Abstract

The fallibility and corrigibility of experimental results, and of the confirmation or refutation based on those results, is illustrated in the 1930's history of Fermi's theory of decay. Early results favored the competing theory of Konopinski and Uhlenbeck. It was found that there were experimental difficulties along with an incorrect theoretical comparison. When the experiments were corrected and the proper theoretical calculations made, the evidence favored Fermi and refuted Konopinski and Uhlenbeck. The relevance of known evidence for confirmation and the value of ad hoc hypotheses is also discussed.