This discussion centers on the philosophical and methodological aspects of proving the existence of particles, particularly electrons. The original poster questions how experimental data leads to the conclusion of particle existence without relying on assumptions, suggesting that the process may appear speculative. Participants emphasize the importance of the scientific method, acknowledging that assumptions are inherent in scientific inquiry. They also reference J.J. Thomson's work and the historical context of the Standard Model as foundational to understanding particle discovery.
PREREQUISITESStudents of physics, philosophers of science, and anyone interested in the foundational principles of particle physics and the scientific method.
He did accept that trees exists, but not electrons. Hard to imagine that he will change viewpoint due to squirrels..Drakkith said:Electrons are as real as the squirrels in my back yard
This has been already discussed. It is sematincs.Iloveyou said:the electron is an invention and not a discovery
Electrons are not inventions, so your context is wrong.Iloveyou said:If according to the context mentioned above, the electron is an invention and not a discovery, then the thingness does not apply to electrons..
Squirrels are inventions for sure. Never seen one.Drakkith said:Electrons are not inventions, so your context is wrong.
And with that we are done here.Iloveyou said:the thingness does not apply to electrons