Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarvamundo
Good point re cryptography... allow my distinction
Particular beef is theoretical-mathematical-physics
|
Again, why?
Theoretical postulation in any field hurts no one and costs nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarvamundo
LIGO fail
CDMS fail
Gravity Probe B fail
Pioneer Probe speed anomaly fail
Quasar time dilation fail
Next up to fail:
LISA ($4 Billion)
|
But these are all experiments to test understanding of the details of theory. Often they go wrong because an insufficient heatshield or the wrong type of alloy is used - it is pretty rare that the outcome of an experiment will result in the utter refutation of an accepted theory.
The therory costs nothing, and besides, while it is true that the failures cost a lot, the successes pay for the failures and then some.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarvamundo
Stop funding to maths? No ofcourse not. Stop funding to gravitational antennas and dark matter probes? well at some point we may have to... how much is enough (see list above)?
My argument, allow funding to alternatives, before blowing more...
|
What possible alternatives could there be to the scientific method? Prayer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarvamundo
Surely dismissing alternatives is the "very narrow-minded argument for a science-based forum..."
|
Not if we're talking about some magical way of scientific advance that doesn't involve testing theories it isn't, mate
