Science proves nothing

All our knowledge has it’s origins in our perceptions.
Leonardo Da Vinci
 

It is a mistake to believe that a science consists in nothing but conclusively proved propositions, and it is unjust to demand that it should. It is a demand only made by those who feel a cravingfor authority in some form and a need to replace the religious catechism by something else, even if it a scientific one.
Sigmund Freud
 

Every sentence I utter must be understood not as an affirmation, but as a question.
Neils Bohr
 

Science is a method of describing the Universe, &, is based on largely reproducible observation which excludes divine intervention. It does this by providing formulas which hopefully accurately describe physical phenomena like Newtons laws of gravitation & motion. The notion that a compact formula can describe phenomena is called algorithmic compressibility. Humans containing only limited memory, &, only able to take in things of limited complexity generally desire algorithmic compressibility from scientific theories. Another way of looking at algorithmic compressibility is Occam’s razor which states that “the simplest explanation of the facts is most likely to be the correct explanation.” 

It’s amazing that God made the laws of physics so intelligible, &, algorithmically
compressible, this stunned Einstein, a computer program contain
ing a simulation of the entire Universe using the known laws of physics & the constants of physics to the best known accuracy could probably be implemented in less space than the amount of computer memory that it takes to hold an electronic copy of this blog, admittedly if the variables aren’t also compressible it would need an infinite amount of space to contain the variables of the running of the simulation itself & it would run infinitely slowly on a normal computer.

Scientific theories are more likely to gain acceptance when they make predictions which are later verified & explain phenomena not explained by current theories. Einstein’s theory of general relativity made a prediction that light would curve in the Suns gravitational field, this was verified in 1919 by the British astronomer Arthur Eddington.
Einsteins theory of general relativity thus superseded Newtons theory of gravitation as it described the phenomenon of gravity more accurately.

Einstein came up with most of his theories using thought experiments. For Special Relativity he primarily based his work on the implications of the Michelson Morley experiments, that light travels at the same speed for all observers & after a few years work drew very insightful conclusions from this observation. For General Relativity Einstein recognized that a person in a box would have no means of telling whether they were stuck on a planet, &, experiencing gravity accelerating weightlessly through space & experiencing G forces from this he drew more insightful conclusions.


Einstein had no idea why his aesthetically beautiful theories described the Universe so accurately & elegantly. Science proves
nothing, &, does not explain anything, it never will, ultimate understanding through science is an illusion, all the answers it gives are superficial.

The easiest way to annoy scientists is to just keep asking them  “Why did that happen, please tell me?” & just let them keep answering because..., depending on their maturity the may get more annoyed & frustrated about having their naive belief systems that they really understand what is going on challenged.

Richard Feynman gave a interview explaining why  science ultimately explains or proves nothing, there will always be god in the gaps below is the argument for this paraphrased from my recollection of the interview.

Q: Why did the woman fall on the ice?
A: Because it was slippy.
 

Q: Why did that happen, please tell me?
A: Because a thin layer of water formed on top of the smooth surface of the ice.
 

Q: Oh that’s very interesting, why did that happen?
A: A relatively complicated reason to do with the pressure causing water to form on top of the ice as water takes up less volume than an ice crystal for the same number of molecules.

Q: You must be a very clever man, why did that happen?
A: Sweat pouring off, an answer which even the scientist doesn’t fully comprehend or appreciate probably involving the Pauli eclusion principle & some other quantum physics sincerely hoping not to be challenged any further.
 

Q: I’m impressed, you must be very knowledgeable, why did that happen?
A: Dunno...


Actual video is here

About the Author

D.J. Barrow is an Engineer & Linux Consultant based in Ireland, his website is here


More Links on this site

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The joys of Reverse Polish Notation

Lowdown of everything I know about how to get good at programming fast

My efforts to crack RSA, it was maddening