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]

Re: [Phys-l] status of Occam's razor



My understanding of Occam's Razor is that it guides the choice between EQUALLY VALID models.
If the simpler model makes incorrect predictions then we reject it. (Or question the experimental
results more stringently!)
----- Original Message -----
From: John Denker<mailto:jsd@av8n.com>
To: Forum for Physics Educators<mailto:phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] status of Occam's razor


On 08/02/2007 08:44 AM, Rauber, Joel wrote:

>> As far as models are
>> concerned, all models that lead to the correct experimental
>> predictions are equally acceptable.
>
> Occam's razor not withstanding . . .

Well, in this narrow context, yes, Occam's razor not withstanding.

The point of a good theory is to make correct _predictions_.
Without Occam's razor or something like it, you will have a
hard time /finding/ a theory that makes correct predictions,
but if-and-when you have found such a theory, it doesn't
matter whether you got there via Occam's razor or otherwise.

The flow of dependency is:

Occam's razor ---->\
\
correct predictions ----> theory is good
/
Other schemes ---->/
to prevent
overparameterization

Without Occam's razor or something similar, there will be provably
an infinite number of hypotheses, all of which are consistent with
the /old/ data, but almost none of which reliably _predict_ new data.

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu<mailto:Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l<https://carnotphysics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l>