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] |
How do we decide what is and what is not an explanation?
By whether it makes correct predictions!!!!!!!!!!!
Trying to be polite, I wrote an understatement:
thermal zig-zagging is not "the" explanation.
At 04:19 PM 11/3/00 -0500, Ludwik Kowalski wrote:
How do we decide what is and what is not an explanation?
By whether it makes correct predictions!!!!!!!!!!!
Since polite understatement didn't communicate the point, here it is with
kid-gloves removed:
-- The zig-zag theory predicts the wrong dependence on temperature.
-- The zig-zag theory predicts the wrong dependence on viscosity.
-- The zig-zag theory predicts the wrong dependence on particle size.
-- The zig-zag theory predicts the wrong dependence on particle mass.
-- It succeeds only in postdicting one bit, namely that small particles
qualitatively settle out faster.
Therefore, although it purports to be a scientific explanation, it is not
anything of the sort. Rather, it is what we call a "Just So Story".
*) How the small particles settle slowly.
*) How the camel got his hump.
*) How the leopard got his spots.
*) et cetera; see
http://www2.shore.net/~mogget/justso.htm