atop the corpse of the bogus scientific theory that was vanquished by it of course. Look at Newton's theory of gravity as compared to that of Aristotle. Or look at Einstein's theory on the nature of light from the perspective of Newton's. The power of what we know now seems magnified so many times when viewed through the lens of people who tried to understand but failed. I for one would like to see the importance of non-linear paths to knowledge echoed in school curriculum. This strict-achievement-test-multiple-choice mess of a system we have now is a recipe for disaster. But that is another discussion. Phlogiston, just because we couldn't prove you doesn't mean we don't love you. May your 3 phonically phony syllables never never be forgotten.