• loppy@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 days ago

    All the successful theories were developed from experimental results

    The more I think about this, the more I’m not sure I 100% agree… For example, special relativity essentially came from the observation that Maxwell’s equations were not Galilean invariant, and instead invariant under this weird other group (what we now call the Lorentz group); and QED essentially came from Dirac wanting to take a “square root” of the Klein-Gordan equation.

    (Of course, real history is more intricate than this.)

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      You’re too polite. This guy is absolutely full of shit. Our awareness of black holes emerged from pure math, as just one example off the dome. Experimental data came later. And decades later, in fact. A lot begins in the math.

      • Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        That’s the “make predictions” part, smartass. There is a big difference between calculating the limits with a theory and inventing new limits and trying to find maths that fit.

        And even then is the experimental evidence still the most important part. Wormholes, warp drives and white holes are also mathematically possible. Doesn’t mean they are real. We didn’t call the higgs field real until it was experimentally proven.

        Yes, people found a whole lot out via maths. But they didn’t just have some idea about how they think nature works and then invented some formulas for that. They built on prior theories and evidence.