Boud Roukema wrote:
Cześć
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Michal Frackowiak wrote:
Boud Roukema wrote:
BTW, Michał just used the word "predict" in the way many people do, to "predict" a value we already have measured. A more careful word that some people now use is "postdict". Or you can simply say "imply", which is a purely logical word, without any connotations on philosophy of science.
Think of "I predict that the ZSRR will collapse around 1989-1991" or "I predict that there will be a major political revolution in France in 1789." Those are not predictions.
In the sense that all the "constants" and "parameters" directly follow from the theory without any need for experiment. independently. the theory of everything should e.g. give the values of plank's constant, cosmo constant, grav constant etc... and should not contain any adjustable parameters.
philosophy of science:
OK, so now you're using "directly follow" and "give" That's fine by me, it's more careful than "predict". :)
theory of everything:
- cosmo constant or quintessence parameter(s) - agree that this(these)
should be implied, not axiomatic
- grav constant - disagree - as i see it, it's just a question of
units, like converting seconds to metres, or miles to kilometres, or euros to f.francs (1 euro = 6.55957 f.francs exactly
- Planck's constant - no opinion...
just followed M. Heller and some other guys in this matter. not only my own view.