Re: Operational Definitions

[igal@vms.huji.ac.il (Igal Galili)]

Larry,

> This particular example doesn't seem so bad, but I'm wary of operational
> definitions in general.  My science education professor once asked us in
> class what the definition of temperature was and a PhD physicist taking the
> class with me responded with usual stuff about average kinetic energy.  The
> Sci Ed prof said no, and no other student could come up with any other
> definitions.  So after class I asked him what _real_ the definition of
> temperature was and he said, "It is how hot or cold an object feels."  So
> if I put my left hand in a bucket of cold water and my right hand in a
> bucket of hot water, and then simultaneously plunge them both in a bucket
> of warm water, the middle bucket has two different temperatures at the same
> time?  And objects that aren't being felt have no temperature?  Does an
> object that isn't being weighed at some instant of time have weight then?

        I think, I got your point, Larry.  Physics solved this problem.
The operational definition of weight contains STANDARD weighing using a
calibrated scale and not an attempt to hold the object by hand.  Indeed,
the result of the latter procedure is in an obvious dependense of how
frequent you are doing  your working out.

Igal.