9 Questions

J_B_

I have answers to questions no one ever asks.
May 15, 2020
1,258
365
Midwest
✟101,755.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
?? If there is nothing to distinguish them then they are the same theory...

I thought the context was evident. There was nothing per the correlation metric used relating model to data that distinguished them.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,258
8,056
✟326,229.00
Faith
Atheist
I thought the context was evident. There was nothing per the correlation metric used relating model to data that distinguished them.
OK; if they are different theories that explain the same data with equal facility and are inseparable in term of the criteria for a good explanation, then there is no rationale for preferring one over the other, and both should be held equally likely / equally good explanations until they can be separated by new evidence, or unified - it's occasionally been the case that two apparently different theories turn out to be different formulations of the same underlying principles.

Having said that, there are always be those who will prefer one theory over the other for their own reasons.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: J_B_
Upvote 0

Estrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
9,547
3,180
39
Hong Kong
✟147,281.00
Country
Hong Kong
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
OK; if they are different theories that explain the same data with equal facility and are inseparable in term of the criteria for a good explanation, then there is no rationale for preferring one over the other, and both should be held equally likely / equally good explanations until they can be separated by new evidence, or unified - it's occasionally been the case that two apparently different theories turn out to be different formulations of the same underlying principles.

Having said that, there are always be those who will prefer one theory over the other for their own reasons.

Can YOU think of a example
 
Upvote 0

Estrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
9,547
3,180
39
Hong Kong
✟147,281.00
Country
Hong Kong
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
I appreciate you being here, and I want your participation. I am, by nature, a very sarcastic person. Such doesn't translate well in an Internet forum so I have to be careful. The problem is, even when I say something meant to be fun and playful, it often comes across as sarcastic, which is death in this particular forum. You're not supposed to explain jokes, but in this instance I'll clarify that post #36 was meant to be that fun and playful thing.

No prob. But still, dont intro a topic you dont want discussed or challenged
 
Upvote 0

J_B_

I have answers to questions no one ever asks.
May 15, 2020
1,258
365
Midwest
✟101,755.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
No prob. But still, dont intro a topic you dont want discussed or challenged

Your replies confuse me. You seem to think I haven't given a real example, when I have. You seem to think I'm not open to being challenged. I am, but I want to confine discussion in this thread to a specific topic. If secondary topics seem important to you, I am willing to continue through DM or a different thread.
 
Upvote 0

Estrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
9,547
3,180
39
Hong Kong
✟147,281.00
Country
Hong Kong
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Your replies confuse me. You seem to think I haven't given a real example, when I have. You seem to think I'm not open to being challenged. I am, but I want to confine discussion in this thread to a specific topic. If secondary topics seem important to you, I am willing to continue through DM or a different thread.

I asked for a real example of competing theories, never got one.

I suggested not introducing " biss" if you dont want to discuss it.
You replied with something about sarcasm.
 
Upvote 0

Estrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
9,547
3,180
39
Hong Kong
✟147,281.00
Country
Hong Kong
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Quantum mechanics was originally formulated as matrix mechanics by Heisenberg, but Shrodinger's wave mechanics was discovered to be exactly equivalent (but easier to use).

Ah, ok. Thanks.
So both are " true", for now.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

J_B_

I have answers to questions no one ever asks.
May 15, 2020
1,258
365
Midwest
✟101,755.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I asked for a real example of competing theories, never got one.

I mentioned nonlinear vibrations, which have multiple theories, one being Mathieu's method (deriving coefficients for a set of Mathieu functions) and another being Krylov's method (describing functions). A 3rd would be perturbation theory for small nonlinearities.

I suggested not introducing " biss" if you dont want to discuss it.
You replied with something about sarcasm.

I answered your question (with a "yes" FYI), but requested we not let it derail the conversation. If you want to discuss further, let's do it elsewhere.
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,408
15,555
Colorado
✟427,871.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
I mentioned nonlinear vibrations, which have multiple theories, one being Mathieu's method (deriving coefficients for a set of Mathieu functions) and another being Krylov's method (describing functions). A 3rd would be perturbation theory for small nonlinearities.
(as an aside, are these about vibration in complex structures? Or about simple elements like a single bar with a fixed end?)
 
