He is right and he is wrong.
History is inexact but so is SCIENCE.
What is Science ?
Its a systematic study of reduced natural events (called experiments) and proposal of rule (called Laws) which can manupulate future events (called technology) with certain accuracy.
And History ?
Is it not a systematic study of residuals of events (fossils,texts,artifacts) in nature and proposal of rule (Racism, Universal Rights) which can manupulate future events (politics, social behaviour) with certain success.
Napolean once said "History is but a fable agreed upon".
I say, " Science is but a theory agreed upon".
Newton's laws, once considered universal, were mere approximations to a more complex and bizarre Eintein's Equations, which also were not universal. They did not explain various events of nature like electro-magnetism, and quantum mechanics.
Some say we just need to discover the Ulitimate Unified Theory to explain all the Laws of Universe. Once we do that, every event can be predicted precisely. There will be no scope for interpretations or approximations.
9 comments:
just a related thought I had written a while ago
http://vinjk.livejournal.com/57420.html
a step ahead in chaos , eh ?
yea :)
I say, " Science is but a theory agreed upon"
I don't quite agree. I think Science is not a set of agreed theories, but descriptions in which everyone MUST agree. I don't remember which scientist said once, while many people was trying to throw away his theory: "If I were wrong, there would only need for one person not agreeing". Or sth like that. So the only thing that makes hypotheses into laws are observations, not people agreeing on the validity of the hypothesis itself. Maybe you meant this in a way.
Some say we just need to discover the Ulitimate Unified Theory to explain all the Laws of Universe. Once we do that, every event can be predicted precisely. There will be no scope for interpretations or approximations.
Even those should know that the Laplacian deterministic uthopy is long ago surpassed with the arrival of the uncertainty principle. The absolute unified theory needs to include by definition the uncertainty principle. The conclusion is that "precise" means only "most probable".
a theory satisfies only few events , that too inaccurately.
Eg. Fourier law of heat transfer.
It states that q ~ dT/dx
This is only an approximation. No one really knows if it is exactly proportional to 1st order temperature gradient or also dependent on 2nd order. Inclusion of 2nd order is too complicated so scientist have 'agreed' on usage of Fourier Law.
Exactly !!
'uncertainty principle' states that humans will never know the exact location or speed of a paricle with 100% pobability.
but the cosmos follows one single path without hesitation. Its just that 'We' will never know that path for sure. Only 'He' will.
We can never predict what future events are even if we have complete description of present with 100% probability.
welcome to the lost!
Inclusion of 2nd order is too complicated so scientist have 'agreed' on usage of Fourier Law
... You can agree about the usage of a certain law regarding its accuracy, but not about the validity. So the law is used because the empirical observations match to a very high degree of accuracy what the law predicts. If then you want to scratch certain terms because by doing that you get as well a fairly high precision, that is agreed. But of course one must be open to new hypotheses that can overthrown the previous theories.
touché
Post a Comment