[PairTheBoard]

poker_penguin -

"Does anyone outside the little Math Role Playing Game really believe that these guys are explaining anything? If so, why? "

The key word here is "EXPLAIN". Science provides "models" which organize experimental data. The models can be worked on mathematically and extended independently of experimental data. Models are most valuable when their theoretical extensions inspire new experiments whose new results confirm the predictions of the extensions. When this happens the models give us a "sense" that they are "explaining" reality. This is as far as most people go in their understanding of what science does.

The problem with viewing the scientific model as an explanation arises when the model is superceded by a better one. For example, consider the old model of the Solar System constructed centuries ago which consisted of a clockwork miniature of the Sun with Planets revolving around it. This was a valid scientific model. It could predict with some accuracy where planets would be in the near future. It wasn't a very good model. It could not be easily extended theoretically. But it did organize data and gave some sense of explaining what was going on in the sky - at least to people with a flat earth mentality. But did the model really "explain" things?

When Newton came out with his Theory of Gravity the Old Model was suddenly exposed as naive. Gravity explained why the planets moved as they did. His theory also had greater predictive powers and could be worked on mathematically. But did it really "explain" things?

Einstein came along and superceded Newton with a theory for why gravity works. But did Einstein really "explain" things? And is his model the only one that can give such a nice explanation for gravity?

Quantum Physics has arose to explain How things work at subatomic levels. imo, it is at a similiar stage as the old clockwork miniature solar system. It organizes data but does little to explain why things are happening as they do. Some think String theory will provide such an explanation.

Here's the thing. These models give us a "sense" of understanding, a "sense" that things are being explained. But I don't think they really explain things. Suppose an Alien race developed entirely different concepts which did even an even better job of organizing data and predicting new results? Where does that leave us with our "explanations". imo, we should see science for what it is, a valuable tool. But it's not worth making a religion out of.

PairTheBoard