The Ability to Change One's Mind

One of the qualities I most admire in a scientist is the ability to look a pattern of scientific results and say "well I guess my pet theory was wrong, I need to change the way I think about this."  The difference between science and religion or philosophy is that science is not based on beliefs; scientific theories must be based on concrete observations. No matter how elegant and seductively intuitive an idea might be we must be vigilant about molding our ideas to the data and not the other way around.  In order to stay relevant and cutting edge throughout our careers we should be nimble in our thinking, constantly taking in and assimilating new information.  This is what is so exciting about being a scientist; there is always more to learn and new discoveries to make.

A recent article in Nature News titled "Beautiful Theory Collides with Smashing Particle Data" highlights the fact that a much beloved theory of particle physics called supersymmetry has thus far not been supported by the Large Hadron Collider experiments being performed in Europe.  Now I am no physicist but from what I understand theoretical physicists like this theory because the math behind it is beautiful and provides an elegant solution to some sticky problems.  A major problem in physics right now is that theories that work on the very small scale (quantum physics) are difficult to reconcile with those that work on the very large scale (general relativity).  This has lead physicists to search for a "unified theory of everything" (a grand title indeed.)  Super symmetry is one component of theories used to solve this problem and suggests that every particle has a "supersymmetrical partner."  However, these super particles have not yet been found leading many to suggest that as elegant of a solution supersymmetry may be for solving some of physics' darkest mysteries it might simply not be true.  Some physicists say that the jury is still out on this and more experiments are being completed but others suspect it might be time to go back to the drawing board.

I would love to hear from you.  Have you ever had the experience of disproving your own (or worse yet your advisor's) favorite hypothesis?  Are there contentious debates in your field with prominent scientists lined up on both sides of the debate and completely sure that they are right?