How does science work?
Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2018 2:38 pm
Partly inspired by my ongoing, but largely futile efforts to convince members of this forum that I'm not a complete idiot, I have decided to write another article to submit for publication in the magazine. (That's Philosophy Now, for anyone who doesn't realise that we on this forum are guests of that organ.) You can read my original effort here: https://philosophynow.org/issues/104/Ph ... d_Branches or in my blog: https://willijbouwman.blogspot.co.uk It was a while ago, but I've been busy doing an MSc in History and Philosophy, getting divorced, moving house (twice), going doolally and a bunch of other craziness.
Anyway, the idea is to write 4500 words by the end of May, exploring and developing issues that have presented themselves in discussions on this forum. The starting point is taking up from the Roots and branches article, that theoretical science generally has three sides to it: The phenomenon. The mathematical analysis. The philosophical model. Then there's the practical applications.
For now, the working framework is something I've cut and pasted from another thread involving Philosophy Explorer among others:
1. There can be any number of theories to explain the same phenomenon.
See the list of alternative theories for gravity below, for example.
2. The maths gives pretty much the same results.
All the theories below are consistent with the observed data. In other words, any one of them could be true.
3. The different theories are based on different philosophical models.
For example: General relativity is based on the idea that gravity is caused by the 'curvature of spacetime'. Whereas: "In string theory, one of the many vibrational states of the string corresponds to the graviton, a quantum mechanical particle that carries gravitational force. Thus string theory is a theory of quantum gravity."
4. The philosophical models are psychological tools.
These help physicists to conceptualise the thing they are studying, which makes it much easier to come up with new ideas to research than ploughing through a mountain of tricky maths.
Of course there is no guarantee that it will get published, and if it does it would be next year at the earliest, but I will be referring to this forum and this thread in particular. So please do comment and contribute, but bear in mind there is a potential readership of thousands on top of the usual crew.
Anyway, the idea is to write 4500 words by the end of May, exploring and developing issues that have presented themselves in discussions on this forum. The starting point is taking up from the Roots and branches article, that theoretical science generally has three sides to it: The phenomenon. The mathematical analysis. The philosophical model. Then there's the practical applications.
For now, the working framework is something I've cut and pasted from another thread involving Philosophy Explorer among others:
1. There can be any number of theories to explain the same phenomenon.
See the list of alternative theories for gravity below, for example.
2. The maths gives pretty much the same results.
All the theories below are consistent with the observed data. In other words, any one of them could be true.
3. The different theories are based on different philosophical models.
For example: General relativity is based on the idea that gravity is caused by the 'curvature of spacetime'. Whereas: "In string theory, one of the many vibrational states of the string corresponds to the graviton, a quantum mechanical particle that carries gravitational force. Thus string theory is a theory of quantum gravity."
4. The philosophical models are psychological tools.
These help physicists to conceptualise the thing they are studying, which makes it much easier to come up with new ideas to research than ploughing through a mountain of tricky maths.
Of course there is no guarantee that it will get published, and if it does it would be next year at the earliest, but I will be referring to this forum and this thread in particular. So please do comment and contribute, but bear in mind there is a potential readership of thousands on top of the usual crew.