Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,819 Year: 4,076/9,624 Month: 947/974 Week: 274/286 Day: 35/46 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Scientific Method For Beginners
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2158 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 127 of 138 (521822)
08-29-2009 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by Straggler
08-29-2009 11:23 AM


Re: Tentativity
quote:
The reason that tentativity is important in science is because it is an acknowledgement of the fact that we can never knowingly have ALL of the relevant evidence. It is an acknowledgement of the very practical limitations imposed on knowledge and certainty. It is an acknowledgement of the possibility that new evidence can turn up that will completely blow away much of what we think we know.
As applied to the number of legs you have (or other such examples) the whole things is fairly academic as the only way such conclusions could be wrong is if you are a "brain in a jar", dweller in a matrix or some other equally pointlessly irrefutable philosophical consideration.
However tentativity as an acknowledgement of the very practical fact that we can never knowingly have all of the relevant evidence is a rather key aspect of any discourse that seeks to consider how confident we can be in our evidence or the conclusions that we derive from our evidence. This remains true no matter how many legs you may or may not have.
As I've said earlier in this thread, in actual scientific practice we would normally consider the fact that Dr Adequate has two legs to be an "observation" or "data." We would normally not speak of his two legs as a "theory" or as "proven" (or "regarded as proven"). The observation that he has two legs is tentative, but only slightly so. If it turns out we were wrong, we would normally explain this as bad data or an incorrect observation.
As you say, tentativity is important in science because we can never have all of the evidence. And we don't know which evidence we may have misinterpreted. In order to figure out the unknown, we must juggle data with varying degrees of probability as to their correctness. We are comfortable with some measure of uncertainty. This is in contrast to engineering, where uncertainty is generally not acceptable.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Straggler, posted 08-29-2009 11:23 AM Straggler has not replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2158 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 130 of 138 (521839)
08-29-2009 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Modulous
08-29-2009 2:15 PM


Re: Tentativity
quote:
So really, I think Dr A is talking about the practical, real-world, as practiced scientific method. As opposed to the 'ideal scientific method' which nobody geniunely follows all the time because it would interfere with getting on with the business of having a life.
Yes, but he is not using the practical, real-world, as-practiced scientific language regarding "proof." My foray into this thread was simply to try to pull the language closer to that used by scientists (or at least by leading physicists). (And in so doing I got sloppy with "theory" and "law" which pulled us off on another tangent.)
Edited by kbertsche, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Modulous, posted 08-29-2009 2:15 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2158 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 132 of 138 (521843)
08-29-2009 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by cavediver
08-29-2009 5:54 AM


Re: Theory of Gravity
quote:
quote:
Interestingly, we don't usually call the full set of Maxwell's Equations either a "theory" or a "law."
Actually, we do. This is Maxwell's electromagnetism or the theory of electromagnetism. The laws explained by this theory are those you have mentioned, all empirically derived from observation. But Maxwell unified these laws into his theory, and went on to predict electromagnetic radiation.
We will sometimes speak of "Maxwell's Theory" (particularly in a historical context). But the set of equations themselves are usually called "Maxwell's Equations" rather than "Maxwell's Theory."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by cavediver, posted 08-29-2009 5:54 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by cavediver, posted 08-30-2009 6:44 AM kbertsche has replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2158 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 134 of 138 (521944)
08-30-2009 5:17 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by cavediver
08-30-2009 6:44 AM


Re: Theory of Gravity
quote:
quote:
But the set of equations themselves are usually called "Maxwell's Equations" rather than "Maxwell's Theory."
Yes, because they are the equations resulting from Maxwell's Theory.
I agree completely (and used virtually the same wording earlier in this thread).
quote:
But we commonly speak of Maxwell Theory in relativity, quantum gravity, and string theory. When we combine the actions of Maxwell Theory with other actions, we speak of, for example, Einstein-Maxwell Theory, Maxwell-Yang-Mills Theory, Maxwell-Chern-Simons Theory.
Nothing I've said in this thread contradicts the statements above.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by cavediver, posted 08-30-2009 6:44 AM cavediver 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