Upvote 0

J_B_

I have answers to questions no one ever asks.
May 15, 2020
1,258
365
Midwest
✟101,755.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
(as an aside, are these about vibration in complex structures? Or about simple elements like a single bar with a fixed end?)

It's like herding cats. (wink)

Many nonlinear theories are about very specific problems in very simple systems (e.g. Van der Pol or Duffing). The three I mentioned are attempts to extend theories that began that way into something that applies to complex structures.
 
Upvote 0

J_B_

I have answers to questions no one ever asks.
May 15, 2020
1,258
365
Midwest
✟101,755.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Ok, lets get to question 2 please!

Yeah. I wanted to be sure everyone had time to fully express their position. I was originally thinking of giving it 24 hrs, since that seems to be the cycle time required for all the time zones to have a chance to chip in. But I guess I can do the next set.

Maybe each one deserves a thread so the new question doesnt get buried?

I did consider that. If it's everyone's preference, I can do it. 9 threads just seemed a bit much. For now, what I've been doing is noting everyone who replied, and I'll tag them each time I post new questions.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

J_B_

I have answers to questions no one ever asks.
May 15, 2020
1,258
365
Midwest
✟101,755.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Though the first question was philosophical, the remaining 8 are specific to evolution. Sorry if that disappoints anyone.

I'm tagging everyone who replied to the first question. If you don't want me to do that for the remainder of the questions, just let me know: @Tinker Grey @durangodawood @Yttrium @Estrid @Frank Robert @essentialsaltes @FrumiousBandersnatch

Question #2: Given a DNA sequence, is there currently a means (based on the DNA alone) for determining if that sequence will produce a viable organism and what the morphology of that organism will be?

Question #3: Given the morphology of an organism, is there currently a means (based on morphology alone) for determining its DNA?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Tinker Grey

Wanderer
Supporter
Feb 6, 2002
11,213
5,605
Erewhon
Visit site
✟923,135.00
Faith
Atheist
Though the first question was philosophical, the remaining 8 are specific to evolution. Sorry if that disappoints anyone.

I'm tagging everyone who replied to the first question. If you don't want me to do that for the remainder of the questions, just let me know: @Tinker Grey @durangodawood @Yttrium @Estrid @Frank Robert @essentialsaltes @FrumiousBandersnatch

Question #2: Given a DNA sequence, is there currently a means (based on the DNA alone) for determining if that sequence will produce a viable organism and what the morphology of that organism will be?

Question #3: Given the morphology of an organism, is there currently a means (based on morphology alone) for determining its DNA?
I don't mind being tagged. As I am not qualified, I likely won't be responding but I will be reading.
 
Upvote 0

durangodawood

Dis Member
Aug 28, 2007
23,408
15,555
Colorado
✟427,871.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Question #2: Given a DNA sequence, is there currently a means (based on the DNA alone) for determining if that sequence will produce a viable organism and what the morphology of that organism will be?

Question #3: Given the morphology of an organism, is there currently a means (based on morphology alone) for determining its DNA?
Can we go back the the philosophy of science questions?

All I got are total guesses....(no).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Yttrium

Independent Centrist
May 19, 2019
3,853
4,267
Pacific NW
✟242,386.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Single
Question #2: Given a DNA sequence, is there currently a means (based on the DNA alone) for determining if that sequence will produce a viable organism and what the morphology of that organism will be?

Question #3: Given the morphology of an organism, is there currently a means (based on morphology alone) for determining its DNA?

Interesting questions. Based on what little I know of the subject, I would think the answer to both questions would be no. They would have to be very similar to known critters. We're still a long way from figuring out everything that goes into DNA.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

J_B_

I have answers to questions no one ever asks.
May 15, 2020
1,258
365
Midwest
✟101,755.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Can we go back the the philosophy of science questions?

I love the philosophy of science. Maybe when this is all done we can wrap it up with some more philosophizing. However, while I think it's an important topic, my approach to philosophy means that at some point one must get his hands dirty with the real details.
 
Upvote 0