Ron Johnson wrote:
> He discovered ("take the cover off of") the mathematical model that
> rules the universe.The mathematical model does not rule the universe. The model is an attempt to approximate the observed behavior of the universe in a way that allows us to predict future events. Why the universe behaves as it does is completely unknown to us. If you have a black box containing an electrical circuit with a set of inputs and outputs, you can study the behavior of the box and come up with a number of hypothetical circuits that would behave similarly to the box, but you cannot prove that the circuit in the box is identical with any of your hypotheses. All you are demonstrating is functional equivalence for the set of tests you have run, within the measurement limits of the testing equipment you're using. Other tests (or even the same tests at some other time) or better measurements might require you to discard or modify your hypotheses. This is a simple analogy for the entire process of science. We devise theoretical models that correspond to the phenomena we observe, but we can never know what's really inside the black box. My favorite quote from Stephen Hawking is one where he was contrasting his view of quantum theory with that of Roger Penrose in a Scientific American article several years ago. He wrote (this may not be word perfect, as I no longer have the article), "Roger doesn't like quantum theory because he doesn't believe that a cat can be dead and alive at the same time. He thinks that can't correspond to reality. But I don't know _anything_ about reality. All I care about is that a theory can be used to successfully predict the results of experiments. By that standard, quantum theory has been very successful." Craig
msg28618/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
