The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: Sceptom on January 15, 2015, 10:44:59 PM
-
One important aspect of a scientific theory is to propose refutable propositions. For instance, special relativity could be refuted if someone measured something moving faster than the speed of light (in vacuum). There actually was a buzz a few years ago with neutrino at the CERN, supposedly going faster than c, but it turned out to be an error of the device. Scientists were actually excited to see a theory so strong being refuted; it would have mean a huge leap for knowledge.
I wonder, in FET, what would be considered as a refutation of the theory? What kind of observation or data could prove FET wrong?
-
Dear flat earthers,
I have been on this site a while and have been unable to find something with which to pull your theories apart. Would you be so kind as to tell me a subject you might have difficulty with so I can make endless threads about it?
Yours,
Sceptom
Tempting, but no thanks.
-
Dear flat earthers,
I have been on this site a while and have been unable to find something with which to pull your theories apart. Would you be so kind as to tell me a subject you might have difficulty with so I can make endless threads about it?
Yours,
Sceptom
Tempting, but no thanks.
Good. So you just admitted that your approach is not scientific at all. Thanks.
(And by the way, it's very intellectually dishonest to "quote" something i never wrote. And I'm still waiting for a good answer to the length of the day thread)
-
Hallo,
I also would like to see a reply to Sceptom's answer. Science is about asking questions, and trying to answer them by experiments and obervations.
Thanks
Alex
-
Theory has to be falsifiable or it's just doctrine.
-
Like string theory?
-
The predictions String Theory will make will be falsifiable. Without a firm understanding of String Theory, something you can argue no one really has, we can't compare it to things like the Theory of Electromagnetism.
The Need for Experimental Falsifiability in String Theory
]http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/the-need-for-experimental-falsifiability-in-string.html] (http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/the-need-for-experimental-falsifiability-in-string.html)
SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE
http://edge.org/3rd_culture/smolin_susskind04/smolin_susskind.html (http://edge.org/3rd_culture/smolin_susskind04/smolin_susskind.html)
Flat Earth Theory can be tested.
Flat Earth Believers do not accept the mainstream data that disproves Flat Earth Belief.
Flat Earth Believers should develop and test and publish their own data proving the Flat Earth.
Dr David Thork, seems to believe supplying data like his is the same as "a subject you might have difficulty with". It's not.
Providing a kind of observation or data that could prove FET wrong is an important step to being a real scientific idea.
-
The predictions String Theory will make will be falsifiable. Without a firm understanding of String Theory, something you can argue no one really has, we can't compare it to things like the Theory of Electromagnetism.
The point that I was trying to make is that string theory doesn't currently make any predictions, therefore is not falsifiable and is therefore not up to the standard of a scientific theory and therefore it should not be referred to as such.
-
Maybe we could agree that both the flat earth belief and the string theory have, at present, nothing falsifiable.
The only problem is, string theory has a problem because the energies it needs to test are too small to test. We might be able to test them someday. The theory can develop things to test and just need to wait till we have the ability to test those.
Is there a reason flat earth belief can't be tested now?
-
Maybe we could agree that both the flat earth belief and the string theory have, at present, nothing falsifiable.
Actually, FET makes lots of falsifiable predictions. Unfortunately, it fails most all of them.
-
I wasn't aware of any.
-
I wasn't aware of any.
There definitely are. For example, according to the predicted altitude and size of the FE sun, it should never reach the horizon. On the other site there is a thread that goes through this authored by rottingroom.
-
I wasn't aware of any.
There definitely are. For example, according to the predicted altitude and size of the FE sun, it should never reach the horizon. On the other site there is a thread that goes through this authored by rottingroom.
You really need to read up on bendy light.
-
Spoon, what is "bendy light"?
-
I wasn't aware of any.
There definitely are. For example, according to the predicted altitude and size of the FE sun, it should never reach the horizon. On the other site there is a thread that goes through this authored by rottingroom.
You really need to read up on bendy light.
Also on the other site, alpha2omega ran some simulations on the Bendy Light equation and it only works in the North South direction. As of right now it is not fit for application and can be ignored. The rest of the theory is not scientific and can be ignored for the purposes of this discussion.
-
'Bendy light' is a slang that describes a hypothetical phenomenon in order to bend light to fit to someone's theory. However, I am not aware of a fully described theory that explains self-contained all effects seen with light.
-
FET could be proved wrong if water would stick to the side of a spinning basketball.