Re: Fact -- a useless concept

Devils Advocaat wrote:
On 2 Apr, 18:04, Ivar Ylvisaker <ylvis...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ernest Major wrote:
Do you also object to describing the existence of atoms (and electrons,
and protons, and neutrons) as a fact; to describing the cause of disease
by microorganisms (and viruses) as a fact; to describing the earth as
(roughly) spherical, and the solar system as heliocentric as facts; to
describing the source of energy emitted by the sun as due to nuclear
fusion as a fact, to describing the Yellowstone caldera as due to a very
large volcanic eruption as a fact, etc. If not, on what grounds do you
make the distinction.
Yes.

Atoms, viruses, etc. are elements of theories. In the terminology of
the philosophy of science, they are "theoretical."

If atoms are simply theoretical elements, then how come we can capture
images of them?

http://www.sfc.fr/material/hrst.mit.edu/hrs/materials/public/STM_intro.htm

And here is an image of a molecule of naphthalocyanine

http://www.gizmag.com/go/7920/picture/37092/

If viruses are simply theoretical elements, then how come we can also
capture images of them?

http://www.lib.uiowa.edu/Hardin/md/cdc/8160.html

We are not observing the atoms, molecule, and viruses directly. What we
are observing are images of these objects made with with Scanning
Tunneling Microscopes (STM) and a transmission electron microscope
(TEM). It is these images that are our facts, our data. We can't see
the targets themselves.

These microscopes are complex electronic devices. They don't work at
all like our eyes. It is these devices that are the links between the
images that are our data and the target objects. Our knowledge of the
targets depends the images and on our understanding of the theories of
operation of these devices. If we discovered that our understanding of
the theories behind these devices was flawed or incomplete -- and that
is certainly possible -- the images wouldn't change but our
understanding of the targets would. The targets are theoretical because
our understanding of them depends on our understanding of the theories
behind the imaging equipment.

To say that something is theoretical does not mean that the existence of
that something in some form is questioned. And we don't need a picture
of an object to recognize that a theory incorporating that object is
useful. The structure of DNA was discovered using X-ray diffraction
images, which don't look at all like DNA. The existence of atoms was
based on theories needed to explain observed phenomena and not on any
picture of what atoms looked like.

Ivar

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Fact -- a useless concept
    ... Atoms, viruses, etc. are elements of theories. ... capture images of them? ... Tunneling Microscopes and a transmission electron microscope ... the targets themselves. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Fact -- a useless concept
    ... capture images of them? ... We are not observing the atoms, molecule, and viruses directly. ... the targets themselves. ... targets depends the images and on our understanding of the theories of ...
    (talk.origins)
  • [3/5][POWERPC] boot: use more Kbuild rules
    ... Switch to if_changed_dep for bootcc, cmd for known rebuilds without deps, ... Move clean-files to targets for if_changed files. ... # as well as the ELF images. ... $/vmlinux.bin: vmlinux FORCE ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Grow binary mask by pixel (to find localized background in image)
    ... I have some images with amorphous blobs in images that I call ... These targets can be non-contiguous collections of smaller ... what I'd like to do is grow the white pixels in the mask outward pixel ...
    (comp.soft-sys.matlab)
  • Re: Fact -- a useless concept
    ... the philosophy of science, they are "theoretical." ... capture images of them? ... We do NOT capture images of viruses or of atoms. ...
    (talk.origins)