POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : Quotable : Re: Quotable Server Time
7 Sep 2024 19:11:58 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Quotable  
From: Mueen Nawaz
Date: 3 Jun 2008 10:25:20
Message: <48455450$1@news.povray.org>
Warp wrote:
> Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>>>>         And, AFAIK, that's the best explanation there is.
>>>   Except that it's not an explanation at all. It's simply stating the
>>> result of the experiment.
> 
>>         Isn't that what a theory is?
> 
>   No. A theory is a suggested explanation for a phenomenon, not just a
> description of the phenomenon.

	I'm not seeing a difference here. If a theory purports to explain what 
is going on, then an experiment has to be performed to verify that 
mechanism (not the original experiment). And thus theories are 
equivalent to predicting the results of experiments.

	We have Newton's theory of gravitation. It didn't explain how gravity 
worked.

	Einstein's special theory of relativity didn't explain much either - it 
was just a framework that could duplicate some weird experimental 
results - and predicted some more weird results. It didn't explain why 
the speed of light is constant w.r.t. any observer, why it didn't need a 
medium to travel, and why you have length contraction as you go faster.

	The difference between a good theory and just any theory is that last 
bit - not only can it match the result of known experiments, but it 
suggests new experiments and predicts their results.

>>         Your claim that it passes through both slits is untestable. We can 
>> never detect that it is doing this.
> 
>   There are many theories which are untestable in practice. For example
> the existence of the so-called cosmic horizon is, by definition, untestable.
> (If we could go and see if the cosmic horizon indeed exists, it would not
> be a cosmic horizon anymore, by the very definition of cosmic horizon.)
> That doesn't make the theory any less of a theory.

	Many scientists think it does. Wikipedia definition (emphasis mine):

"In science a theory is a *testable* model of the manner of interaction 
of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences 
or observations of the same kind, and capable of being *tested* through 
experiment or otherwise verified through empirical observation. "

-- 
Fax me no questions, I'll Fax you no lies!


                     /\  /\               /\  /
                    /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                        >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                    anl


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.