HyperTuned CGEM and G11wG2 SV115T20, Meade SN-8, AT-66, and modified 20d. Nebulosity, SkyTools3, TSX, and Pixinsight.
"Scientists aren't perfect, just peer reviewed.""Eye of Sauron Observatory", featuring "Sauron's Other Eye", 16" dob, conical Royce mirror.
It would make as much sense to spend time considering this from Wired as if it were from the Watchtower or DC Comics.
Cactus Patch Observatory / 14" LX200
"The four points of the compass be logic, knowledge, wisdom, and the unknown. Some do bow in that final direction. Others advance upon it. To bow before the one is to lose sight of the three."
Quote:What is the connection between vast amounts of data and the scientific method? Wouldn't the method be the same if only a few data points were considered or many more data points?Otto
Quote:It would make as much sense to spend time considering this from Wired as if it were from the Watchtower or DC Comics.
Quote:Careful! I grew up on DC Comics.Charlie B
Quote:Dave,What does "formal stepwise heuristic" mean?Otto
Greg - Celestron SkyScout 90mm refractor & planetarium
Quote:I've never, ever seen South Park, not even once.
Quote:Quote:Dave,What does "formal stepwise heuristic" mean?Otto "Formal" may have been too strong a word, since there is some variation in how the steps are defined. The basic sequence that I was taught in elementary school is roughly this:1. Make an observation about something that happens.2. Question how it happened3. Create a hypothesis to explain what is going on as an answer to the question.4. Conduct an experiment to see if your hypothesis was right.5. Make a conclusion from the results of the experiment6. Profit!!!More generally, something along those lines still goes on, but the process is actually pretty fluid. The Conjectures and Refutations approach is more like: 1. Consider some system that affects the world.2. Propose a conjectural hypothesis attempting to explain that system or some part of it.3. Attempt to refute that hypothesis, through logic, experiment, historical records, or any other means that might seem appropriate. Attack it as deeply and forcefully as possible.4. If the conjecture survives all attempts at refutation, it may be provisionally accepted. Otherwise, it must be either rejected or modified.Step 3 is not really a step per se, since here is no time limit on refutation. An idea may survive every prior attempt at a refutation, but when new tools and concepts appear, those can be applied to attack the idea from a different angle. Thus, there is no real "conclusion" in any sense of closure -- it's always subject to future attempts at falsification. Unlike the steps we learned in school, this one doesn't give you neatly tied up ends to your theories. It's always a "what have you done for me lately" situation.This approach works not only for science, but just about every tangible problem category I can think of.
Vixen 140mm Neo-achro, 2" AP Maxbright diagonal, 40mm Orion Optilux, 35mm, 30mm, 18mm, and 15mm Ultrascopic/Ultima, 28mm & 20mm ES 68, 19mm TV Panoptic, 5.5mm Meade UWA, 2.4x 2" Dakin barlow (prototype barrel),1.6x Antares barlow.