Unlimited Possibilities: Theory Permutations

  • Thread starter Thread starter wolram
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the structure of scientific theories as sets and their subsets, focusing on how to evaluate and evolve theories based on experimental verification of their components. The idea is that if a theory consists of various postulates, some of which may be disproven while others are validated, it may be beneficial to retain the verified components and discard the disproven ones. This approach could facilitate the evolution of the theory rather than its outright rejection. The conversation also touches on the ambiguity of certain components, such as dark matter candidates, and the potential for numerous alternatives if a primary candidate is not found. The participants express a need for further expertise on the topic, particularly regarding the number of candidates for dark matter and related subsets. The discussion raises questions about the methodology of theory evaluation and the implications for scientific progress.
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,410
Reaction score
555
If one takes a theory as a set ,there seems to be many sub sets that make that theory, and even sub set of sub sets, has anyone ever worked out the possible permutations that will keep a theory alive?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure what you're proposing here Wolram. Are you saying that if we take the principles and postulates of a theory as a set, then the subsets would be useful in determining how good that theory was. For example if we have whatever theory as A = \{x,y,z\} for postulates x, y and z and x & y were verified experimentally but z was disproved then we could examine the parts of that theory which contained as x and y as elements and throw away the bits with z in. This would then help the theory evolve rather than throwing the whole lot out?

Or am I off.
 
Last edited:
Kurdt said:
I'm not sure what you're proposing here Wolram. Are you saying that if we take the principles and postulates of a theory as a set, then the subsets would be useful in determining how good that theory was. For example if we have whatever theory as A = \{x,y,z\} for postulates x, y and z and x & y were verified experimentally but z was disproved then we could examine the parts of that theory which contained as x and y as elements and throw away the bits with z in. This would then help the theory evolve rather than throwing the whole lot out?

Or am I off.

Rather part z can be ambiguous, if for instance the WIMP is not found there are many candidates to take its place, so one goes to the next best candidate and if that one can not be found the next etc, etc, so my question is how many candidates are there for dark matter, which is just a sub set of the set, and how many candidates are there for the other sub sets of the set.
 
In that case I think this is where marcus or somebody else will have to come in since I have little knowledge in that area rather embarrassingly.
 
Why move this to GD?
 
Back
Top