Help
Sign In
belief
June 2009 
What is your favorite theory?
Posted on Nov 17th, 2008
by 
:franc
:franc
This is in Response to the Questions and Reflections for November 17, 2008:
Evolution.
but it is important to note that a scientific theory - like evolution - is not merely an opinion. Like gravity, evolution is fact and theory, and a scientific theory is:
"a well supported body of interconnected statements that explains observations and can be used to make testable predictions."
"Scientific theories describe the coherent framework into which observable data fit. The scientific definition of the word "theory" is different from the colloquial sense of the word. Colloquially, "theory" can mean a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation that does not have to be based on facts or make testable predictions. In science, the meaning of theory is more rigorous: a theory must be based on observed facts and make testable predictions."
"In science, a current theory is a theory that has no equally acceptable alternative theory, and has survived attempts at falsification. That is, there have been no observations made which contradict it to this point and, indeed, every observation ever made either supports the current theory or at least does not falsify it. A revision of the current theory, or the generation of a new theory is necessary if new observations contradict the current theory, as the current findings are in need of a new explanation (see scientific revolution or paradigm shift). However, the falsification of a theory does not falsify the facts on which the theory is based."
all quoted from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact
but it is important to note that a scientific theory - like evolution - is not merely an opinion. Like gravity, evolution is fact and theory, and a scientific theory is:
"a well supported body of interconnected statements that explains observations and can be used to make testable predictions."
"Scientific theories describe the coherent framework into which observable data fit. The scientific definition of the word "theory" is different from the colloquial sense of the word. Colloquially, "theory" can mean a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation that does not have to be based on facts or make testable predictions. In science, the meaning of theory is more rigorous: a theory must be based on observed facts and make testable predictions."
"In science, a current theory is a theory that has no equally acceptable alternative theory, and has survived attempts at falsification. That is, there have been no observations made which contradict it to this point and, indeed, every observation ever made either supports the current theory or at least does not falsify it. A revision of the current theory, or the generation of a new theory is necessary if new observations contradict the current theory, as the current findings are in need of a new explanation (see scientific revolution or paradigm shift). However, the falsification of a theory does not falsify the facts on which the theory is based."
all quoted from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact
Access: Public
But aren't observed “facts” based on “theories” of natural law?
Interesting
in the curiosity of waiting for this powder keg to go off…..
i do respect your personal viewpoints, however Franc Paul.
Might not agree with them
but i find myself enjoying all the vast different view points of each GAIA member, whether they be similar or parallel with mine or of a different nature.
we could all sit here & debate over evolution as opposed to creationism or whatever other idea someone has come up with in the past or present even. You believe the way you perceive to be as truth YOUR way. If your purpose is to PROVE something here in, to each their OWN truth be right for themselves….
But what does it really matter which way you believe with such'?
WHATEVER it is….it is JUST THAT: it is what it is.
and life goes on…..
Hey FP,
Thanks for posting this! I love science! :) I agree. I think evolution is one of the most beautiful scientific theories ever devised. What's your take on M Theory?
Amy: yes and no. the theory would predict what the facts should look like if correct. if when observing the 'facts' they confirm to the predictions of the theory then that goes towards confirming the theory. if the observable facts do not correllate with the predictions of the theory then you are dealing with a very shortlived theory.
richDuck: i totally agree about personal belief being just what it is. however we live in a time where get to choose between progress and ignorance.
By contrasting evolution with something like creationism you are suggesting that they are alike or somehow equally valid, where an opinion about one or the other can somehow suggest truth - by which a skilled orator may convince anyone of either. Infact it is rather ludicrous to equate the two as if creationism is a valid theory. Creationism was the status quo from the bronze age and through the dark ages. Once Darwin started analysing the data it became clear very quickly that creationism was to simple an idea to withstand critical analysis. So darwin postulated a new theory to explain the obvious evolution observed in nature. If creationism was a worthy theory, then that is where the story of evolution by natural selection would've ended and died. fortunately science is open for further refinement and enquiry and through the last century and a half especialy after DNA and genomes could be analysed all the facts have validated and refined the idea of natural selection as the driving force of evolution.
To equate creationism and the theory of evolution is similar to suggesting that Pasteur's germ theory missed the mark completely and that, for example, syphilis is a spontaneous condition caused by thought crime.
To say that each have their own truth is very nice, but obviously rather pointless as 2 opposing truths can't both be true, no matter how pc you want to be.
