Can the Sciences Prove that Something is True?

[shunyadragon]

"Most of the philosophy of science is completely irrelevant to the actual conduct of science. "

Where do you think this "conduct of science" came from? And how do you think it is further refined?

Math and science are evolving analytic philosophies (much older than classical philosophy), and the "conduct of science" actually evolved over the millennia as the product of what works and what not works. The ethical conduct in science has produced science, and the unethical conduct of science fails.

 

[Nous]

Your talking about a math proof, which is different from falsification by scientific method's. It and when you can distinguish between proofs in math and falsification by scientific methods communication will improve.

If and when you become able to read and understand what is written in black and white, communication will improve. I didn't even vaguely suggest that "a math proof" is (the same as) "falsification from scientific method's" (sic).

Science is just the discovery of the mathematical nature of empirical reality. There is no aspect of empirical reality that isn't mathematical. Mathematics is not some unessential "tool" in science.

 

[shunyadragon]

If and when you become able to read and understand what is written in black and white, communication will improve. I didn't even vaguely suggest that "a math proof" is (the same as) "falsification from scientific method's" (sic).

Science is just the discovery of the mathematical nature of empirical reality. There is no aspect of empirical reality that isn't mathematical. Mathematics is not some unessential "tool" in science.

Math is an essential tool of science, but there is more to science than just math there is also the physical objective verifiable evidence, which result in the progressive advancement of theories, hypothesis an the knowledge of science.

 

[Nous]

there is more to science than just math

Again, there is no aspect of empirical reality that is non-mathematical.

 

[shunyadragon]

Again, there is no aspect of empirical reality that is non-mathematical.

Math is descriptive as well as science. The objective verifiable physical evidence is not math it is described in terms of math.

 

[Nous]

Math is descriptive as well as science. The objective verifiable physical evidence is not math it is described in terms of math.

(1) The terms E, m and c times itself are all quantities. These terms are not "descriptive" of something that is not a quantity.

(2) There is nothing verified or verifiable about adjectives such as "physical" or "natural". There is no scientific discipline that defines or "verifies" such adjectives or verifies that phenomena conform to such adjectives. No scientific experiment has ever tested such adjectives.

 

[shunyadragon]

(1) The terms E, m and c times itself are all quantities. These terms are not "descriptive" of something that is not a quantity.

Long time disagreement. E and m are all physical entities and measured in quantities, and c is the speed of light a measured quantity. I do not see any resolution in our disagreement.

(2) There is nothing verified or verifiable about adjectives such as "physical" or "natural". There is no scientific discipline that defines or "verifies" such adjectives or verifies that phenomena conform to such adjectives. No scientific experiment has ever tested such adjectives.

Adjectives are not tested. Adjectives are descriptive of the objective verifiable evidence of physical phenomenon.

I do not see any resolution in our disagreement.

 

[shunyadragon]

Again, there is no aspect of empirical reality that is non-mathematical.

Again math is an analytical philosophy that evolved for human use as descriptive empirical reality.

Again I see no resolution to our long term disagreement.

 

[Nous]

E and m are all physical entities and measured in quantities

Your ideas are contradicted by the facts. It's an example of willful ignorance to resist accepting the facts.

There is a fact, or if you wish, a law, governing all natural phenomena that are known to date. There is no known exception to this law—it is exact so far as we know. The law is called the conservation of energy. It states that there is a certain quantity, which we call energy, that does not change in the manifold changes which nature undergoes. That is a most abstract idea, because it is a mathematical principle; it says that there is a numerical quantity which does not change when something happens.​

The Feynman Lectures on Physics Vol. I Ch. 4: Conservation of Energy

Adjectives are not tested.

So you agree that no scientific experiment has ever tested or "verified" that the quantities E, m or c times itself are "physical" objects.

 

[Nous]

Again math is an analytical philosophy that evolved for human use as descriptive empirical reality.

There is no other objective aspect of empirical reality than its mathematical nature.