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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1014db,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: Jonathan Guthrie Subject: Re: Software Engineering and Dreamers Date: 1997/06/09 Message-ID: <5nh0th$dam$1@news.hal-pc.org>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 247242204 References: <19970602.562B58.2B32@ai110.du.pipex.com> <5n1261$qj6@polo.demon.co.uk> <19970602.433020.144E5@ai078.du.pipex.com> <33983ABE.26B2@sni.de> <19970606.49CA70.12B91@ae124.du.pipex.com> Organization: Houston Area League of PC Users Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-06-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In comp.lang.ada Robert Dewar wrote: > << > 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 > Crocodiles using the Newtonian theory pushing things around (as best I > understand the MH alternative theory). > 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!) I disagree that you need Ockham's razor to lay the so-called "Crocodile Theory" to rest. As near as I can tell, the "Crocodile Theory" can be stated this way: "There are these invisible crocodiles, and they move the planets around in some arbitrary way." (The competing theory is: "The planets move in a gravitational field according to the nature of that field.") However, crocodiles moving planets around in some unstated arbitrary way is useless to make predictions from. Therefore, the theory makes no predictions at all about planetary "behavior" (one could argue that it cannot---after all, what happens if the crocodiles change their mind about how to move the planets?) And before that fool writes me another email, no I'm not going to accept "they know about those other laws and always follow them" as a description of which arbitrary way they move the planets. I can derive the Newtonian laws of planetary motion from the nature of the gravitational field. What can you derive from the crocodiles? Other than soup, stew, etouffee, and so forth, I mean. -- Jonathan Guthrie (jguthrie@brokersys.com) Information Broker Systems +281-895-8101 http://www.brokersys.com/ 12703 Veterans Memorial #106, Houston, TX 77014, USA We sell Internet access and commercial Web space. We also are general network consultants in the greater Houston area.