Re: Lightspeed exceeded


"Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4ADB7B65.3000509@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Jonah Thomas wrote:
"Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jonah Thomas wrote:
"Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jonah Thomas wrote:
"Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

May I remind you of your 'prediction':
<<
If you have one theory that you believe is true and another
theory> that you believe is false, the experiments you design
to>> test> between them may not be worth doing. Your biases will
get in>> your> way when you design and carry out the tests.
>>
which you found to be confirmed by Vessot's experiment:
<<
He did believe in GR, he
performed an experiment designed to confirm GR, and he
interpreted> the results in ways that did confirm GR. He decided
that the errors> compared to theory were not important. Just as
I>> predicted.> >>
Your claim is clearly that Vessot chose to interpret the outcome
of the experiment as a confirmation of GR, not because the data
showed it to be the only possible conclusion, but because Vessot
was biased and got the results he wanted.
No, Vessot's bias is a hidden variable. We might find clear
evidence>> of bias when we discover ways that he did his experiment
wrong or>> ways that he interpreted it wrongly. But until we discover
such>> things we do not know whether he made mistakes that we have
not yet>> discovered. Particularly when we share his biases.
My claim is that he did believe in GR, that he performed an
experiment on that basis, that he interpreted the results in ways
that confirmed GR, and that he decided the errors compared to
theory>> were not important. I will not decide whether he made
important>> errors until I look closely at his work, which is not my
highest>> priority yet.
So you - without having studied the experiment - choose not to
accept> the fact that gravity probe A verified the predictions of GR
within> tiny error bars.

I do not claim his experiment got wrong results, or that it was done
incorrectly. It could have been just fine. I claim only that his
results were a confirming instance of my own statement.
May I remind you of your 'prediction':
<<
If you have one theory that you believe is true and another theory
that you believe is false, the experiments you design to test
between them may not be worth doing. Your biases will get in your
way when you design and carry out the tests.
>>
which you found to be confirmed by Vessot's experiment:
<<
He did believe in GR, he
performed an experiment designed to confirm GR, and he interpreted
the results in ways that did confirm GR. He decided that the errors
compared to theory were not important. Just as I predicted.
>>

Your claim is clearly that Vessot chose to interpret the outcome
of the experiment as a confirmation of GR, not because the data
showed it to be the only possible conclusion, but because Vessot
was biased and got the results he wanted.

You were wrong.

See, this is another example of your basic misunderstanding of
scientific method.

If you do the experiment, and the result comes out the way your theory
predicts, that's a confirming instance. It does not mean that your
theory was correct.

Of bloody course no experiment can prove a theory correct!

Previously I wrote:
| An experiment cannot 'verify' a theory, it can only 'confirm'(or
falsify) it.
| It can however 'verify' a specific prediction of a theory.
|
| Gravity probe A verified GR's predictions for the rate of the maser
| during the probe's flight, and thus it didn't falsify GR, but confirmed
it.

It does not mean that you got your result for the reasons you think.

??? What does this mean? "the reasons you think", what reasons are that?

It's only a confirming instance -- the results came out as you predicted.

You are talking nonsense.
It is utterly irrelevant what I, Vessot, or anybody else 'predicted'
or expected the outcome of the experiment to be.
GR was confirmed because its predictions was in accordance with
the measurements.


If I said that people who had biases could never ever do an experiment
and get correct results, then Vessot's work would disprove my theory
assuming that his results are actually correct. But I did not say that.

Didn't you?
You are now fleeing your own words, which is a typical crackpot behaviour.

These are your words about Vessot's gravity probe A experiment:

Jonah Thomas wrote:
| Once he believed that GR was true and thought in its definitions, his
| ability to think about useful tests for it was deeply compromised.

Jonah Thomas wrote:
| If you have one theory that you believe is true and another theory
| that you believe is false, the experiments you design to test
| between them may not be worth doing. Your biases will get in your
| way when you design and carry out the tests.

Jonah Thomas wrote:
| He did believe in GR, he
| performed an experiment designed to confirm GR, and he interpreted
| the results in ways that did confirm GR. He decided that the errors
| compared to theory were not important. Just as I predicted.


Your clearly claimed that Vessot chose to interpret the outcome
of the experiment as a confirmation of GR, not because the data
showed it to be the only possible conclusion, but because Vessot
was biased and got the results he wanted.

In other words, you claimed that Vessot's experiment didn't satisfy
the requirement of the scientific method.

You were wrong, a fact you now are fleeing.


Do you get it now? Do you see how your attitude has been fundamentally
unscientific?

I have now finally got that you are a crackpot.

Case closed.

Chickening out and resorting to name-calling, Tusseladd?
======================
=== Thomas 1, Andersen 0 ==
======================
Case closed.



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Real world modeling [LONG]
    ... >>a good design, or as a good design detector. ... > voyage.addCargo(cargo, confirmation); ... Trace back to the spec. ... Only M3 explicitly states the overbooking criteria. ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: Form/Confirmation Not Working
    ... First, rename your pages to remove the spaces, for example rename ... Design It form.htm to Design_it_form.htm ... down boxes and entered in the text boxes to be summarized on a confirmation ... absolutely nothing about CGI Scripts, as I'm extremely new to this and very ...
    (microsoft.public.frontpage.client)
  • Re: Lightspeed exceeded
    ... Jonah Thomas wrote: ... get in>> your> way when you design and carry out the tests. ... of the experiment as a confirmation of GR, ... | Gravity probe A verified GR's predictions for the rate of the maser ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Real world modeling.
    ... > World Modeling as a guide to a good design, or as a good design detector. ... The booking application will associate each Cargo with a Voyage. ... public int makeBooking ... voyage.addCargo(cargo, confirmation); ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: Difference between randomness and automated selection
    ... quantitative predictions can be made and the theory extended. ... measurement methodby which those predictions may be tested. ... appearance of design, all lies are truth, all cause are effect. ... In reply we were told that NS is a metaphor. ...
    (talk.origins)