Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
1,561 bytes added ,  22:45, March 4, 2013
→‎Notable examples: Adding example: Silk
Line 7: Line 7:     
== Notable examples ==
 
== Notable examples ==
−
In the postmodern science, the traditional [[scientific method]] demanding from scientists to provide the [[scientific evidence]] for their [[hypothesis]] and conduct [[experiment]]s was replaced by [[logic of possibility]]. This [[paradigm]] shift in [[science]] can be demonstrated at a representative example, the description of research by [[Alan Guth]], where a claim is made about tests being performed in a '' 'hypothetical laboratory' ''<ref>{{cite web|title=Faculty Directory: Alan Guth, Victor F. Weisskopf Professor of Physics|publisher=Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Physics|accessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://web.mit.edu/physics/people/faculty/guth_alan.html|quote=}}</ref>: <blockquote>''"Working with Prof. Edward Farhi and others, Guth has explored the question of whether it is in principle possible to ignite inflation in a hypothetical laboratory, thereby creating a new universe. The answer is a definite maybe. They showed that it cannot be done classically, but with quantum tunneling it might be theoretically possible.{{#tag:ref|cf."Physical scientists like [[Newton]] are not content to say that it ''may'' be so, and then build up theories based on bare possibilites."<ref>{{cite book |title=Darwin and his critics: the reception of Darwin's theory of evolution by the scientific community|author=David L. Hull|publisher=Harvard University Press|year=1973|page=275|url=http://books.google.com/books?ei=jkUzUb-xK4Ol4gS27IGYAQ&id=juTaAAAAMAAJ&dq=Hull+Darwin+and+his+critics&q=verb#search_anchor}}</ref>|group=note}} The new universe, if it can be created, would not endanger our own universe. Instead it would slip through a wormhole and rapidly disconnect completely."</blockquote>'' Postmodern science does not lead to resolution of scientific questions but leaves them undecided by applying terms like '' 'a definite maybe' ''{{#tag:ref|cf."If one wishes to obtain a definite answer from Nature one must attack the question from a more general and less selfish point of view." [[Max Planck]]<ref>{{cite book |title=Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics|author=Alfred Korzybski|publisher=Institute of General Semantics|year=1995|page=415|isbn=978-0937298015|url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/Science-Sanity-Introduction-Non-Aristotelian-Semantics/dp/0937298018}}</ref>|group=note}}. Consequently, the scientific discoveries are being replaced by the beliefs affected by worldview of scientist which are then effectively promulgated as [[Creed|statements of faith]] or scientific [[myth]] calling for public acceptance.
+
*In the postmodern science, the traditional [[scientific method]] demanding from scientists to provide the [[scientific evidence]] for their [[hypothesis]] and conduct [[experiment]]s was replaced by [[logic of possibility]]. This [[paradigm]] shift in [[science]] can be demonstrated at a representative example, the description of research by [[Alan Guth]], where a claim is made about tests being performed in a '' 'hypothetical laboratory' ''<ref>{{cite web|title=Faculty Directory: Alan Guth, Victor F. Weisskopf Professor of Physics|publisher=Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Physics|accessdate=03.03.2013|url=http://web.mit.edu/physics/people/faculty/guth_alan.html|quote=}}</ref>: <blockquote>''"Working with Prof. Edward Farhi and others, Guth has explored the question of whether it is in principle possible to ignite inflation in a hypothetical laboratory, thereby creating a new universe. The answer is a definite maybe. They showed that it cannot be done classically, but with quantum tunneling it might be theoretically possible.{{#tag:ref|cf."Physical scientists like [[Newton]] are not content to say that it ''may'' be so, and then build up theories based on bare possibilites."<ref>{{cite book |title=Darwin and his critics: the reception of Darwin's theory of evolution by the scientific community|author=David L. Hull|publisher=Harvard University Press|year=1973|page=275|url=http://books.google.com/books?ei=jkUzUb-xK4Ol4gS27IGYAQ&id=juTaAAAAMAAJ&dq=Hull+Darwin+and+his+critics&q=verb#search_anchor}}</ref>|group=note}} The new universe, if it can be created, would not endanger our own universe. Instead it would slip through a wormhole and rapidly disconnect completely."</blockquote>'' Postmodern science does not lead to resolution of scientific questions but leaves them undecided by applying terms like '' 'a definite maybe' ''{{#tag:ref|cf."If one wishes to obtain a definite answer from Nature one must attack the question from a more general and less selfish point of view." [[Max Planck]]<ref>{{cite book |title=Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics|author=Alfred Korzybski|publisher=Institute of General Semantics|year=1995|page=415|isbn=978-0937298015|url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/Science-Sanity-Introduction-Non-Aristotelian-Semantics/dp/0937298018}}</ref>|group=note}}. Consequently, the scientific discoveries are being replaced by the beliefs affected by worldview of scientist which are then effectively promulgated as [[Creed|statements of faith]] or scientific [[myth]] calling for public acceptance.
 +
 
 +
*Another example demonstrating the traits of Postmodern science can be given from interview with Joseph Silk, Savilian Professor of [[Astronomy]] at [[University of Oxford]]<ref name="ESA">{{cite web
 +
|title= Is the Universe finite or infinite? An interview with Joseph Silk
 +
|publisher= ESA, European Space Agency
 +
|date= 02-May-2001
 +
|url= http://www.esa.int/esaSC/SEMR53T1VED_people_0_iv.html
 +
|access date= 04-March-2013
 +
}}</ref>:
 +
<blockquote>
 +
*'''ESA:''' ''We seem to agree that the [[Big Bang]] started with an '[[Cosmic inflation|inflation]]', a short period of high-speed expansion. But what happened before that?''
 +
*'''Joseph Silk:''' ''Maybe long before inflation there was a Universe that was collapsing near a [[singularity]], which then inflated again, so there was already a history before the [[Big Bang]]. Some people think there was a 'pre-Big Bang'. One possibility is that this pre-Big Bang, if there was such a place, would have made lots of entropy (the amount of disorder in the Universe). And the Universe we live in does have huge amounts of entropy. That's one theory. But we have no understanding of how to change from collapsing to expanding. There's no physical way to explain that transition. Some people believe that they have explanations the pre-Big Bang, so it's a respectable theory.''</blockquote>
 +
In Postmodern science theories are considered'' 'a respectable' ''not due to their merits in terms of [[Scientific observation|observational discoveries]] or [[scientific evidence]] but merely because 'Some people believe [them]'.
    
== Notes ==
 
== Notes ==
Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
2,947

edits

Navigation menu