Complaint A Disservice to Science: Exploring Philosophical Questions in Nature

  • Thread starter Thread starter jackmell
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the tension between encouraging philosophical inquiry and maintaining scientific rigor within a science forum. Participants argue that while curiosity and philosophical questions can spark scientific exploration, they often lead to unscientific speculation that detracts from factual discussions. The forum emphasizes the importance of distinguishing valid scientific questions from philosophical musings, asserting that discussions should remain grounded in empirical evidence. There is a consensus that fostering a clear understanding of established science is crucial before engaging in broader philosophical debates. Ultimately, the forum aims to promote meaningful scientific discourse while avoiding the pitfalls of unfounded speculation.
  • #51
ZapperZ said:
And I asked you for specific evidence to back your claim, within the context of what has happened in today's scientific world.

Zz.

I've done a few things Zapper and I'm pretty much a nobody. But I don't want to discuss them publicly. So yes, some nobody today can do something meaningful in science what no one else in established science can.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
jackmell said:
I've done a few things Zapper and I'm pretty much a nobody. But I don't want to discuss them publicly. So yes, some nobody today can do what no one else in established science can.

I get e-mail like that from crackpots, and I wish I had $1 for every one that I've received. So you'll understand if I do not put any validity on such statement.

Zz.
 
  • #53
As Greg said "Philosophical discussion is at the mentor's discretion" that is why we have mentor's and adviser's and moderator's on this site. I think they do a good job and if you get a thread locked or deleted you can always PM the group and get a reply as to why.
 
  • #54
jackmell said:
Longitude. You know this story? Harrison came from no where and solved it didn't he? All the great academians were against him but his passion for the matter was stronger then their arrows.
I read the book, but its been a while. My understanding is that all he did was invent a good clock, he didn't actually do any science. The scientific problem had already been figured out, they just didn't have the tool they needed. So there was no controversy, no "academians" "against him" that I'm aware of. That's not an issue of science, it is an invention.
Many solutions were proposed for how to determine longitude at the end of an exploratory sea voyage and hence the longitude of the place that was visited (in case one would want to revisit it, place it on a map, or more urgently, avoid known marine hazards). The practical methods relied on a comparison of local time with the time at a given place (such as Greenwich or Paris). Many of these methods relied on astronomical observations relying on the predictable, "clockwork" nature of motions of heavenly bodies. By measuring locations of the fixed stars, local time could be reckoned. The remaining problem was to accurately estimate the time at the given (now distant) place.

Harrison set out to solve the problem in a direct way: by producing a reliable clock that could keep the time of the given place across a long sea journey.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison#Overview_of_the_problem
 

Similar threads

Back
Top