Re: XP Requirement Analysis?

From: Dagfinn Reiersol (reiersol_at_online.no)
Date: 10/04/04

  • Next message: Dagfinn Reiersol: "Re: XP Requirement Analysis?" 
    Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 10:13:30 +0200

    Universe wrote:
    > Dagfinn Reiersol <reiersol@online.no> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Universe wrote:
    >>
    >>>Wow, it seems overall that your science knowledge is horrible.
    >>>
    >>>Elliott
    >>
    >>If mine is "horrible", yours would be...wonderful? Fabulous? Superb?
    >>Exquisite?
    >
    >
    > Accurate and correct for the most part, yes.
    >
    > And at least I do know the truth that Galileo's telescope observation
    > were on the whole a major win for science not inaccurate or however
    > you derogated them.
    >
    > Elliott

    You seem to have missed the fact that I'm summarizing the views of Paul
    Feyerabend, who was one of the big names in the philosophy of science,
    and who I'm sure knew the history of science far better than either of us.

    We know now that Galileo was basically right, and as you say, that his
    observations were "a major win for science". But that's with the benefit
    of hindsight. The question is, how strong were Galileo's reasons for
    believing that what he saw in the telescope was real, given the evidence
    and the theories--and the quality of the equipment--that were available
    at the time.

    According to Feyerabend, not very strong:

    "In addition to natural interpretations, Galileo also changes
    /sensations/ that seem to endanger Copernicus. He admits that there are
    such sensations, he praises Copernicus for having disregarded them, he
    claims to have removed them with the help of the telescope. However, he
    offers no /theoretical/ reasons why the telescope should be expected to
    give a true picture of the sky.

    Nor does the initial /experience/ with the telescope provide such
    reasons. The first telescopic observations of the sky are indistinct,
    indeterminate, contradictory and in conflict with what everyone can see
    with his unaided eyes. And, the only theory that could have helped to
    separate telescopic illusions from vericidal phenomena was refuted by
    simple tests."

  • Next message: Dagfinn Reiersol: "Re: XP Requirement Analysis?"

    Relevant Pages

    • A New Lunar Impact Observatory
      ... The Walker County Observatory recorded its first ... Walker County Science and Technology Center. ... Installing a telescope in Walker ...
      (sci.space.news)
    • NASAs Next-Generation Space Observatory Comes To Baltimore
      ... full-size model of NASA's James Webb Space Telescope at the Maryland ... Science Center, located at 601 Light Street in Baltimore's Inner ... recipient of the 2006 Nobel Prize in Physics and Webb ... university professor at the Johns Hopkins University ...
      (sci.space.news)
    • Mikulski Opens Webb Telescope Exhibit at Maryland Science Center
      ... MIKULSKI OPENS WEBB TELESCOPE EXHIBIT AT MARYLAND SCIENCE CENTER ... of NASA's James Webb Space Telescope to the Maryland Science Center ...
      (sci.space.news)
    • Re: OT: A bit of a long shot, but
      ... Hubble telescope, which has been a great benefit to astronomical ... One Hubble repair mission costs more than launching another space ... done several times as much science, ...
      (sci.electronics.design)
    • Re: OT: A bit of a long shot, but
      ... of the ISS white elephant ... Hubble telescope, which has been a great benefit to astronomical ... One Hubble repair mission costs more than launching another space ... done several times as much science, ...
      (sci.electronics.design)