Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
Subject: Re: how science works
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 10:01:45 -0500
From: "RAUBER, JOEL" <JOEL_RAUBER@SDSTATE.EDU>
(soap-box mode on)
I'm rather glad that Bernard mentioned N-rays. I think folks, particularly
the lay-folks tend to over-emphasize the progress of maverick new ideas. By
pointing to Einstein and many others. One tends to forget that being a
maverick idea opposed to the opinion of the "dinosaurs" is not proof of
correctness and that most maverick crazy ideas are just that, crazy. We
tend to not know about all the wrong crazy ideas as they are lost from
having been corrected by the sieve of skepticism.
(soap-box mode off)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bernard Cleyet [mailto:anngeorg@PACBELL.NET]
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2001 1:34 PM
To: PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu
Subject: Re: how science works
For those of you who haven't heard of "N rays", I recommend:
http://skepdic.com/blondlot.html
Here's an example of the failure of skepticism! Probably
caused by the
well known character of the French, chauvinism.
bc half French, who thinks he's not a chauvinist.
William Beaty wrote:
On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, Richard Hake wrote:bickering," so a=
Yes, as Debbie says "science works through lots of
spracticed by most
to finally arrive at a "community map." In Hake (2001a), I give a
capsule description of the "scientific method" as
Scientists are hu=research scientists (rather than "as typically presented"):
I think it goes much further than that. There is a vast difference
between asking for evidence versus derision and ridicule, between
scientific skepticism versus irrational disbelief.
manknown by many
beings, and the problem of irrational disbelief is well
scientists, if not by the textbook authors:=20its opponent=
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing
s andopponents eventu=
making them see the light, but rather because its
allyit." - Pl=
die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with
anckdefine skepti=
"Science advances funeral by funeral."=20
Skepticism is a very necessary component of science. I
cismnew discover=
as "refusing to accept new discoveries without proof." Irrational
disbelief is different, it leads to emotional attacks on
ies,discoverers, as well =
including attempts to silence the voices of the
assomeone say=
emotional attacks in peer review which can halt funding of the
replications that would validate the new discoveries. If
sdon't care how
"OK, prove it", that's skepticism. If someone says "I
strong your evidence is, the very idea is ridiculous" ...that's NOTfindings of anal=
skepticism.=20
Here's something scary. Are you aware of the common
yzersto be par=
of accidents, where each full-blown accident is often found
t ofif the sam=
a group of close calls and ongoing unsafe practices? What
e isalmost-suppresse=
true of revolutionary ideas in science? What if the
dThe works=
discoveries are just the visible part of a larger problem?
ofChandrasekhar's blac=
McClintlock and Wegner (and Ahrrenius' ions, and
kbecause of the=
holes, and Gold's deep rock bacteria) were almost lost
verysuggests =
strong negative reaction of the scientific community. This
thatWERE complete=
it's quite possible that some revolutionary discoveries
lyconventional
lost. Note that with this kind of "science accident", only the near
misses could ever be visible.
Some quotes about how science actually works:
"Perhaps the only thing that saves science from invalid
wisdom that becomes effectively permanent is the presenceof maveri=
cksthey are no=
in every generation - people who keep challenging convention and
thinking up new ideas for the sheer hell of it or from an innate
contrariness." - D. Raup, Paleontologist
"It is as fatal as it is cowardly to blink facts because
t toreported because =
our taste." - John Tyndall
"Whenever the established ideas are accepted uncritically, but=20
conflicting new evidence is brushed aside and not
itlacks merit, =
does not fit, then that particular science is in deep trouble"
- Dr. T. Gold
"New ideas are always criticized - not because an idea
butit. Some p=
because it might turn out to be workable, which would threaten the
reputations of many people whose opinions conflict with
eopleconservat=
may even lose their jobs." - physicist, requested anonymity
"It is really quite amazing by what margins competent but
ivestart with th=
scientists and engineers can miss the mark, when they
eimpossible. =
preconceived idea that what they are investigating is
Whenof them."=
this happens, the most well-informed men become blinded by their
prejudices and are unable to see what lies directly ahead
=20because when th=
- Arthur C. Clarke, 1963
"We must care to think about the unthinkable things,
ingsgive up eve=
become unthinkable, thinking stops and action becomes mindless."
=A0=A0 - James W. Fulbright
"Sit down before facts like a child, and be prepared to
rywhatever abysse=
preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to
sa strange=
Nature leads, or you shall learn nothing." - T.H. Huxley
"Biologists can be just as sensitive to heresy as theologians."
- H.G. Wells
"The mind likes a strange idea as little as the body likes
=20perhaps b=
protein and resists it with similar energy. It would not
e=20acting anti=
too fanciful to say that a new idea is the most quickly
gen=20by the fal=
known to science." - Wilfred Trotter
"The discovery of truth is prevented more effectively not
seerror, not dire=
appearance of things present and which mislead into
ctlyopinion, b=
by weakness of the reasoning powers, but by preconceived
ynovel that t=
prejudice." - Schopenhauer
"...By far the most usual way of handling phenomena so
heypreconceptions is to
would make for a serious rearrangement of our
ignore them altogether, or to abuse those who bearwitness for the=
m."by getting =
- William James
"If I want to stop a research program I can always do it
a few=20away that=
experts to sit in on the subject, because they know right
it=20Kettering, G=
was a fool thing to try in the first place." - Charles
Mthrough to you=
"If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it
.is ruling=
You become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense
theBut every n=
world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.)
owand wonderf=
and then, a new idea turns out to be on the mark, valid
ul.everythin=
If you are too much in the habit of being skeptical about
g,will be stan=
you are going to miss or resent it, and either way you
ding=20a bad thi=
in the way of understanding and progress. " - Carl Sagan
"It's like religion. Heresy [in science] is thought of as
ng,mysteries, and n=
whereas it should be just the opposite." - Dr. Thomas Gold
"I believe there is no source of deception in the investigation of
nature which can compare with a fixed belief that certain kinds of
phenomena are IMPOSSIBLE." -William James
"There is nothing particularly scientific about excessive caution.
Science thrives on daring generalizations." - L. Hogben
"Let the mind be enlarged... to the grandeur of the
ot=20Francis B=
the mysteries contracted to the narrowness of the mind" -
aconto come on=
"It would seem to me... an offense against nature, for us
theto overbrim=
same scene endowed as we are with the curiosity, filled
ming)))))))))))))))=
as we are with questions, and naturally talented as we are for the
asking of clear questions, and then for us to do nothing about, or
worse, to try to suppress the questions..." -Lewis Thomas
Also see:
NEW IDEAS IN SCIENCE, T. Gold
http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/newidea1.html
((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) )
))))))HOBBYIST we=
William J. Beaty SCIENCE
bsitehttp://www.amasci.c=
billb@eskimo.com
omtesla, weird sc=
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects,
iencevortex-L webh=
Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 freenrg-L taoshum-L
ead-L
-------------------------------------------------------------