Final answer:
The question concerns the historical challenge of convincing people of scientific concepts that are not directly observable, underscoring the reluctance to conduct experiments to validate theories, such as cosmological models or the existence of atoms. It also touches on efforts to standardize scientific measures and acknowledges that scientific conclusions are always subject to revision based on new evidence.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question relates to how non-scientists have used concepts that scientists, throughout history, have struggled to prove or disprove due to lack of evidence or difficulty in observation and measurement. This can be applied to early cosmological theories such as the heliocentric and geocentric systems, where there was little motivation to conduct observations or experiments to validate these theories. Similarly, the concept of atoms took millennia to be accepted because it was difficult for people to be convinced of the existence of entities that are invisible to the eye.
The difficulty of accepting ideas that suggest act at a distance or involve entities too small to see is not just a historical artifact. It continues to be a challenge in the modern age, even as scientific understanding and technology advance. Additionally, the establishment of uniform measurement systems, such as the metric system initiated by scientists after the French Revolution, highlights the ongoing effort to improve and standardize scientific principles to facilitate better communication and progress in scientific research.
Historical scientific debates and the evolution of accepted scientific knowledge remind us of the inherently tentative nature of science, where hypotheses must withstand rigorous testing, and sometimes unexpected findings can lead to paradigm shifts or the formulation of new scientific theories.