Re: Slow Death for Real Science
- From: brian@xxxxxxx (Brian Tung)
- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:15:32 -0800 (PST)
Martin Brown wrote:
But part
of the problem, in my opinion, is that scientists use tools, culture,
and language that are distinct from those used outside of science, but
yet look a lot alike.
Philosophers and lawyers also use words in specialised ways so that
isn't a unique trait of science.
Perhaps, but the problem isn't exacerbated as much in philosophy, since
philosophical results are not reported in newspapers. Culturally, we
seem to think that it is more important to convey scientific results to
the public than philosophical results, but we don't give the public the
tools to understand those results properly--even when redacted for the
level of the readership. In other words, a good science writer can
bring the essentials of a scientific project to the lay audience, but it
won't mean as much if the lay audience doesn't have an appreciation for
the proper way to do science.
It is in part Newton's fault that scientific papers are almost always
presented in a dry fashion that hides the creative leap that made a
solution possible (he used obscure geometrical constructs to derive the
results for the inverse square law he had first obtained by
fluxions/calculus).
Well, err, but De Motu Corporum in Gyrum was done analytically rather
than geometrically, and I don't think it was tremendously easy to follow
for readers, either. I don't think you can blame the geometrical
approach for that one--nor Newton specifically, although he was so
influential that whatever approach he took would have been followed for
a long time to come. He is like Dobson in that he took an approach that
had been used before, and became so influential that everything of that
kind today traces back to him. There can hardly be a large-aperture
alt-azimuth Newtonian (!) today that is not influenced in some way by
Dobson.
Offhand the only example where the true spirit of making a scientific
breakthrough is popularly known is from Kekule describing how the idea
of a benzene ring came to him in a dream.
That's the most famous example, but I've read others. In the field of
astronomy, for instance, there is Bradley's story of how he arrived at
an explanation for the aberration of light.
--
Brian Tung <brian@xxxxxxx>
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html
(Location of these pages soon to change. Stay tuned for updates.)
.
- References:
- Slow Death for Real Science
- From: Shawn
- Re: Slow Death for Real Science
- From: Chris L Peterson
- Re: Slow Death for Real Science
- From: Brian Tung
- Re: Slow Death for Real Science
- From: Martin Brown
- Slow Death for Real Science
- Prev by Date: ASTRONOMERS MEASURE PRECISE MASS OF A BINARY BROWN DWARF (STScI-PR06-11)
- Next by Date: Re: Scientists have "another theory" of mass extinction
- Previous by thread: Re: Slow Death for Real Science
- Next by thread: Re: Slow Death for Real Science
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
