Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
The Way I See It...

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Bruce on November 5, 2002 21:52:20 UTC

There are models for doing science. They have have domain of applicability. The models either work or they don't work (either verified or falsified). We do experiments to test them in their domain of applicability. Those who can't grasp this simple idea and insist on testing models outside thieir domain of applicability are 'most likely' crackpots.
Such as someone who claims Einstein made a mistake the way he modeled time in relativity and then can't produce one result which could falsify Einstein's model. Newton modeled time differently and we can produce numerous results which falsify the Newtonian model. Therefore we can possibly say that Newton's model of time is falsifiable. His model is still very useful in a domain of applicability where the ratio GR bookkeeper time / Earth time is ~ 1. Van Flandern has always argued GR is wrong. His model (whatever it is) will soon be falsified by the Kopeikin experiment and he knows it. Thats why he 'spin doctored' what the experiment was trying to measure.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2022 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins