Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old June 15th 07, 11:01 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,521
Default Water burns!

Jim Kelley wrote:
Sounds like someone might have been talking about the theories
ordinarily referred to as Newtonian Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics.


No, he appeared to be referring to all theories:

"Hypotheses are discarded all the time, theories aren't."
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com
  #2   Report Post  
Old June 16th 07, 12:05 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,898
Default Water burns!

Cecil Moore wrote:
Jim Kelley wrote:
Sounds like someone might have been talking about the theories
ordinarily referred to as Newtonian Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics.


No, he appeared to be referring to all theories:


"Hypotheses are discarded all the time, theories aren't."


If you think that is incorrect, it should be easy for you to name
a theory that was validated by multiple, indendent, reproducible,
experiments and later discarded.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.
  #3   Report Post  
Old June 16th 07, 12:29 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 464
Default Water burns!


Cecil Moore wrote:

Sounds like someone might have been talking about the theories
ordinarily referred to as Newtonian Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics.


No, he appeared to be referring to all theories:


"Hypotheses are discarded all the time, theories aren't."


And, I'd say that his statement is true, almost by definition.

Why? Well, it's because scientists don't upgrade a proposal from
something generally called a "hypothesis", to something called a
"theory", until it has survived quite a lot of technical challenges
and numerous attempts to find experimental evidence which disproves it.

In other words, if it were easy (and quick) to disprove it, or if it
didn't have substantial predictive power and verifiability, it never
would have been called a "theory".

Hypotheses are born in large numbers... and are often easily slain
while they're still at the "hypothesis" stage. "Theories" are the
ones which are still marching along, churning out useful predictions,
after many assaults.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
  #5   Report Post  
Old June 16th 07, 02:35 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,898
Default Water burns!

John Smith I wrote:
wrote:


...
If you think that is incorrect, it should be easy for you to name
a theory that was validated by multiple, indendent, reproducible,
experiments and later discarded.



Just to get you started, mind you:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsolet...tific_theories

Let's do the physics ones:

Aristotelian theory of gravity: no experimental confirmation; discarded.

Classical mechanics: experimentally verified; superseded and still used
within appropriate boundaries.

Classical electrodynamics: experimentally verified; superceded and still
used within appropriate boundaries.

Ether: no experimental confirmation; discarded.

Caloric theory: no experimental confirmation; discarded.

Emitter theory: no experimental confirmation; discarded.

Persistence of vision: no experimental confirmation; still debated.

Let's do astronomical and cosmological theories:

Ptolemaic system/Geocentric universe: no experimental confirmation;
discarded.

Copernican system: no experimental confirmation; discarded.

Newtonian gravity: experimentally verified; superseded and still used
within appropriate boundaries.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.


  #8   Report Post  
Old June 16th 07, 03:40 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,154
Default Water burns!

wrote:

...
Is that babble supposed to mean something?


Your first tactic of "whamboozling" has been duly noted, let the rivers
flow ...

JS
  #10   Report Post  
Old June 16th 07, 04:04 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,521
Default Water burns!

wrote:
Ether: no experimental confirmation; discarded.
Caloric theory: no experimental confirmation; discarded.
Emitter theory: no experimental confirmation; discarded.


So many scientific theories have been discarded
down through history.
--
73, Cecil
http://www.w5dxp.com


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA: "RADIO, A STUDY OF FIRST PRINCIPLES" 1928 E.E.BURNS-NR RLucch2098 Equipment 0 April 10th 04 03:02 PM
FA: "RADIO, A STUDY OF FIRST PRINCIPLES" 1928 E.E.BURNS-NR RLucch2098 Equipment 0 April 10th 04 03:02 PM
FA: "RADIO, A STUDY OF FIRST PRINCIPLES" 1928 E.E.BURNS-NR RLucch2098 Equipment 0 April 6th 04 04:57 PM
FA: "RADIO, A STUDY OF FIRST PRINCIPLES" 1928 E.E.BURNS-NR RLucch2098 Equipment 0 April 6th 04 04:57 PM
WA3MOJ crahses and Burns!!! Twistedhed CB 1 August 23rd 03 02:51 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:53 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017