|
MKJCP wrote: Likely you mean the fundamental laws of physics don't change.
Ya, I think that's what he means. Although there's no way to prove that the laws don't change. 
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
Elsewhere, MKJCP wrote: Look up the definition of science.
The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
I don't see your point.
"Systematic study ... through observation and experiment" does not mean "Have a quick shufty, form an opinion, and call it science" (despite its seeming to be the most common method of investigation, if all the click-bait is anything to go by).
Scientific rigour demands that, without definitive proof (achieved through systematic yadda yadda), even correct opinions and theories remain as only opinions and theories.
Don't confuse cack-handed opinions, statistics, and marketing guff about "what is good for you" with science.
MKJCP wrote: Science is the organized body of knowledge to explain things, it does not exist without people to make theories, etc
That statement itself shows that theories are not science, but are only a step on the way toward it.
Only after proof do theories become part of the "organised body of knowledge", because only after proof can they be termed "knowledge", rather than "opinion" or "theory".
And proving that some complex foodstuff is "good for you" is pretty much beyond our current capabilities, given the umpty-gazillion chemical interactions that go on daily within the human body, so statements to the effect are not science.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
My point is that I felt you were confusing the human study which is science with the laws themselves (I mean here the actual dynamics governing physical universe) when you said Quote: Science Does Not Change
. But then, later in your response above you seem to agree that "science" is the study, so maybe I am mistaken. I have little doubt you understand all this. Quote: complex foodstuff
Sounds like you need breakfast.
|
|
|
|
|
MKJCP wrote: you seem to agree that "science" is the study
It is the study, but when you study, you only retain knowledge, not every unproven theory, crackpot idea, or statistical survey that everyone and his uncle Willy vomits out along the way.
I confess to being a little tired of headlines (especially on the web) that declare "Science Proves [insert any old guff here]!"
Science doesn't "prove" anything, and doesn't "confirm" anything. It's the application of proven scientific principles, facts, and knowledge that do that.
A good example of where it all goes wrong is the global warming "discussion".
Genuine scientists will never win that discussion, because GW itself isn't science -- but people rightly use science, apply science, when attempting to prove things that are not themselves science.
GW is just a series of effects of scientific laws (e.g. the proven laws regarding energy gradients, fluid dynamics, and changes of states of matter). But again, the systems involved are far too complex to properly apply scientific principles, and too many of the calculations come down to statistics.
So no true scientist could put his hand on his heart and declare that his GW predictions are indisputably true, but anyone who just has personal preferences on the matter will quite happily declare that his opinion is absolute truth -- and will roll out as many bullfacts as he can think of as "proof" of his completely unscientific ideas.
QED Pheobe, in Friends, who demonstrated this succinctly and perfectly.
For every fact of science, there are a million unsubstantiated opinions, so the line has to be drawn between facts/knowledge and opinions/theory, or you'll just drown under the deluge of opinions and unproven theories. Facts are science; theories are, at best, the application of science.
There was never any definitive proof that the Earth is flat, so that ain't science.
Gravity worked before someone figured out how to calculate its effects, so it was always a fact, even though we still don't know exactly how it works.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I hear ya. Way too much pseudo-science, pseudo-journalism, click-bait crap and Phoebe's out there of late. The old saying is that a sucker is born every minute. It seems to have accelerated. Probably 12 suckers and a shyster per minute now.
|
|
|
|
|
I know you believe you understand what you think he wrote, but what you read is not what he meant.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, that is clear. 
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: What, do you think gravity was different before Newton wrote about it?
Or that the Sun did indeed revolve around the Earth, because people believed it to be so?
I believe you are wrong. "Science", our study and understanding of the Physical World, Universe, the rules that govern its' behavior, etc., changes constantly. It is the Physical World, Universe, etc., that does not change, much...  .
To quote Cool Hand Luke "What we have heah is a failure to communicate.". 
|
|
|
|
|
The laws of physics don't change. Science is the process of discovering them, so science does change.
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: because it never changes
That's a joke right? Science always changes. It's the scientific way.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: Science always changes.
That's quite a common misapprehension.
The science does indeed never change.
How much we know of it, however...
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
ok, if by "science" you mean "the laws of the universe, physics, chemistry, etc" then yeah, I agree.
But most people understand science as "our current understanding of the universe, etc". Indeed science means "the study of knowledge, or what is knowable" hence, by definition, our grasp of such is always changing.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: our grasp of such is always changing
Your phrasing there confirms that the science doesn't change; only our grasp of it.
Science is the mechanics behind the universe (including the functionality behind the tiny, inconsequential lumps of matter that move around and form opinions on how everything works). Our not knowing or comprehending all of science cannot change the way things work.
It's like not knowing CSS doesn't make it not exist.
Unfortunately.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Look up the definition of science.
|
|
|
|
|
wrong. Science is the study of the mechanics behind the universe. The universe's workings don't change, but our science (i.e., our understanding of the universe) does.
Go read the dictionary.
Science derives from the latin root word "scien" which means "to know".
A scientist is someone who "knows".
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: Science derives from the latin root word "scien" scientia which means "to know".
Indeed.
Not "to theorise" or "to opine"; "to know".
If it ain't a fact, or it ain't true, it ain't science.
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: A scientist is someone who "knows".
Indeed.
Not "someone who theorises", or "someone who has an opinion"; "someone who knows".
If it ain't a fact, or it ain't true, it's only an opinion or a theory.
Get an education. It beats the crap out of a search engine.
And look up "good manners", whilst you're at it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, misremembered from high school latin class. It's been a few years.
So since you agree that science means "to know" or "knowledge" then science is what humans do, not what the universe is. What humans know about the universe constantly changes, hence science constantly changes.
My disagreeing with your beliefs is not ill mannered.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
TheGreatAndPowerfulOz wrote: My disagreeing with your beliefs is not ill mannered.
Sure, just the way it's phrased.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
No offense meant. Sorry if it was ill phrased.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
"It's not what we don't know that gets us into trouble. It's what we know that ain't so."
It's a quote from somewhere (I don't remember where I read it.).
I'm thinking of phlogiston, or the aether.
|
|
|
|
|
YaakovF wrote: "It's not what we don't know that gets us into trouble. It's what we know that ain't so."
Well, just thank Heavens we know that google is our friend!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps you're confusing the terms nature and science. Nature, specifically how the natural universe works, never changes, but science, how we perceive and model it, changes constantly including how we use models that might be in disagreement to each other but work within their respective contexts.
Even so, what makes something that doesn't change more important than something that does change?
(Psst, you don't have to answer that; it was just rhetorical.)
|
|
|
|
|
I think you're correct in your assertion. Take Newtonian mechanics as an example: Newton formulated his laws on planetary motion but it took till Einstein to come along and refine them to give a more accurate picture. Even this might not be fully correct and someone in the future comes along and refines them even more. Therefore, the science changes. The fundamental laws do not. Whether we understand the fundamental laws FULLY is a different matter and what science is all about.
modified 6-Sep-22 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
You're confused.
Politics unfortunately rules our lives. The more politics there is the more tyranny and that's the situation most countries find themselves in.
China landing on the moon means NOTHING to the vast majority of humanity.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
