Science in its current form wasn't prevalent back when people were saying that the Earth couldn't be round. Any modern day scientist would always be open to the

Science in its current form wasn't prevalent back when people were saying that the Earth couldn't be round. Any modern day scientist would always be open to the possibility, given physical evidence. The very best model at the time showed that the earth was flat-- hey, it looks flat when you go outside. But evidence through experimentation led to the model being updated. Electrons are small and you can't see them with your eyeballs. But J.J. Thomson used models of how cathode rays work and how electrical conduction works, and he hypothesized and then experimentally showed that electrons exist. They may not exist, and any good scientist would be open to that possibility, given evidence. But the best models we have today show that they do exist. Observation and experimentation are one level beyond assumption. They're assumption backed by evidence. Blind assumption is to "suppose a case is true without proof." Imagination drives science, true. But nothing imagined is ever considered science, or even possible, without some kind of evidence. Uncertainty is fine. Is there dark matter? Is it possible to travel faster than the speed of light? Why are photons both particles and waves? Uncertainty is what makes these the interesting questions in science.