While i respect everyone's right to believe what they wish, and to preach what they will, i do not have to respect their specific ideas, if clearly it is based on dubious logic.
“what does it really matter”, well education for one. We can't afford to suggest to our youth that for example prayer is as good a contraception as condoms, or that raping virgins cures aids, or that the earth is 6000 years old and due for a violent imminent end in the next few years. We need to be responsible and teach verifiable knowledge as a basis for further self and world exploration. We need to get a good solid foundation in reality.
Such a foundational understanding is what progress was built on ever since the dawn of the modern age.
That said if people that believed wierd things were openly aware that they are very likely wrong and acted accordingly then there would be no issue at all.
The best collection of knowledge we have is what we managed to deduce over the centuries by applying the rigors of the scientific method to our beliefs. Most certainly there are facets of the universe that is not describable by science at the moment, and doubtless scientific consensus on something will turn out to have been wrong. But the scientific method remains the best way of being slightly certain of what is going on about us.
man, that was a long winded and halfassed answer, but maybe it get's a conversation going that might prove useful to someone.
~M:
m-theory, being even stringy-er than string theory, goes above my understanding - due to my lack of post graduate maths or physics training. ;)
what i have read about it makes it seam like if we were to travel interstellarly, then it would most probably be by manipulating the 11 dimensions of ~m-theory. I think it is awesome that we (and by we, i mean gifted physisists and mathematicians) can already make certain predictions by which to test the validity of such a theory.
personally, i rest assured that great minds are pondering away the darkness surrounding it.
my grasp of the elegance of natural selection is much greater than the abstract joy and intrigue i'm sure you derive from ~M-theory
neither long winded nor half assed from where i sit. I get what you're saying here. i agree with knowledge being needful to provide a better life to live. And I as well agree with Matthew: I also love science. And my suggesting creationalism & evolution are alike….to which can you prove (or disprove)? Where there ARE areas of science that definitely need to be respected & adhered to, shouldn't we at least only clinge to that which has been proven absolute (when it comes to science)?
“what does it really matter”, well education for one. We can't afford to suggest to our youth that for example prayer is as good a contraception as condoms, or that raping virgins cures aids, or that the earth is 6000 years old and due for a violent imminent end in the next few years. We need to be responsible and teach verifiable knowledge as a basis for further self and world exploration. We need to get a good solid foundation in reality.”
THIS paragraph i am right there with you, my friend.
richDuck, i aggree, we needened cling to any current theory. it is not a mater of blind faith. we can and should investigate the evidence and follow the reasoning. we should then be able to make reasonable judgements regarding theories and also challenging theories and world views. we needn't cling to not absolutely proven ideas, like M-theory, we can make good judgement on it's likelyness based on the observed facts we have already. most theories is not as well established and 'absolutely' proven as evolution, but clearly they are worth investigating and spending amazing thoughtcycles on.
glad to hear from you!
thanx, :franc! 'appreciate your insights! 'interested now in readin' up on some of your other blog inputs, bud.
Regarding what you just wrote Franc…
And that's one of the reasons I like M-theory. There's so much yet to prove and disprove. We really don't know a whole lot about it yet. We're still on the verge of discovery. We're still pioneers in this field of scientific investigation. Evolution has been thoroughly tested. Evolution is old. It's already been attacked from all angles. No one has been able to punch holes in it. It's as complete a scientific theory as there is. There's still a lot of work to do with M-theory, on the other hand. And that, to me, is exciting.
Hi Mathew & others
I agree that in one sense evolution is a simple theory and well proved - ie it requires only three things:
Something that can replicate,
Occasional errors in the replication process,
Resulting competition amongst the variants leading to differential survival rates and thence changes in the frequencies of of variants in the population.
At one level - that is all evolution is.
At another level it is so much more, as different strategies evolve at different levels and enter the mix - eg sex, and the recombination of allelles at every generation.
Evolution works at so many levels - molecular including DNA,s RNAs, and histone modifiers (which actually add a Lamarkian aspect to reality) protiens and many more.
At the electrical level, patterns evolve within cells.
At the multicellular level, we have electrical and chemical evolutionary patterns.
……
That evolution works is undeniable.
That we are the result of evolution alone, working for the last 4 billion years on planet earth seems probable to me with a probability of .999999+ but I cannot prove it to 1.0 - because I wasn't there observing every step.
