----- Original Message -----
From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: Economics of Environmentalism RE: Authority of the marketplace?
> At 04:17 PM 7/20/01 -0500 Dan Minette wrote:
> >> To quote Alfred, Lort Tennyson "science is trained and ordered common
> >sense."
> >>
> >
> >Well, I strongly differ with that. QM and common sense are at odds, for
> >example.
>
> Bzzt. Thanks for playing.
>
> The Laws of QM were derived from common sense,
ROTFLMAO Don't Bzzt me about things you don't know nearly as well as I do.
I'll let it pass this one time, the next time I'll ask you to explain QM to
the list. :-)
One of the reasons that QM took so long to be developed is that it violates
common sense. For reference, you can go to my multiple posts on this
subject.
>even if the superficial understanding of them don't fit common sense.
My understanding of QM doesn't fit common sense. Would you call it
superficial?
>
> Anyhow, I'd love to see *your* definition of science that includes all
> branches of Physics yet excludes Economics.
>
Well, explaining the nature of science is an L3 to an L4 post. I'll work on
it, but don't expect it today. BTW, this not just my view, its pretty well
a consensus among the physics community.
> Yet, didn't two guys by the names of Michelson and Morely produce one of
> the grandest physics experiments of all time, all the while making a
> *wrong* prediction?
I would suggest that you refrain from the attempt to instruct me in the
history of science. For one thing, experiments do not make predictions,
theories do. Experiments validate or falsify theory. (Actually, it is
typically an ensemble of experiments, but that's the subject of another L3
post on the nature of science.)
>
> P.S. Does Geology qualify as a science where you come from?
There is a lot of science in geology. Rocks for jocks geology isn't
science, though, its stamp collecting. :-)
