Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigS
Hmm … another one of those sampling problems there eh, Rob ?
Cheers |
Craig,
It strikes me that the problem isn't just one of interpreting accurate data correctly but it's also of having the relevant data there in the first place.
For example, if the velocity data for light did not exist (e.g. no Michelson-Morley experiment), relativity might not have been deduced.
If future data shows neutrinos can travel faster than light then this will have other ramifications.
Narrow data subsets lead to narrow conclusions. They can even lead to conflicting deductions. We have one subset of data saying the expansion of the universe is accelerating, another subset saying it is an illusion. The question becomes when and if we will ever have a minimal data set that can tie up all branches of physics. It is likely that we do not have the technology yet to get a minimal data set.
Regards, Rob