Skip to main content

View Diary: Pique the Geek 20110605: Misconceptions about Science (112 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  sure, but (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Translator, WiseFerret

    I still don't get the distinction. Say somebody hands you a bunch of alleged coordinates of planets. You say "aha, if we have these rules...(include gravity)... that's the sort of pattern we'd get." So then you'd say that gravity was a theory, an explanation of a bunch of appearances. Or maybe the concept of force has become very concrete in your mind and you really can't imagine any other type of coordinates so you say gravity is a law.

    Who cares what the name is? What matters is whether it's right or how close it gets when. My point is that all these scholastic arguments about names get nowhere. As Galileo said, "I could call it polenta..."

    This comes up all the time on our Q&A site. People want to know "Is light matter?" etc. We could always make up some definitions and then answer them, but why get tangled up in a bunch of pointless words? It's more important to sort out which questions have meaning. Same goes for "law", "theory",...

    Michael Weissman UID 197542

    by docmidwest on Sun Jun 05, 2011 at 10:22:01 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I can not argue. (0+ / 0-)

      Warmest regards,


      Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me over and over, then either I really love you blindly or I am a Republican.

      by Translator on Sun Jun 05, 2011 at 10:23:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site