5 ms·
The example you suggested is probably too simple; one should realise that the actual experiment might be very difficult, if not impossible to carry out. Consid
by xtacy 16y ago
The example you suggested is probably too simple; one should realise that the actual experiment might be very difficult, if not impossible to carry out. Consider a theory of galaxy collisions---I am unable to see any way of testing out the hypothesis, unless the equations are simple enough.
A computer program just a different language of expressing the theory... Hence, I see no reason why one should separate theory and computer programs.
- Retric 16y agoModeling is at best a thought experiment. It can only show you if a theory is reasonably self consistent based on your assumptions not if it's actually true. PS: There are limits on science, and the ability to conduct an actual meaningful exponent is one of the largest ones.
- jshen 16y agoI think there's more to it than that. For example, a model can tell you if something isn't true which is very significant. It can also make predictions that can then be tested. These two alone are much more than a mere thought experiment.
- ynniv 16y agoGreat news! My model tells me that humans no longer have to breathe!
- brg 16y agoI am having a hard time seeing the different. A thought experiment can tell you that if A then B. A model is a means of producing a prediction B from A by means of long, complicated calculations instead of simple logical inferences. In both cases the conclusions should be evaluated before accepted as physical truth.
- jshen 16y agowhat do you believe is the different between a theory and a thought experiment?
- brg 16y agoI would say a theory is a hypothesis which has been tested. A thought experiment can be part of hypothesis creation.
- jshen 16y agoand a model can very easily be a hypothesis which can be tested. I.e. it's far more like a theory than a thought experiment.
- brg 16y agoPerhaps we're splitting hairs. But this doesn't sit right with me. Consider what is meant by a thought experiment in popular literature. Take Einstein's elevator. Would you call that "Einstein's elevator theory?" Or is that a prediction based on the theory of equivalence? Maybe in this vein a clear distinction is that a thought experiment is a proof discovery technique. It is working with heuristics and intuition. At the end there is something; a statement or prediction that seems right. But no matter how much intuition confirms it, in the physical sciences it needs to be tested and in the mathematical sciences it needs a formal proof. Beyond that, it is just another hypothesis. After that it leads to a theory.
- Confusion 16y agoWith all due respect, but you're both not just splitting hairs: you're splitting hairs about something you don't know enough about. There's a whole body of literature on the subject and you're not going to reinvent all of that in the course of this small discussion. If neither of you have heard of, for instance, Carl Hempel, then this discussion is completely pointless. If you don't standardize your terminology first, then you're just discussing the boundaries of your personal definitions, instead of embarking on actual intellectual discovery of the terrain.
- jacobolus 16y agocf. the Borges paragraph-long story: https://notes.utk.edu/bio/greenberg.nsf/0/f2d03252295e0d0585256e120009adab https://notes.utk.edu/bio/greenberg.nsf/0/f2d03252295e0d0585...
- zbyszek 16y agoBut it is not obvious that a theory can be expressed by a program. I am prepared to believe that there are fields in mathematics or genetics or something where this is not problematic. In physics, theories often describe a world which is both infinite and continuous, which is hard to encode in a form suitable for computation; typically finite-volume and discretisation approximations (at the very least) are made. In these situations the theory represented in code isn't the same as the theory you started with. One has to work quite hard to demonstrate that the differences are quantitatively understood and under control, and that the domain of applicability is understood.