Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one
From: Malcolm (mdmacg_at_dsl.pipex.com)
Date: 10/18/04
- Next message: George Hammond: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Previous message: AllYou!: "Re: Attack instead of explain or ignore."
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Next in thread: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Reply: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Reply: Paul Draper: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 18 Oct 2004 04:35:22 -0700
How can Newton's theory of gravitation be false when engineers use it
every day in their calculations? You need to be able to identify some
theories as being 'leass false' than others, or 'more useful', or
'approximately true'.
Of course even QED and GR are only approximately true (nothing is
absolutely true, or if it is you could never know it).
"robert j. kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:<2tfal4F1vlsf4U1@uni-berlin.de>...
> mike3 wrote:
>
> >
> > By "proof", he meant some sort of evidence for the theory. For instance, if
> > observations are consistent with the theory, that's evidence for it.
>
> Evidence but not proof. A physical theory is true if and only if ALL of
> its predictions are true. Since there are an infinite number of
> predictions a physical theory cannot be shown to be true in a finite
> interval of time. A physical theory is in one of two states: Falsified
> and not yet Falsified.
>
> In the mean time, a theory for which a finite subset of its possible
> predictions have corroberations for those predictions and no
> falsification has yet been made is a plausible theory. Plausibility is
> not equivalent to true. It just means people believe the results and are
> inclined to use them.
>
> For a while Newton's theory of gravitation was experimentally
> corroberated and not falsified. Then the anomalous advance of the
> perihelion of Mercury threw the matter into doubt. Since no cause of the
> anomaly could be empirically demonstrated and another theory (GTR)
> explained the anomaly, Newton's theory of gravitation is now considered
> falsified.
>
> Bob Kolker
- Next message: George Hammond: "Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation"
- Previous message: AllYou!: "Re: Attack instead of explain or ignore."
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Next in thread: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Reply: robert j. kolker: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Reply: Paul Draper: "Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|