Additionally,in Natural Sciences the experts can have different thoughts about how the worldworks and what elements are presentin the world also the experts devise many theories which helps us understandmore about the world.
The atomic theory which was first introduced byJohn Dalton in the year 1803 with an oral presentation and a publication in1805, many experts had given theories which Dalton used in his model to givesubstantive evidence, the experts before Dalton did not find out about atom butstill helped Dalton to build upon them and through experimentation was able toprove the smallest particle ‘atoms’ existence. The experts agreed on Dalton’satomic structure until it was falsified by J.J.
Thompson and Ernest Rutherfordwhen they found out about the electron having a negative charge which was apart inside the atom thus, making it the smallest particle. J.J. Thompson alsocreated the plum pudding model which was in hope to create an electricallyneutral atom but Thompson’s student Rutherford falsified the plum pudding modelin 1911 by finding out that an atom contains a positive charge and most of theatoms mass is in the centre/nucleus. By Rutherford identifying the proton andneutron it was Henry Moseley who changed the way the periodic table wasarranged by seeing the x-ray emissions of the elements, the periodic table wasthen arranged according to the atomic number instead of the atomic mass, whichis the periodic table we currently use. In natural sciences the theory or lawis in consensus by the experts until and unless someone falsifies it, once itis falsified the disagreements starts to happen which causes the new theory orlaw to be developed and accepted. These falsifications take place when theexperimentation gives a different result from the last time, the observationsthat are made can be have errors because the observation is based on humansense perception and our senses cannot always be reliable. This all signifiesthe historical development of the theories and laws with the increasingadvancement of technology.
The latest andthe widely accepted atomic model is the Bohr’s Model created by Niels Bohr whoimproved the Rutherford’s model by explaining the emission and the absorptionspectra and also why the electrons do not crash into the nucleus. Now thismodel replaced the previous model by advancements in it and by more detailedexplanation and analysis of the structure. The experts are in consensus aboutthis model and is used by the experts till now. The first model was created in1803 which lacked many explanations that we now know about, the continuousprogress of the model has historically developed a lot and can further bedeveloped with the new thinking and by disagreements of the experts orconsensus of the experts on the atomic model. It may happen that someone mayimprove the Bohr’s model resulting in a newer model which can be in consensusby the experts. Natural Sciences tend to be in consensus until and unlesssomeone falsifies the theory or law however, the disagreements exist with thecourse of time as the experts understand more about the theory or law and canquestion on its very proof.
Concludingly, thecreation of robust knowledge does not always depend on the consensus ordisagreements that the experts have on a claim raised, but the creation ofrobust knowledge can also be dependent on the course of time. The claim orfindings put up by an expert can be accepted by the other experts for aparticular time, it may happen that the claim or findings had a limitationwhich was solved with the course of time. As mentioned about human sciences,people used to believe that economic growth always leads to economicdevelopment but as the time passed people realised that economic developmentdoes depend on various other factors. Just as is the case of natural sciences,until and unless a theory is falsified it is accepted by the experts but withthe advancements in technology and better observations the findings can givedifferent and improved results leading to a new or more improved theory to beaccepted.
The claims and counterclaims put up from both the areas of knowledgereflect that sometimes the knowledge does not exist without consensus ordisagreement whereas sometimes the knowledge can exist with only consensus ordisagreement.