Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: AlphaOmega (OmegaZero2003_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 03/10/05
- Next message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:29:27 -0700
"Albert Wagner" <albertwagner@cox.net> wrote in message
news:zMZXd.6283$Fy.2573@okepread04...
the matter(sic!)
>
> And wise scientists and laypersons are already questioning the endless
> proliferation of invented particles and forces for which no explanation
> can be given, other than: "It was needed to make the math work."
You certainly aren't a physicist - right? Even lay persons familiar with the
standard model know it is wonderfully predictive and elegantly structured.
- Next message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Reply: Albert Wagner: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|