Thread: Seriousness In science we Trust.
View Single Post
Old 10-19-2010, 03:33 AM   #75
HarryT
eBook Enthusiast
HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
HarryT's Avatar
 
Posts: 85,557
Karma: 93980341
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparrow View Post
While I think that's true, it seems to me that it runs counter to the 'scientific method' that scientists like to promote - where existing knowledge is used to uncover further knowledge.
Here, existing knowledge is overturned, and further knowledge is uncovered more by accident than design.
Absolutely. But that's what being a good scientist is all about. You come up with a theory, make predictions from it, and then perform experiments to see if those predictions are accurate. If they aren't, you revise your theory.

I imagine it must be more difficult in fields like neuro-science. Experiments are probably less reproducable than those in fields like physics.
HarryT is offline   Reply With Quote