From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: Craig Franck Subject: Re: Software Engineering and Dreamers Date: 1997/06/09 Message-ID: <5nfnq1$6ta@mtinsc04.worldnet.att.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 247149878 References: <5mmvgj$61k@squire.cen.brad.ac.uk> <19970602.562B58.2B32@ai110.du.pipex.com> <5n1261$qj6@polo.demon.co.uk> <19970602.433020.144E5@ai078.du.pipex.com> <33983ABE.26B2@sni.de> <19970606.49CA70.12B91@ae124.du.pipex.com> Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-06-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: >Mat said > ><< >If science were only about prediction (as has been claimed in this thread and >numerous times elsewhere), the crocodile theory would be as valid as the >Newtonian one. > >But science is not, so the crocodile theory is not. > >> > > >Science is only about formulating theories and making predictions (at least >that is the late 20th century post-Heisenberg viewpoint). > >But let's look at the two theories here > >Newtonian explanation He can predict, but he has no *explanation*. The whole thing reeks of some sort of cabalistic mumbo jumbo. (The last passage of his I read had him sort of "divining the mind of God through mathematics", blah, blah, blah... >Crocodiles using the Newtonian theory pushing things around (as best I >understand the MH alternative theory). Nope. All matter interacts by exchanging virtual crocodiles. When a crocodile "hops" from one particle to the next, they can be said to be interacting. (An alternative theory has them pushing things around with their snouts: the math comes out the same either way.) >Occam's Razor clearly selects the simpler form sans crocodiles, so your >theory, while not predictively inferior, gets rejected solely on this >basis (and on no other!) But, the crocodile theory explains more because it has a method of interaction; the Newtonian theory *never* explaines *why* gravity works. Gravity works by exchanging virual crocodiles. (You can also think of it in terms of snout waves as well. In fact, we are all immersed in a sea of snout-waves.) -- Craig clfranck@worldnet.att.net Manchester, NH I don't pretend to understand the universe, it is a great deal bigger than I am. -- Thomas Carlyle