Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,628 Year: 4,885/9,624 Month: 233/427 Week: 43/103 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   So I Wrote A Book On The Scientific Method
Straggler
Member (Idle past 150 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 91 of 168 (733290)
07-15-2014 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by NoNukes
07-15-2014 1:44 PM


Re: Modern Physics - Predictions
How did Big Bang theory overcome steady state theory in your opinion? Why was the discovery of anti-matter considered the making of Dirac as a theorist in your opinion? Why was the discovery of the Higgs Boson considered important for the validity of the standard model? Why does the discovery of Tiktaalik confirm both evolutionary theory and the geological models that underpin evolutionary theory?
Modern science is built in verification of predictions. Whatever Popper does or does not say about that...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by NoNukes, posted 07-15-2014 1:44 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-15-2014 4:13 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 94 by NoNukes, posted 07-15-2014 5:20 PM Straggler has not replied
 Message 98 by xongsmith, posted 07-16-2014 4:12 AM Straggler has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 92 of 168 (733291)
07-15-2014 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Straggler
07-15-2014 4:05 PM


Re: Modern Physics - Predictions
How did Big Bang theory overcome steady state theory in your opinion?
The name sounds cooler and it elicits better imagery.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Straggler, posted 07-15-2014 4:05 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Straggler, posted 07-15-2014 4:50 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 150 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 93 of 168 (733293)
07-15-2014 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by New Cat's Eye
07-15-2014 4:13 PM


Re: Modern Physics - Predictions
Bzzzzt!!
Try again!! :tonguebackatya:

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-15-2014 4:13 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 94 of 168 (733297)
07-15-2014 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Straggler
07-15-2014 4:05 PM


Re: Modern Physics - Predictions
Modern science is built in verification of predictions. Whatever Popper does or does not say about that.
Of course verification is important. Reliance on a single person as 'The' authoritative source is silly anyway. Can you imagine using a debate strategy that begins and ends with "Popper says?"
In addition though, I see that I misspoke. No verification means no theory at all because, as most of us agree, simply describing what we see is not the scientific method. No scientist would accept anything without verification. I was instead referring to the effect of spectacular kinds of verification on the acceptance of a theory.
Sorry about the confusion; entirely my fault.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Straggler, posted 07-15-2014 4:05 PM Straggler has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Tangle, posted 07-15-2014 6:18 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9531
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 95 of 168 (733305)
07-15-2014 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by NoNukes
07-15-2014 5:20 PM


Re: Modern Physics - Predictions
and now imagine debating Popper

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by NoNukes, posted 07-15-2014 5:20 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by NoNukes, posted 07-15-2014 6:50 PM Tangle has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 96 of 168 (733307)
07-15-2014 6:50 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Tangle
07-15-2014 6:18 PM


Re: Modern Physics - Predictions
and now imagine debating Popper
I do not expect Popper would employ the tactic of quoting himself and leaving things at that.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Tangle, posted 07-15-2014 6:18 PM Tangle has not replied

  
sfs
Member (Idle past 2618 days)
Posts: 464
From: Cambridge, MA USA
Joined: 08-27-2003


(1)
Message 97 of 168 (733308)
07-15-2014 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Tangle
07-15-2014 10:24 AM


Re: Please provide an authoritative source for F=ma...
I'm puzzled by this notion of a formal, authoritative definition of scientific theory. The only point to defining "theory" is to describe the practice of actual scientists; any brief definition is almost certain to be lacking in some respect. And while there are authorities on scientific practice -- those who study how science is done -- there are no authoritative definitions of "theory", since such definitions have no authority over the scientists doing the work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Tangle, posted 07-15-2014 10:24 AM Tangle has not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2603
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 98 of 168 (733327)
07-16-2014 4:12 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Straggler
07-15-2014 4:05 PM


Re: Modern Physics - Predictions
Straggler writes:
How did (the) Big Bang theory overcome (the) steady state theory in your opinion?
This is a false choice. There are so many untold multitude of theories that will trounce both of these very uniformed views.
You are sort of asking why a combustion engine powered car would beat out a rickshaw. Kramer, notwithstanding.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Straggler, posted 07-15-2014 4:05 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Straggler, posted 07-16-2014 6:10 AM xongsmith has not replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 150 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 99 of 168 (733328)
07-16-2014 6:10 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by xongsmith
07-16-2014 4:12 AM


