| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| public:rem4:rem4-20:philosophy_of_science_i [2020/01/12 21:44] – [Concepts] thorisson | public:rem4:rem4-20:philosophy_of_science_i [2024/04/29 13:33] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 |
|---|
| | [[http://cadia.ru.is/wiki/public:t-701-rem4-20-1:rem4-20-lecturenotes|2020 Lecture Notes]] |
| | |
| | -------- |
| |
| |
| | Hypothesis \\ (ísl. tilgáta) | A prediction about the relationship between a limited set of phenomena, as explained by a particular theory. \\ Any statement about the world that must hold true if a given scientific theory is correct. | | | Hypothesis \\ (ísl. tilgáta) | A prediction about the relationship between a limited set of phenomena, as explained by a particular theory. \\ Any statement about the world that must hold true if a given scientific theory is correct. | |
| | Data \\ (ísl. gögn) | Typically "raw numbers" -- only contain low-level semantics. | | | Data \\ (ísl. gögn) | Typically "raw numbers" -- only contain low-level semantics. | |
| | Information (ísl. upplýsingar) | Processed and prepared data -- "data with a purpose". | | | Information \\ (ísl. upplýsingar) | Processed and prepared data -- "data with a purpose". | |
| | Randomness | It is hypothesized in quantum physics that the universe may possibly be built on a truly random foundation, which means that some things are by their very nature unpredictable. Randomness in the aggregate, however, does seem to follow some predictable laws (c.f. the concept of "laws of probability"). | | | Randomness | It is hypothesized in quantum physics that the universe may possibly be built on a truly random foundation, which means that some things are by their very nature unpredictable. Randomness in the aggregate, however, does seem to follow some predictable laws (c.f. the concept of "laws of probability"). | |
| | Sampling | Sampling theory uses statistics to tell us \\ (a) how many random measurements we need to make to make a prediction about a whole group of which they are members and \\ (b) how reliable the results are given the particular methods of sampling and recorded variations in the data. \\ (Notice: not the same as Nyquist's sampling theorem, which states that to capture a waveform accuractly in digital form you need to sample it at more than twice its frequency.) | | | Sampling | Sampling theory uses statistics to tell us \\ (a) how many random measurements we need to make to make a prediction about a whole group of which they are members and \\ (b) how reliable the results are given the particular methods of sampling and recorded variations in the data. \\ (Notice: not the same as Nyquist's sampling theorem, which states that to capture a waveform accuractly in digital form you need to sample it at more than twice its frequency.) | |
| | Experiment | Typically refers to the most powerful method of science, the comparative experiment. \\ There are other reliable ways of studying the world, and they can be scientific if one realizes their limits. | | | Experiment | Typically refers to the most powerful method of science, the comparative experiment. \\ There are other reliable ways of studying the world, and they can be scientific if one realizes their limits. | |
| | Tautology \\ (ísl. klifun, hringskýring) | A 2-part sentence where the second part sounds like a logical conclusion of the first part, or an explanation, but simply restates it. \\ Example: "All Icelanders love shopping — because it's fun!" | | | Tautology \\ (ísl. klifun, hringskýring) | A 2-part sentence where the second part sounds like a logical conclusion of the first part, or an explanation, but simply restates it. \\ Example: "All Icelanders love shopping — because it's fun!" | |
| | The key to the advancement of scientific knowledge. | The ability of individuals and groups to create verifiable "coherent stories" of how phenomena in the world are connected, and produce rigorous models that support the stories, is a necessary condition for scientific progress. | | | The key to the advancement of scientific knowledge | The ability of individuals and groups to create verifiable "coherent stories" of how phenomena in the world are connected, and produce rigorous models that support the stories, is a necessary condition for scientific progress. | |
| | |
| \\ | \\ |
| | Support of evidence | The strongest form of evidence is rigorous hypothesis testing using scientific experimentation: clearly thought-out tests of the claims that naturally fall out of the Theory to be tested. It helps if the hypotheses concern unexpected results. | | | Support of evidence | The strongest form of evidence is rigorous hypothesis testing using scientific experimentation: clearly thought-out tests of the claims that naturally fall out of the Theory to be tested. It helps if the hypotheses concern unexpected results. | |
| | Rigor | A theory is more rigorous than another if it includes more clear definitions, tighter relationships with observable and measurable factors that are more independent of external factors (such as the observer/measurer) than the other. The use of mathematics is not a guarantee for rigor. | | | Rigor | A theory is more rigorous than another if it includes more clear definitions, tighter relationships with observable and measurable factors that are more independent of external factors (such as the observer/measurer) than the other. The use of mathematics is not a guarantee for rigor. | |
| | Creating hypotheses | Use both induction and deduction | | | Creating hypotheses | Use both induction and deduction, | |
| | Creating experiments | Use logic and tradition | | | Creating experiments | Use logic and tradition. | |
| | Executing experiments | Use care | | | Executing experiments | Use care. | |
| | Interpreting results | Use rationality. Follow the data! ("Follow the duck, not the theory of the duck.") | | | Interpreting results | Use rationality. \\ Follow the data! ("Follow the duck, not the theory of the duck.") | |
| |
| \\ | \\ |
