8
   

Scientific Urban Legends

 
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 09:51 am
@maxdancona,
There was not personal insults whatsoever in my post. Sorry if it ruined your hairdo.

Quote:
1. What test can I run that would tell me if an event is "predetermined" or not?

You can try to reproduce the initial conditions for the event, and see if that leads to reproducing the event. If you can always reproduce the event by reproducing its initial conditions, then it follows that the initial conditions fully determine the event.

Quote:
2. How does this test work differently in "modern science" versus the other type of science?

It doesn't work differently in "modern science". It's just that since the beginning of the 20th century, a whole lot of events have been of the type impossible to reproduce at will. Eg in the double-slit experiment you famously cannot predict where the next photon will land on the screen.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 09:54 am
@maxdancona,
determinism can have several aspect meanings in science. Most all chemical equations are deterministic.
Im afraid youre invoking some kind of philosophical/religious meanings . I recall the "deterministic values in physical chemistry"

However, I never really spent anytime worrying about the adjectives used in p-chem especially since most of the reactions involved pre dated the time when "scientist" was even a valid word. Im sure we will find some way to keep this "speaking past each other" going for several pages.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:00 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
Eg in the double-slit experiment you famously cannot predict where the next photon will land on the screen.


I am curious. Have you actually ever done the double-slit experiment?

The results are quite deterministic,,, we measure it. We use similar techniques to precisely measure crystal structures (for example).
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:01 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
determinism can have several aspect meanings in science. Most all chemical equations are deterministic.
Im afraid youre invoking some kind of philosophical/religious meanings .


My point exactly.

When Olivier makes the claim that "Modern Science is non-deterministic", I feel he has to define his terms. He has shown no evidence that this claim has any meaning.

My objection is that the "philosophic/religious meanings" should be kept away from science. This is where Scientific mythology comes from.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:02 am
@maxdancona,
No I haven't done it myself. Have you? I'm curious whether you think that it is possible to predict where the next photon will land on the screen? Because if that's the case, don't keep it for yourself...
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:04 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
No I haven't done it myself. Have you?


Actually I have run the experiment thousands of times in the classroom (teaching physics) and in the lab (running experiments with microwaves and crystals).

You should understand the actual experiment before you derive "philosophical/religious meanings" from it.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:15 am
@maxdancona,
Determinism is indeed a form of metaphysics. It cannot be proven empirically. Non-determinism is also a form of metaphysics of course, and thus it cannot be proven either.

My point was that modern science (unlike the classic version) does not pretend or assume that the world is entirely predetermined, and in fact assumes that some events are either non-determined and/or beyond our current capacity to foretell.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:15 am
@maxdancona,
OH SORRY, I was giving you the credit for the non specific use of the term in science. CARRY ON.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:16 am
@maxdancona,
Okay, so answer the question then. Can you foretell where any individual photon will land on the screen?
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:19 am
@Olivier5,
Oh and BTW, I have observed interferences in a two-slit experiment in class. That's pretty banal and easy to do. What I didn't do is slow the photon delivery to such a rate when they go through the slits one particle by one particle, and yet they still behave as a wave i.e. create interference.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:21 am
@Olivier5,
Then we should start a thread entitled "Metaphysical Urban Legends". Actually the title makes me chuckle... it is rather redundant.

I am not even sure if your new claim that the "classic version" of science "assumes the world is entirely predetermined". Let alone the anthropomorphism of science, I don't think classical scientists made this claim.

You are making "metaphysical" claims as if they were scientific. This is a thread about science.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:22 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Oh and BTW, I have observed interferences in a two-slit experiment in class. That's pretty banal and easy to do.


And you hopefully noticed that the diffraction pattern was completely predictable. If you did the experiment yourself you would have calculated theta and measured the resulting bands and confirmed that they matched the mathematical function.

My point is that you are making a mushy, ill-defined philosophical statement and then confusing it with science.

Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:31 am
@maxdancona,
Yep, but not the individual pixels. Why won't you acknowledge that?

So each and every event leading to the final picture was unpredictable, and yet the final picture is predictable. That's the beauty of statistics. I can't tell when exactly I will die, but I'm pretty certain it is not going to be in 2395 AD... That would be statistically impossible.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:36 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
Yep, but not the individual pixels. Why won't you acknowledge that?


Pixels? This is scientifically incorrect. There are no pixels. Your simplified philosophical view is scientifically wrong.

I am not going to teach you a third year University Physics class here. I am sure you have heard the pop-science phrase "wave-particle" duality (as much as I am averse to relying on pop-science phrases).

There is a wave function here.... your imagination of tiny little pixies streaming through the slits each leaving an individual mark is simply incorrect.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:42 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
I don't think classical scientists made this claim.

Newtonian mechanics are generally seen as determinist, although Popper disputed that idea.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Jan, 2020 10:44 am
@maxdancona,
Your avoidance of the question is just a proof you are unable to deal with it.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Jan, 2020 04:44 am
The thumb monkey was here.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/25/2020 at 12:03:47