Re: Scientifically valid definitions.
From: robert j. kolker (nowhere_at_nowhere.net)
Date: 10/24/04
- Next message: Bilge: "Re: Well, Bilge? Re: A SR-cult fraud and corruption (Rev A)"
- Previous message: Bilge: "Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- In reply to: Martin Hogbin: "Re: Scientifically valid definitions."
- Next in thread: Martin Hogbin: "Re: Scientifically valid definitions."
- Reply: Martin Hogbin: "Re: Scientifically valid definitions."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:03:32 -0400
Martin Hogbin wrote:
> Einstein's solution was to say that time is what a clock
> measures. With that definition we again have a consistent
> model of reality that agrees with experiment. As to the
> question of what a clock is, that has to be left as one of
> the agreed starting points namely that everyone knows
> what a clock is.
This is an example of Conventialism. Poincare pointed out that much of
science is convention, rather than raw unprocessed fact. This is not
harmful as long as the conventions do not contradict facts and are
adhered to consistently. It is somewhat like choosing units. You can
choose any convenient unit but once you do you have to stick with it
throughout a unit of discourse.
Bob Kolker
- Next message: Bilge: "Re: Well, Bilge? Re: A SR-cult fraud and corruption (Rev A)"
- Previous message: Bilge: "Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- In reply to: Martin Hogbin: "Re: Scientifically valid definitions."
- Next in thread: Martin Hogbin: "Re: Scientifically valid definitions."
- Reply: Martin Hogbin: "Re: Scientifically valid definitions."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|