What evolution is doing now - at the very many levels it is working on, is fascinating, and beyond the ability of any single mind to comprehend.
Don't give up on it.
Study it - for as long as the passion and discipline hold up!
It will not disappoint.
off course ~m, you're just hoping you can still convince the world that the 'M' of M-theory is short for 'Matthew'.
while specific mechanisms of evolution has been studied and confirmed thoroughly it is still extremely exciting to apply the theory to other aspects of the universe. also within biology and even within natural selection there are still a lot of interesting discoveries awaiting. i'm also fairly sure we'll discover a few interesting driving forces behind survival of certain genes. and we'll still see amazing cures to devestating diseases by means of gene therapy and the like.
once again i am very grateful for the interesting times we live in.
Yeah, I don't disagree with any of that, Franc. And, as for the “M,” according to that article I linked to, I could legally claim it stands for “Matthew”. But I won't do that, unless I figure something out that really solidifies it as the unifying theory of everything. And I'd say the probability of my doing that is about .000001-. In other words, it's about as likely that evolution is unproven, according to Ted's calculations, as it is that I will fill in M-Theory's current holes.
In some way I feel that this may not be a very strong theory to up hold but a theory non the less. What you see is what you get, in other words!
It may be that through our troubled times of what this world is now enduring and facing, as far as our future goes, all we have left may in fact be its drawn conclusion to and what we have at hand…. which may indeed come from an analytic scientist, or from one of our many gifted genius' out there.
It would be interesting to hear at any given rate!
“V”
it is nice to see that despite some disagreements with francs theory we can still talk like civalized human beings rather than try to rip out each others throat like a pack of wild wolves competing for the alpha postion. you are all each living examples of how far we have come as a speices.
my personal opinion evolotion is merely many small changes over time
Hello, There will come a day like any other day and we will know it all. Every answer we have dreamed to ever dream will sit before us to serve at our feet, and then only then will see there was really nothing we did not ever already know.
Thanks
I would like to add what many commented towards. This blog could have taken a much different line of discussion, in a darker & negative way. But those involved kept it moving in a positive & informative way where as it has been a delight to have read ALL of these past comments, as well as those to come. I enjoy blogs that carry this capacity!
It is, IMHO, a damned good read to get one thinking.
And the politeness makes it all work:):)!
pj
Manny: yes, i love the community spirit we have here at gaia. more often than not you'd find encouraging or engaging comments. very seldom you'll see thoughtless ones, and i don't recall very many rude ones.
as for disaggreements, here's one: it's not my theory, i just is a very solid explination and mechanism for observed evolution.
also your definition is spot-on. generally speaking evolution is just that, many small mutations over a long timespan in which environmental pressures shape the qualities of the species. it is however interesting to note that it doesn't always take a very long time. controlled test have shown certain fruitflies to speciate into 2 distinct species within as little as 6 generations.
Rich: thanks for the big part you have played in getting this conversation going in a delightful manner.
PJ: no reason not to be polite, right?
My pleasure. i'm just enjoyin' the ride along here, my friend! Please….by all means…continue!
i havent heard about fruit flies ill have to look that up but if i recall correctly they did an expiriment with gold fish or some other common fish and they put it in a lightless environment after severl generations(i do not recall the exact amount) theyy became combpetly albino after so many more they losttheir eye sight and then if i recall correctly started developing a type of sonar
manny i don’t know about that but i do know that they are seeing nice examples of speciation taking place among cichlids in some of the lakes in Africa.
Also, regarding the fireflies, looks like i read 8 in the past and remembered 6. my appologies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation
:franc,
I will be back.
“I think in terms of its fundamental beauty my favorite theory is
Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory, in which 4 mathematical equations
capture the essence of electricity and magnetism. This was the
beginning of physicists’ efforts to try to find a few unifying
principles for describing nature, which continues today. In addition,
it was in considering Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory that Einstein
got his inspiration to develop the theory of special relativity.”
trackback :-)
and why does my Firefox 3.05 Scribefire 3.1.6 leave all these spaces in between the lines?
Phew! what a read/ride. I don’t even know what to say.
Evolution is absolutely incredible. I keep thinking how incredibly special every life of every being is. We are all here, experiencing this wonderful universe and able to understand it because of this process.
I love the fact that we are all family and all connected in every way. All one. We are stardust! And golden.
Thank you :franc for this wonderful blog post.