Re: What is a physical theory and variable

reany_at_asu.edu
Date: 02/25/05 

Date: 25 Feb 2005 11:52:51 -0800

N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) wrote:
> Dear Daniel Weston:
>
> "Daniel Weston" <daniel009@webtv.net> wrote in message
> news:7291-421F5D47-214@storefull-3132.bay.webtv.net...
> > Patrick has been asked as to what he means by the phrase, "physical
> > theory". His answer was that a physical theory in part, was one
that
> > used instruments for achieving verifiability. I previously
challenged
> > Patrick to debate this, and he refused saying that we should do so
on a
> > new thread on physical theories. This is such a thread as it
includes
> > reference to instruments being used in theories. In this thread I
have
> > pointed out my disagreement with his position on this notion. He
> > apparently, sensing defeat, again refuses to debate the issue. He
is
> > conceding defeat.
>
> Your "disagreement" doesn't call for debate. As to "conceding
defeat",
> consider it to be "respecting your opinion". Your wording appears to
be
> chosen to inflame debate.
>
> This newsgroup is for discussion of science, not philosophy. It is
in the
> charter. Not that that seems to make a difference to many. As has
been
> pointed out more than once; such discussion of "notions", "opinions",
and
> "debate" would be best suited to either a philosophy forum, or
private
> email.
>
> David A. Smith

And you know how to precisely divide between physics and philosophy?
I'd like to hear it.

I learned a long time ago that the heart of the matter why
antirelativist abound in the world is because of the prevalence of
misconceptions about the nature of science and physics. You want to
deal with the symptoms, be my guest. I care to address the root causes.

I freely admit that my approach has had very little success, but
dealing with superficialities will surely never succeed.

You can tell some antirelativists a million times that there is an
asymmetry in the clock experiment between the inertial clock and the
noninertial clock and they will never see it. Why? Because they are
prejudiced against ever seeing it. Where does that prejudice come from?
One source of it comes from a large number of misconceptions they hold
about the nature of theories in physics. Ya have to at some point
address these root causes. And the topic is indeed philosophical in
nature -- that is, within the philosophy of physics. So it ain't that
far off.

In any case, any discussion of the semantics of the common terms in
relativity must be allowable. That would include basic terms as well.

Patrick

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Physics & Philosophy
    ... How Western science education has failed. ... Philosophy gets used all over the place in physics. ... impose a formal point of view, as Einstein said: ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: E = 1/2mv^2
    ... So our retinas are tuned to respond to flashlights, ... Hint, Tom, since you're so interested in debate: ... arguing nonsense derived from your misunderstandings of physics terms. ... Why, yes, yes, I am. That's what a particle detector does. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Big Bang Baloney....or scientific cult?
    ... >> Not another philosophy dude posturing meaningless gibberish as physics. ... All science has is a collection of theories and experimental ... > You wished a clarification for my definition of the universe, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Big Bang Baloney....or scientific cult?
    ... >> Not another philosophy dude posturing meaningless gibberish as physics. ... All science has is a collection of theories and experimental ... > You wished a clarification for my definition of the universe, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Big Bang Baloney....or scientific cult? [ scientific methods ]
    ... > That may be true for your science, and for some possibly Post Modernist ... of physics are like that eg the law of conservation of energy is no more ... should not be used - its context is not well defined. ... >> training but not of the type used in philosophy which is along the lines ...
    (sci.physics)