4 ms·

This is basically the first and most common objection laypeople have. (In fact, this comes up in every single thread on HN about DM, not exaggerating.) Believe

This is basically the first and most common objection laypeople have. (In fact, this comes up in every single thread on HN about DM, not exaggerating.) Believe it or not, scientists have thought of that as well. They tried, and nothing fits the data as well as the standard model. The trope is so common that there even is an xkcd for it: https://www.xkcd.com/1758/ https://www.xkcd.com/1758/

JackSlateur 2y ago
A common objection, and for good reason: just because you do not know the right model does not make your bad model somehow true I mean, when you miss 85% of the stuff, you gotta admit that, perhaps, your stuff is wrong And yes, it can work even if it is wrong
- mr_mitm 2y ago
  Nobody said it's "true", whatever that even means for a model. The claim is that it's the best anyone has been able to come up with. And not for a lack of trying. Everybody also acknowledges that there are issue with DM, it's just that every other known model has bigger issues.
  - JackSlateur 2y ago
    Ha, my bad When you write "this is the [..] most common objection laypeople have", I understood "In contrast with the experts who know better" Of course, if as you say, everybody knows that this is a wrong, specifying "laypeople" seems unnecessary
    - mr_mitm 2y ago
      You seem to have a concept that a scientific model is either "true" or "wrong", but that's not case. All models are wrong, but some are more useful than others. It's better to judge models by their ability to describe reality, and that is not a binary property, but a continuous one.
      - FredPret 2y ago
        What if we one day come up with a Theory of Everything that mathematically explains it all? That model would be “true” no? Assuming of course that it’s possible to come up with a list of observations that covers “it all” and we won’t one day see something weird and new that contradicts our theory.
- king_magic 2y ago
  It’s not a good objection. It conveniently ignores the actual data.
francois14 2y ago
I wonder what the motto was before Einstein suggested a new model.

JackSlateur 2y ago

A common objection, and for good reason: just because you do not know the right model does not make your bad model somehow true I mean, when you miss 85% of the stuff, you gotta admit that, perhaps, your stuff is wrong And yes, it can work even if it is wrong

mr_mitm 2y ago
Nobody said it's "true", whatever that even means for a model. The claim is that it's the best anyone has been able to come up with. And not for a lack of trying. Everybody also acknowledges that there are issue with DM, it's just that every other known model has bigger issues.
- JackSlateur 2y ago
  Ha, my bad When you write "this is the [..] most common objection laypeople have", I understood "In contrast with the experts who know better" Of course, if as you say, everybody knows that this is a wrong, specifying "laypeople" seems unnecessary
  - mr_mitm 2y ago
    You seem to have a concept that a scientific model is either "true" or "wrong", but that's not case. All models are wrong, but some are more useful than others. It's better to judge models by their ability to describe reality, and that is not a binary property, but a continuous one.
    - FredPret 2y ago
      What if we one day come up with a Theory of Everything that mathematically explains it all? That model would be “true” no? Assuming of course that it’s possible to come up with a list of observations that covers “it all” and we won’t one day see something weird and new that contradicts our theory.
king_magic 2y ago
It’s not a good objection. It conveniently ignores the actual data.

francois14 2y ago

I wonder what the motto was before Einstein suggested a new model.