I don't agree with that.  E.g. Quantum mechanics is a theory which predicts how 
electrons behave, which is basis of how your computer works.

Thus if we agree that your computer as a working system is a fact then then 
framework used to get that fact must also be a fact.

You can get more fuzzy and say that newtons theory of gravity predicts facts 
above a certain granularity.  Thus above that level it's a fact.

Take the fuzzy fact concept one step farther: the theory of relativity.

Is gravity a fact?  Then how would you explain superfluidity?  It defies 
gravity.  

If scientific theories aren't facts then there are no facts.



On Sep 14, 2011, at 2:41 PM, Sam <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> I think we can all agree the real definition of a theory is it is not
> a proven fact.
> 
> .
> 
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Larry Lyons <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Its more like when someone brings out the real definitions of a scientific 
>> theory the torches and pitchforks come out. Here people just get sarcastic.
>> 
>>> That explains a lot. So those other groups wind you up and you forget
>>> your in the civil group... or do you wind up the other groups and
>>> they're not as forgiving? Just kidding.
>>> 
>> .
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:342634
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to