[Wonder Warthog]

"Consider the number of chemistry and physics professors who would have to re-learn their subject and you can expect even greater resistance than when Plate Tectonics came on the scene in geology and geophysics."

Can't buy this'un. Any competent scientist has to "relearn their subject" pretty much continuously as God rubs our noses in the fact that we really know very little about how His universe works.

[Smokin' Joe]

I can. Go take a college physics class and start asking about FTL travel, or the velocity of gravity. Be ready to drop the class or flunk--regardless of how well you do on tests. I received just such a threat while inquiring about the velocity of gravity when I was a grad student.

We're not talking about finding the gene that causes brown hair, here, but a fundamental foundation shift (fundamental assumptions) on the order of discovering two plus two actually equaled 4.5 (just an example of the magnitude, not an assertion on my part).

Just as discovering a fundamental force which enabled FTL with little energy investment would overturn Relativity, there were fistfights in the aisles over Plate Tectonics vs Geosynclinal Theory. Fundamental change is met with strong resistance by those who have been taught the teachings of the status quo are gospel.

Minor advancements and refinements which are compatible with current fundamental theory are greeted (after peer review) as advancements.

Changes in the fundamental axiomatic structure of a field are resisted strenuously by those who have invested their lives in learning, researching, publishing, and teaching within the old set of axioms.