e=mc2: 103 years later, Einstein proven right - Page 2

JrKASperov · 11-25-2008, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wellard

I ask a simple question .... J/K

That was an interesting discussion, I like to remind my wife when we are flying at 48,000 ft above the pacific ocean that flight is just a theory not a law

It wouldn't make a difference really.

That said, we should keep in mind that flight and refridgerators (as I'm fond of saying) don't require any theory to be true, they don't require truth on the ontological level of theories and unobservable entities. This whole story of unprovableness is only valid for unobservable levels. On the observable level, proof isn't that hard, it just requires observation! Ie. even I wouldn't say that if an apple felt from a tree we couldn't be sure about that.

Likewise, an aeroplane flies regardless of any theory.

Firestormalpha · 11-25-2008, 05:29 PM

in otherwords flight is fact, since we observe it occurring regularly. But the forces we believe to dictate this phenomenon are theories, becaust we don't observe the forces, we only see the effects of those forces?

JrKASperov · 11-25-2008, 06:14 PM

Yesiirrraaahhh that's correct. And of course force could be replaced by other concepts. Natural place as in Aristotle's work is one of the examples.

Olorin · 11-25-2008, 07:17 PM

Consider the cannonball.

When cannons were first invented, the prevailing theory was that the natural state of the cannonball was rest. Therefore, when a cannonball was shot into the air, something had to be pushing it to keep it moving forward.

Theory: Nature abhors a vacuum. Since the cannonball will leave a vacuum in its wake, air will rush in to fill the vacuum and propel the cannonball forward.

The theory was eventually replaced by Galileo and Newton: Objects in motion tend to stay in motion. The cannonball will continue at the same speed, though it will be pulled downward by gravity and slowed (slightly) by air resistance.

Now just because early cannons relied on nature's abhorrence of a vacuum rather than inertia to hit their target didn't make them any less destructive.

Things work the same way whether we have the proper theory to explain them or not.

JrKASperov · 11-26-2008, 04:53 AM

Great example Olorin!

11-25-2008, 05:29 PM	#12
Firestormalpha Knight of the Rose Join Date: July 11, 2002 Location: Coral Springs, Fl USA Age: 41 Posts: 4,454	Re: e=mc2: 103 years later, Einstein proven right in otherwords flight is fact, since we observe it occurring regularly. But the forces we believe to dictate this phenomenon are theories, becaust we don't observe the forces, we only see the effects of those forces? __________________ "When you start with a presupposition, it's hard to arrive at any other conclusion." "We are never to judge a philosophy by its abuse." - Augustine "If you're wondering if God has a sense of humor, consider the platypus." http://www.greaterthings.cbglades.com

11-25-2008, 06:14 PM	#13
JrKASperov Fzoul Chembryl Join Date: July 16, 2003 Location: Wa\'eni\'n Age: 39 Posts: 1,701	Re: e=mc2: 103 years later, Einstein proven right Yesiirrraaahhh that's correct. And of course force could be replaced by other concepts. Natural place as in Aristotle's work is one of the examples. __________________ God is in the rain.

11-25-2008, 07:17 PM	#14
Olorin Avatar Join Date: May 27, 2002 Location: Boulder, CO Age: 49 Posts: 544	Re: e=mc2: 103 years later, Einstein proven right Consider the cannonball. When cannons were first invented, the prevailing theory was that the natural state of the cannonball was rest. Therefore, when a cannonball was shot into the air, something had to be pushing it to keep it moving forward. Theory: Nature abhors a vacuum. Since the cannonball will leave a vacuum in its wake, air will rush in to fill the vacuum and propel the cannonball forward. The theory was eventually replaced by Galileo and Newton: Objects in motion tend to stay in motion. The cannonball will continue at the same speed, though it will be pulled downward by gravity and slowed (slightly) by air resistance. Now just because early cannons relied on nature's abhorrence of a vacuum rather than inertia to hit their target didn't make them any less destructive. Things work the same way whether we have the proper theory to explain them or not. __________________ "Many are my names in many countries. Mithrandir among the Elves, Tharkun to the Dwarves; Olorin I was in my youth in the West that is forgotten, in the South Incanus, in the North Gandalf; to the East I go not" --The Two Towers

11-26-2008, 04:53 AM	#15
JrKASperov Fzoul Chembryl Join Date: July 16, 2003 Location: Wa\'eni\'n Age: 39 Posts: 1,701	Re: e=mc2: 103 years later, Einstein proven right Great example Olorin! __________________ God is in the rain.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Deport her to America!(proven to be false, but still funny anyway)	Stormymystic	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	38	09-08-2004 03:50 PM
Guilthy until proven innocent?!	Dreamer128	General Discussion	5	12-28-2003 01:27 PM
Parts of the Old Testament proven true	Yorick	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	72	10-01-2003 10:53 PM
Einstein was right again!	Rokenn	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	4	01-08-2003 03:29 PM
my theory has been proven!	SSJ4Sephiroth	Baldurs Gate II: Shadows of Amn & Throne of Bhaal	2	08-13-2001 07:33 AM

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)