On 4/15/2021 4:52 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
Frolicking Theories Moose writes,
<<Historically, that has NEVER been true. Don't bet on it becoming true in our
<<lifetimes, or long after.
That statement really irked you and I think AG. Complete truth seems a very
tall bar and one can asymptotically approach that certainty but likely not get
there.
I'm not talking complete truth, just simple truth. Lamark had a theory. Then Darwin (and Wallace) had theories. Darwin
also had a mechanism.
Turns out Darwin's theory of natural selection seems pretty true, although for
the wrong reasons.
In high school biology, they made fun of Lamark; all it takes is common sense to see that he was wrong. But wait,
there's more! Lamark didn't just make it up, it was based on observation, a theory to explain observable events in the
world.
And - it turns out he was right! Although for the wrong reasons.
So when between Lamark wrote and recent discoveries of environmental changes that are inherited (and a mechanism), was
Science True?
Newton's laws of motion are true, but not the whole truth.
The Ptolemaic model of the universe sounds foolish to us, partly because of the bias of the stories we have heard. But
guess what? It worked, accurately predicting all known astronomical events, including eclipses. It was true, as a theory
that explained all observations, until Jupiter's moons.
This IS the history of science. Theories, laws are all provisional, and all, so far, have been outdated, made untrue,
over time - or will be . . .
Mathematical proofs seem perfectly true for all time and independent of human
thought/language. It certainly is my opinion.
I wasn't talking about math. Given the right postulates, enormous mathematical systems may be designed/discovered - that
are true, within their assumptions. The trick is that people tend to believe that math that makes great predictions
about the events in the natural world is, in fact, inherent in that world.
That has proved not to be true in many cases, and has not been proven to be
true anywhere.
Even in Physics, it's true. The First Law of Thermodynamics starts "In a closed system . . ." We know, of course, of no
actually completely closed systems in the real world. The common assumption that the Universe is a closed system is just
that, assumption without proof, belief that blurs over into philosophy and religion.
When I was a science nut kid, the debate between Fred Hoyle and the Big Bangers was not resolved. I remember Gamow and
Hoyle's competing views and great discussions with my nerdy friends. Hoyle's Steady State Universe theory was not a
closed system.
Of course, the Big Bang rules, but that's really recent, within my lifetime. Who's to say that will last? History
suggests not.
Speaking of Event Horizons . . . New theories are the subject of efforts to disprove them. (Also of fistfights at
physics meetings, in the case of Special Relativity.) Then, when they pass some sort of threshold, almost all research
is done to prove them. Except for the madmen who are hatching the new theories.
We love heroes, idols. What will happen to St. Stephen of Hawking if/when it turns out that black holes were just
mistaken literalism for math?
I am no expert in philosophy of mathematics but Gödel’s two incompleteness
theorems even pours cold water on that.
Nor am I. I certainly don't pretend to understand them. OTOH, he simple fact that no strict or casual connection has
been proved between math and the behaviors it predicts accurately is enough for me to see it as a tool, not an explanation.
That both arise from some as yet unknown "reality" would explain their tight
relationship, for example.
A long way 'round to reiterate that I think DeGrasse Tyson's statement is essentially political hyperbole, simple
bullshit intended to further an agenda.
It's all a crapshoot; the dice are probably loaded, but how and by whom/what is a mystery. What wonderful exercise for
our minds!! 😁
Moose D'Opinion
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|