0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Feyerabend summarises his reductios with the phrase "anything goes". This is his sarcastic imitation of "the terrified reaction of a rationalist who takes a closer look at history
the Structure of Scientific Revolutions introduced a realistic humanism into the core of science, while for others the nobility of science was tarnished by Kuhn's introduction of an irrational element into the heart of its greatest achievements
these debates clearly show that there is no universal agreement as to what constitutes the "scientific method".[93]
There is no scientific method -- We keep hearing that what makes science science is the "scientific method" but --There is no scientific method
What would you advocate instead?
Quote from: Bored chemist on 30/01/2019 21:19:43What would you advocate instead?
There is no scientific method.... XXX were discovered serendipity
Chance favors only the prepared mind.
Quote from: OPThere is no scientific method.... XXX were discovered serendipityQuote from: Louis PasteurChance favors only the prepared mind.- x rays were discovered by Roentgen, as part of his scientific experimentation on vacuum tubes- penicillin was discovered by Fleming in his scientific studies of bacteria- the micro wave (oven) was discovered by Spencer in his engineering work with radar transmittersradioactivity was discovered by Becquerel due to his scientific interest in geology and photography - Relativity was discovered by Einstein due to his scientific interest in what would happen if his tram travelled (a lot) faster- Electromagnetic waves were discovered by Maxwell due to his mathematical interest in unifying scientific discoveries by Faraday, Ampere and others.Science, mathematics and engineering prefer:- data over opinion- objectivity over subjectivity- quantitative over qualitative - repeatable results over random results- education over ignoranceAs Bored Chemist asked, what alternative are you proposing?- Which of the above preferences would you reverse?Oops! crossover with mad aetherist...
The scientific method isObserveHypothesiseTestScientific knowledge is the residue of explanatory and predictive hypotheses that have survived testing.It has nothing to do with how why when or by whom the initial observation was made.Literary criticism has been dismissed as "reams of bad English written about a few lines of good English". I wish I could come up with an equally succinct dismissal of the philosophers of science.
, that was simply a case of fraud by Einstein working backwards towards a known number, & making his nonsense equations appear good).
Quote from: mad aetherist on 31/01/2019 12:24:10, that was simply a case of fraud by Einstein working backwards towards a known number, & making his nonsense equations appear good).IMO, on intellectual gun points by the Einsteinian mafia, Einstein was merely the figurehead of the Einsteinian Dark Age.
The mafia have a problem. They cant afford to admit that SR & GR are complete krapp, & that Einstein is a false god. The easy thing is to deny & censor & hide the truth. But this makes it worse for themselves down the road. But they hope that something will come up & somehow cushion their fall, or in any case they themselves will have died so it will embarrass someone else.In a way this bizness is merely a sideshow. Its a bit like watching Islamology & Jewology fighting it out, the winner doesnt matter, they all disappear into their churches once a week, & it doesnt matter which building they enter. For most of the week they are doing something productive like growing corn. The Einstein question represents say 1% of 1% of 1% of science. If we all agreed that aether exists & that SR & GR are krapp then nothing much would change. The large colliders would not be designed differently, the fusion gizmos would not be designed differently. But praps Einsteinology is holding some important discovery or invention back. We dont know. Its a bit like arguing whether God created us. Or whether Noah's flood killed the dinosaurs. The argument is almost superficial, there might not be much harm done. Or, it could destroy the planet.
Quote from: mad aetherist on 31/01/2019 20:10:06The mafia have a problem. They cant afford to admit that SR & GR are complete krapp, & that Einstein is a false god. The easy thing is to deny & censor & hide the truth. But this makes it worse for themselves down the road. But they hope that something will come up & somehow cushion their fall, or in any case they themselves will have died so it will embarrass someone else.In a way this bizness is merely a sideshow. Its a bit like watching Islamology & Jewology fighting it out, the winner doesnt matter, they all disappear into their churches once a week, & it doesnt matter which building they enter. For most of the week they are doing something productive like growing corn. The Einstein question represents say 1% of 1% of 1% of science. If we all agreed that aether exists & that SR & GR are krapp then nothing much would change. The large colliders would not be designed differently, the fusion gizmos would not be designed differently. But praps Einsteinology is holding some important discovery or invention back. We dont know. Its a bit like arguing whether God created us. Or whether Noah's flood killed the dinosaurs. The argument is almost superficial, there might not be much harm done. Or, it could destroy the planet.Indeed. So, you can't really blame the Einsteinian mafia on its modern physics religion that tailors for pragmatic theories of truth.“The more you see, how strange nature behaves, the harder it is for us, to make a model, that explains even how the most simple phenomena works. Theoretical physics has given up on this pursuit.” - Richard FenymanEinstein did had many significant discoveries, one example is on the photoelectric effect, which is instrumental for solar cell developments.BTW, he did not win the N prize for SR or GR. He should be recognized for the geodesic effect for his SR paper, but unfortunately this was hijacked and adulterated by the Einsteinian mafia to promote their religion of science.
Go read Kuhn The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
Quote from: sim on 30/01/2019 21:14:44Go read Kuhn The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions This is a book any man of science should read and correctly understand.The contemporary scientific method is meant for pragmatic theory of truth, and it has significance for its technological accomplishments. It could weed out pseudoscience for example, this is despite it fails on epistemic theory of truth for its theory of justification.I have a piece on "Critiques of the scientific method" you might be interested p.s. scroll up a bit to find the topic if somehow it did not show the right topic.
Einstein plagiarized even the photo electric effect. Pretty much all of that was already known. I dont know what the geodesic effect is. Praps it refers to the Minkowski. Anyhow there is nothing of any value in SR.Which reminds me that it was Minkowski that made Einstein famous, a bit like Paul making Christ famous -- no Minkowski then no Einstein, no Paul then no Christ.The Einstein mafia have made Einsteinology compulsory for skoolkids. But truth will prevail.
The twins contradiction kills SR. Nothing more needed.
Einstein plagiarized even the photo electric effect.
Quote from: mad aetherist on 01/02/2019 02:36:20Einstein plagiarized even the photo electric effect.Found this:http://theconversation.com/when-science-gets-ugly-the-story-of-philipp-lenard-and-albert-einstein-43165Philipp Lenard and Einstein ever worked cordially initially. Their later fallouts was in personality, which spiral out of control. I still didn't find anything on Einstein plagiarized others work on photoelectric effect. In the backdrop of WW1, it was not the fault of Einstein when the scientific community at then surpressed Nazi physics.
No! Listen to Millikan on the subject -- and he should know!