Re: Modern Physics - Predictions
What theories may or may not be forthcoming in the future has little bearing on how we compare competing theories in the present.
If you want to know which of two un-falsified scientific theories (e.g. Big Bang and Steady State theories circa 1960) is superior then the answer is the one that accurately and correctly predicts new observable phenomena.
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by xongsmith, posted 07-16-2014 4:12 AM xongsmith has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 496 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 100 of 168 (733351)
07-16-2014 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Tangle
07-15-2014 12:43 PM


Re: Please provide an authoritative source for F=ma...
Tangle writes:
I think I have the authoritive work....
Argument from authority is bad... m'kay?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Tangle, posted 07-15-2014 12:43 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Tangle, posted 07-16-2014 2:09 PM ringo has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9531
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 101 of 168 (733352)
07-16-2014 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by ringo
07-16-2014 1:45 PM


Re: Please provide an authoritative source for F=ma...
Dead Ringer writes:
Argument from authority is bad... m'kay?
Only if you're a pedant. Not everyone's opinion is equal; there's nothing wrong in quoting from those who have a proven reputation in the field.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by ringo, posted 07-16-2014 1:45 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by ringo, posted 07-16-2014 2:14 PM Tangle has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 496 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 102 of 168 (733354)
07-16-2014 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by Tangle
07-16-2014 2:09 PM


Re: Please provide an authoritative source for F=ma...
Tangle writes:
Not everyone's opinion is equal; there's nothing wrong in quoting from those who have a proven reputation in the field.
There's nothing wrong with it but it doesn't mean anything either. If a practicing scientist said that a theory doesn't have to be predictive, that would mean something. If he doesn't mention that it does, that's no more significant than if he doesn't mention alligators.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Tangle, posted 07-16-2014 2:09 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Tangle, posted 07-16-2014 2:20 PM ringo has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9531
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 103 of 168 (733355)
07-16-2014 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by ringo
07-16-2014 2:14 PM


Re: Please provide an authoritative source for F=ma...
ZR writes:
If he doesn't mention that it does, that's no more significant than if he doesn't mention alligators.
But if he's writing a whole chapter on the what a theory is and doesn't mention prediction?

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by ringo, posted 07-16-2014 2:14 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by ringo, posted 07-16-2014 2:54 PM Tangle has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 496 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 104 of 168 (733356)
07-16-2014 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Tangle
07-16-2014 2:20 PM


Re: Please provide an authoritative source for F=ma...
Tangle writes:
But if he's writing a whole chapter on the what a theory is and doesn't mention prediction?
Not using the word "prediction" is not necessarily the same as not mentioning predictive ability. As others have pointed out, the predictive ability of a theory has mostly to do with whether or not new pieces will fit into the puzzle.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Tangle, posted 07-16-2014 2:20 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by Tangle, posted 07-16-2014 4:01 PM ringo has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 168 (733358)
07-16-2014 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Tangle
07-15-2014 12:43 PM


Re: Please provide a n authoritative source for F=ma...
However, Popper says that empirical testing - falsifying predictions - is only one of three methods that can be used.
I contend that this is a misleading summary of what Popper actually says on page 9 and 10. He does indeed list empirical testing as one of four lines of inquiry. But he does not go so far as to say that any of the lines of inquiry are sufficient when used alone. At least not on page 10.
But more importantly, all three, er... four of the lines of inquiry start with predictions, where predictions are the consequences of the hypotheses.
From Potter's book:
quote:
According to the view that will be put forward here, the method of critically testing theories, and selecting them according to the results of tests, always proceeds on the following lines. From a new idea, put up tentatively, and not yet justified in any wayan anticipation, a hypothesis, a theoretical system, or what you willconclusions are drawn by means of logical deduction.
That's right. Potter says that when critically testing theories, it is "always" required to draw conclusions from the "anticipation, hypothesis, or theoretical system" by means of logical deduction. As has been mentioned several times, these conclusions are what we mean by the term "predictions".
As ringo pointed out, mere word searching for "prediction" is not enough. As Dr. Adequate among others also pointed out, "prediction" is not the best word to use because it implies that the conclusions have to be about future states, and that implication is wrong. The conclusions can be about past states.
Isn't it great to know that Popper is not the buffoon in this story?
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Tangle, posted 07-15-2014 12:43 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024