There Are No Quarks : Can You Prove Me Wrong? (Page 3)

DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: if its a rolex, it doesnt even tick
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: Yes, a lot of comments about science are seen here on Wireclub and elsewhere, even by intelligent people, which can only be described as shockingly naive.
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: re - "objective, observable evidence"

Hmm, that idea has kinda fallen from grace too.

Read up on the "theory-laden" nature of observation.
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: This IS the naive picture of the Scientific Method:-

1. Observational facts are unproblematic. We can all agree on them.

2. Theories, in contrast, are merely provisional.


This picture died with Logical Positivism. Wireclub hasn't been informed yet.
(Edited by CoIin)
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: "a theory is fact, in science" is a common misconception. it is actually the hypothesis which most accurately describes a phenomena, and is from then on treated as it WERE a FACT, in order to form more hypothesis based on the theory.

the misconception is that a theory is only "presumed true"- within scientific circles, for the purpose of furthering science. thus, a scientist can refer to a theory as factual, as presuming such can allow for further research; however, a layperson cannot tell another lay person that a theory is a fact, as it is only considered 'factual" in the light of scientific hypothesis.

the universe is sooo much bigger and more complicated than we could ever fully understand that it makes perfect sense to assume that boson einstein condensates are factual- in order to build a laser, and, even if the laser works, it is still only circumstantial evidence of bosonic condensates, and any suggestion that this laser serves as definitive proof that the theory is completely factual, and factually complete is, well, i dont want to sound harsh...
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: I DONT GIVE A DAMN IF THE EINSTEIN BOSON THEORY IS TRUE, ALL THAT MATTERS IS THAT I HAVE A HUGE FRIKKIN LASER CANNON!!!!!!
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: A hypothesis is basically the same animal as a theory. In philosophy of science the two terms are used pretty much interchangeably.

Scientists and science fans sometimes try to gerrymander a clear division between the two, no doubt partly as a reaction to adversaries declaring "Such-and-such is JUST A THEORY". A theory, the outraged scientific apologist will inform us, unlike a puny hypothesis, is highly confirmed.

Ask him to explain what "highly confirmed" means and watch his face go red.
(Edited by CoIin)
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: a theory is the 1 hypothesis out of many competing hypothesis which is most widely agreed upon within the scientific community as best describing observable reality. in essence, a hypothesis graduates to theory status by appeal to authority and consensus- in light of observable reality, of course.

that's another reason why i said it bothers me when people (outside of the theoretical scientific community) claim that theories are proven facts.

but, anyway, im not bashing science, cause I LOVE MY FRIKKIN LASER CANNON!!!!!
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: Oh yeah? When exactly is the graduation ceremony?
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: A language is a dialect with an army and navy.

Innit, guv
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: gheeze, colin- you really need some more intelligent people which which to converse. im too distracted to study science cause this LASER CANNON is so much fun!!!
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: Yes, an intelligent interlocutor would be a novelty. Sigh!

Um, what's a laser cannon?
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: well, "cannon" suggests that it would produce laser beams of formidible, yet rudimentary, destructive capabilities.

a comparison could be drawn to germany's invasion of poland, if the polish calvary were riding ton-ton's and firing blasters, while the 3rd reich merely adjusted the orbit of their death star.
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: Thanks for explaining
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: yes, im having a bit of fun; however, why put faith in a theory?

even if the laser is a modern reality, that fails to necessitate the factuality and completeness of the bose-einstein condensate theory.
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: "There is need for some dogmatism. The dogmatic scientist has an important role to play. If we give into criticism too easily, we shall never find out where the real power of our theories lies".

- Karl Popper

How do you like them apples?
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: i really appreciate your posts- in that , they encourage a high level of critical thinking. yet, the menial participation in many of these threads is discouraging, as it suggests that such critical thinking is not so important to the majority- in this internet community.


if im one of the few whom find skepticism as healthy and proper, it lowers my faith in humanity- as i am hardly the sharpest crayon in the box.
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: i would suggest a refinement to that observation- "its not that im smarter than most, its that i stick with problems longer" a.e. einstein.

tenacity does not necessitate fanaticism.
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: well, i re-read the thread from the beginning- seems i chased away the real intellects
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: "its not that im smarter than most, its that i stick with problems longer"

Gotta love the man's modesty, eh?

Nevertheless, I'm fairly certain that if, circa 1905, you'd locked me in solitary confinement for 110 years with the totality of scientific data, whatever might emerge next year will probably not include relativity theory.
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: id put money on it- money on your side...
10 years ago Report
0
CoIin
CoIin: Do you read any philosophy of science, Deep? I think you'd enjoy it. It seems you're passionate about both science and critical thinking.

What disturbs me is that I often see the former uncoupled from the latter, and a love of science degenerates into little more than the memorization and regurgitation of "respectable" ideas with a concomitant disdain for the "disrespectable" or "unscientific".

Anyone familiar with even the most cursory (but non-Whiggish! ) history of science should know that what's respectable today is likely to be regarded as little more than well-intentioned poppycock tomorrow.
(Edited by CoIin)
10 years ago Report
0
DEEP_acheleg
DEEP_acheleg: its not just the love of science which degenerates to such, it is also a problem in the educational system- education is becoming more like indoctrination
10 years ago Report
0
Runner Chick
Runner Chick: The other day I went to the park, and it had a really big pond...I saw a bunch of quantum ducks inside, playing, doing fun duck things....I know they were quantum ducks cuz they went quark quark as they flew away.
9 years ago Report
1
xxxWesxxx
xxxWesxxx: What makes you think we cannot observe quarks or electrons?
9 years ago Report
0