Since it didn't fit in that thread ... quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is a totally subjective thing to believe that a simplistic theory should be better than a more complexe one -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Subjective to believe??? Get with it dude.. " quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- it's a principle that tries to make you play the game of science more savely: the less you assume, the less chance there is you're wrong -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Science does not assume." There is always something that needs to be assumed. "Science give results that includes margins of error, if two solutions give the same result, one being a simple two minute calculation and the other so complex that no human could possible do it in their life time, both giving the same answer with the same margin of error, I know which solution I would use." You are missing the point entirely. You are talking about what is practical, not about which one is closest to reality. "Science is not trying to be nature. It is about explaining the universe around us in practical ways." You're not debating Occam's razor. You are debating whether theories should be practical or not.
Thanks for moving this to a new thread. I agree. But assumption is not part of science it is part of the process that produces good science. What would the point be if science were not practical? Newton is not close to reality but was very practical. I think I was debating Occam’s razor…… Quote ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ “What can be done with fewer [assumptions] is done in vain with more.” ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Willian of Ockham 1300?. It was about philosophy. But it also works well for science.. We must make use of science. We must be able to transfer knowledge. Here is more help on Occam’s razor.. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/OCCAMRAZ.html
Yup, but it seems to me that you still mis the point: Occam's razor is not a true standard to decide which theory is closest to reality/truth ... and that's what I wanted to point out. Because it seems to me that it is almost too often used in that way: my theory has fewer assumptions so it must be BETTER than yours -> bullshit
... but I do agree that the pratical way is easier for the scientist to work! But that has nothing to do with it: A theory with less assumptions could mathematically be more complex than one with more assumptions Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
--Your point is only true outside of the realm of scientific methodology. Science cannot determine 'truth' it can only supply degrees of <i>plausibility</i> relative to other theories attempting to explain the same phenomena. -Chris Grose Geoscience Editor Organization for Young Scientists Inquiry http://www.oysi.promisoft.net
