5 ms·
Those models aren't worth much if you don't test them, so these efforts will have to go hand in hand. The way it tends to go now is RCT -> try to explain findin
by samvher 7y ago
Those models aren't worth much if you don't test them, so these efforts will have to go hand in hand. The way it tends to go now is RCT -> try to explain findings by hypothesizing about mechanisms -> think about an RCT that can test this hypothesis -> repeat. It's a slow and expensive process and not always successful, but I would say that it's progress.
- billfruit 7y agoI would say testing is a small part of building models: building models should essentially be driven by theory, not by experiments.
- SiempreViernes 7y agoStare upon the FRBTheory wiki in delight then, here are ~50 different theories describing the same thing: https://frbtheorycat.org/index.php/Main_Page https://frbtheorycat.org/index.php/Main_Page As a generous guess at most 40 of these models are wrong, since they all describe basically the same few events with vastly different mechanisms. I guess that majority of interesting but wrong models is what you are after?
- blix 7y agoThe space of incorrect-but-reasonable models is infinitely larger than the space of correct models. The way to distinguish between the two is experiment. Experiment is therefore the much more important side of the balance.