Forums / General Discussion Forums / Ad Infinitum / Let's make a deal!
Let's make a deal!
I've been spending a lot of time recently thinking about what science education-y types call "the nature of science" - what is the essence of what science is? What makes science different from the other ways that us humans have of Figuring Stuff Out? That sounds like a pretty straightforward question, but when you really sit down and think about it, it's surprisingly difficult to answer. For example, I've asked scientists all over the world that question, and they are all very confident in their answers - no two of which are the same.
But there are some common themes to the answers people give, and one of the common themes fits with my best answer to that question. My best answer to what makes science unique is that scientific ideas must be TESTABLE. In other words, you when you suggest a scientific theory, you also need to suggest a way to figure out whether the theory is true or false.
Here's a good example. Let's say that I'm selling you the MacBook Pro that I am now using to type this post. Have I got a great deal for you! Because this isn't just any MacBook Pro. It comes with special alpha release software from Apple, never before released to the public, called "Stock Marker." Type in any date since May 26, 1896 - the very first day that the Dow Jones Industrial Average was calculated - and it will show you the closing price of the Dow on that day.
So, for example, put in January 12, 1906 (MJD 17222), and Stock Marker will output 100.25 - the first day that the Dow closed above 100. You can see all sorts of interesting things using this program, like the largest one-day drop in stock market history:
Friday, October 16, 1987 (MJD 47084): 2246.74
Monday, October 19, 1987 (MJD 47087): 1738.74
So, are you ready to buy? If you're a greedy knave like me, there's one thing you want to do first. What is it?
Right:put in TOMORROW's date, then get back to me on Wednesday. It doesn't really matter that my laptop can recreate the value of the stock market every day from 1896 to today. Sure, maybe it's interesting, but it's not really a reason to buy a laptop. If it can successfully predict the value of the stock market TOMORROW, suddenly it becomes a lot more valuable.
That's what I always think of when I think of science being testable. A scientific theory has to tell us something about the world that we don't know yet. Then, when we look out into the world and test whether that prediction comes true, we get a very powerful insight into that theory.
So what do you think? What is unique about science that makes it different from other ways of gaining knowledge about the world?
Strictly speaking, scientific theories are rarely 'testable' in the sense that you can show whether they hold or not: there are only ways to prove it wrong but no ways to prove it's correct. So maybe 'falsifiable' is a better term? While we are at it, I think this is the point where amateurs have the greatest problems following the scientific method : you must present your ideas in a way that makes it *as easy as possible* for others to try to show you are wrong ! This is very different from what most of us are expected to do in a competive work environment : we are supposed to downplay/hide the weaknesses and shortcommings of the goods and services we sell, aren't we? Anyway, being a great fan of Richard Feynman, I just have to refer to http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.pdf CS HB
Hi Bikeman Interesting thoughts. The notion of the simplest idea/model/hypothesis possible is probably not unrelated to Ockham's Razor, right? It seems to me that we can make some analogies with software. 1. Software is like a model of the world in the sense that it is really just an executable model of a set of requirements or thoughts. Hmm. So perhaps it is a model of a model of the world.
2. When testing software, the presence of bugs can be shown to exist, but never their absence. That's very much like what you said: "...there are only ways to prove it wrong but no ways to prove it's correct".
3. The notion of falsifiabity (from Popper, right?) applies to software. I can come up with a test (experiment) to show whether my hypothesis is correct regarding an observed bug in my software. Non-trivial software debugging is essentially the process of making observations, coming up with hypotheses that account for those observations, and devising experiments to falsify (or not) the hypotheses. Of course, that may lead to further observations that require hypotheses to explain them, and so on. 4.Software is different in the sense that it is an artifical construct born out of mathematics. This means that it is possible to prove certain properties of software. That's what the type systems of programming languages are for (to eliminate whole classes of bugs) and why I prefer strongly statically typed languages. :) Then there's formal verification which is still in its infancy. But I digress...
The point is that it is possible in software to prove some things to be true or false for all time. So, coming back to point 1: what about models of physical systems? Regards, David
Hi Jordan It was great to meet you at the workshops. I agree with you that the power of Science derives in large part from the ability to make predictions based upon models of the world verified against evidence. That last part is particularly important I think. You can find a flowchart-style diagram entitled "Science vs Faith" in various places on the Net. Here's one: http://weblog.sinteur.com/index.php/2007/02/18/science-vs-faith/ Being a programmer, this kind of appeals to me because it lays it out in a way that I could almost code. Well, sort of. :) No doubt this diagram has the potential to cause conflict, but even if you just focus on the left-hand-side (Science) flowchart, I think it's a nice way to start thinking about the process. Of course, in boxes like "Get an idea" and "Perform an experiment", there's an awful lot of wiggle room, but then, who says there is not a big role for creativity in Science, as in Engineering, Art, and other areas of life. Regards, David