On 11/07/2017 02:21 AM, Tony Marston wrote:
Some things are so obvious that they do not need scientific proof.
Some things that appear obvious are incorrect, especially when bias enters. Scientific proof brings human bias out of the equation, or at least reduces it.
For example, in a motor vehicle the power-to-weight ratio is important as it affects engine performance and fuel economy. In other words, for a given engine size the lower the weight of the car and the better the fuel consumption. The more weight you add the lower the performance. Your car has a heater which you only use when it's cold. It also has an air conditioner for when it's hot. It has windscreen wipers, and a motor, for when it's raining. When the temperature is mild and it's not raining it means that you are not using any of this equipment, yet you are still carrying their weight, and this weight is affecting your car's performance. I do not have to supply any figures as proof as the car manufacturers keep telling us that cars that weigh less perform better, which is why they try to reduce the weight of as any components as possible.
You then give an example for which every first year physics students has done experiments which use science to demonstrate it (namely demonstrating how weight impacts friction)
Sorry but if something is obvious then it should be able to test in a scientific experiment.
It use to be obvious that some animals were closely related until scientific tests were done, showing that they weren't, and we discovers convergent evolution.
Sorry, I don't mean to go off topic, but saying the scientific method isn't needed to back up certain claims because they are obvious is a very dangerous point of view.
-- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
