From: "JACK L. URETSKY (C)1998; HEP DIVISION, ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB ARGONNE, IL 60439" <JLU@HEP.ANL.GOV>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 23:14:40 -0500
Hi all-
Bob Sciamanda writes:
******************************************************
It seems to me that most reasoned disagreements among contemporary
physicists concerning an observed phenomenon should come down to
1) differing mathematical models connecting the numerical values of
observables, and/or
2) differing conceptual models offering physical explanations of the
phenomenon (and its mathematical model) in terms of causal connections
among more primitive phenomena and entities, real or metaphorical.
***************************
I think not, Bob. One major issue involves the question of
"what is an observed phenomenon." I have been bitten at least three
times by this question. The moral is, that experiments are difficult, and
are difficult to interpret. The shade of Aristotle, if he has learned
anything from Newton, will be my chief witness.
See my next posting - "The Air Track Experiment" - for a way to
bring this point home to your students.
Regards,
Jack
"These several facts prove nothing, for one cannot deduce a principle from so
few examples, but they do at least indicate that the ability to learn to spell
correctly is a gift; that it is born in a person, and that it is a sign of
intellectual inferiority. By parity of reasoning, its absence is a sign of
great mental power."
Mark Twain, "Extract from Eve's Diary'.