You must make a distinction between a phenomenon, a fact, and the theory to explain how it works, what makes it happen.
There are phenomena, facts, that we see in the world around us. 'Gravity', 'evolution, 'ocean tides'. What science is all about is to construct a theory, a hypothesis that explains what we observe, and that can predict what will happen in certain circumstances.
The theory that explains ocean tides, for instance, allows us to accurately predict the tides days and weeks ahead and in every single case they are right on the dot. So this theory is very strong, and if you do not agree then you must point out where it fails to explain and predict. But there is never 100% certainty that a theory is the correct one - it is always possible that another one is developed that explains it even better.
Typically, what happens is that details of a theory are adjusted to make it better fit some observations and predictions that were not as accurate as was hoped.
This is also the case with the 'best fit' theory we know that explains the facts of evolution, the theory of evolution by natural selection. One recent adjustment was the introduction of evolution by 'spurts', I forgot the exact term. But the theory is very strong and robust, and there is no competing theory that does a better job in explaining and predicting. So it's the best we have so far.
Edit: looked it up, the term is 'punctuated equilibrium'.
Jan
Last edited:
What I wanted to show with evolution is that something widely taken to be science is not. OK the science of DNA is cast iron as best we know. Evolution as understood by most is worse than the Flat Earth as science. At least with Flat maps they are useful and accurate on the human scale that involves a motorcar. It is unusual that people wish to see it as more than that. A bit like a pentode that isn't asked to use much of it's slope. I was shocked how good an EF86 as pentode can be as long as a high impedance load is used.
It was reasonable to see the world as earth, air , fire and water. The gasses were said to be air of another type. Up to a point the pattern worked. The Greeks had said elements far back in time. It became clear it was the better idea. Circa 1850 cheap colours were made from coal extracts. That changed the world. An idea almost unknown a short period before made into great refineries.
TV might not be the invention of Baird or Blumlein. Farnsworth most likely was and Cine film must be part of it as was the photo telegraph used by the police. However it is said someone demonstrated a system perhaps in 1890 ( 88? ) that was feeble as there was no amplification, Paris I think. As far as I know it had a lens type scanner as Baird and might be where Baird got the idea from. The Blumlein 405 line system was mostly encouraged to hide the devellopement of radar it seems. We shared factories with German valve makers so found it hard to hide the special valves used. Mullards plant at Croydon said to be put up by Siemens ( one of our engineers worked there, he saw the drawings of the building ). The 405 line system persisted into the 1970's and was great if using the Sony TV 9-90 on the move. London TV area was far better than Oxford and was possible on a piece of coax spread with drawing pins to the Band 3 frequency. It was quality TV in 405 or local TV in 625. TV 9-90 looked like junk inside, yet it was as near 100 % relaible as is possible. When Sony tidied things the magic was over. Total quality control I guess. Leak also the same until Rank killed them. My dad was a radar man and thought I should know electronics and motorcycles aged 4. BSA was his brand of choice. The A7 my favourite.
It was reasonable to see the world as earth, air , fire and water. The gasses were said to be air of another type. Up to a point the pattern worked. The Greeks had said elements far back in time. It became clear it was the better idea. Circa 1850 cheap colours were made from coal extracts. That changed the world. An idea almost unknown a short period before made into great refineries.
TV might not be the invention of Baird or Blumlein. Farnsworth most likely was and Cine film must be part of it as was the photo telegraph used by the police. However it is said someone demonstrated a system perhaps in 1890 ( 88? ) that was feeble as there was no amplification, Paris I think. As far as I know it had a lens type scanner as Baird and might be where Baird got the idea from. The Blumlein 405 line system was mostly encouraged to hide the devellopement of radar it seems. We shared factories with German valve makers so found it hard to hide the special valves used. Mullards plant at Croydon said to be put up by Siemens ( one of our engineers worked there, he saw the drawings of the building ). The 405 line system persisted into the 1970's and was great if using the Sony TV 9-90 on the move. London TV area was far better than Oxford and was possible on a piece of coax spread with drawing pins to the Band 3 frequency. It was quality TV in 405 or local TV in 625. TV 9-90 looked like junk inside, yet it was as near 100 % relaible as is possible. When Sony tidied things the magic was over. Total quality control I guess. Leak also the same until Rank killed them. My dad was a radar man and thought I should know electronics and motorcycles aged 4. BSA was his brand of choice. The A7 my favourite.
Evolution is a funny thing. What is the word for what friends and I did? We often owned cars or motorcycles that had to be run with the lowest power engines. We had a rally Mini with a 850CC engine to suit the insurance people. A Triumph Bonneville with 27 BHP on a good day 500CC engine. Both were better than the real versions as they had a bonus in tight bends and were fast enough. I drove a VW Beetle with 911 parts. The engine was bigger VW. It was a magic car whilst a 911 is the master of the owner.
That 850CC engine was interesting. Certain mods were allowed. A 1100CC head with 60 th inch removed and gas flowed. A big SU carb from a Rover was allowed as it was only one carb ( 1 3/4 inch I think ) and a racing manifold. That would still be group one insurance. Worth about 8 BHP and helped it to rev. We often had valve bounce. The diff from an 1100 would have helped that. That was too much work. We used Michelin XAS tyres that are still around today. My great uncle Frank was Harry Weslakes friend and lived in the same road in Rye. I never met him alas. The Mini cylinder head was to his patent. As far as I know Harry invented gas flowing. Frank and Harry built a few tractors after the war. Wes(t)field I think? That was about 1 mile from RAF Rye radar staion where my dad worked.
That 850CC engine was interesting. Certain mods were allowed. A 1100CC head with 60 th inch removed and gas flowed. A big SU carb from a Rover was allowed as it was only one carb ( 1 3/4 inch I think ) and a racing manifold. That would still be group one insurance. Worth about 8 BHP and helped it to rev. We often had valve bounce. The diff from an 1100 would have helped that. That was too much work. We used Michelin XAS tyres that are still around today. My great uncle Frank was Harry Weslakes friend and lived in the same road in Rye. I never met him alas. The Mini cylinder head was to his patent. As far as I know Harry invented gas flowing. Frank and Harry built a few tractors after the war. Wes(t)field I think? That was about 1 mile from RAF Rye radar staion where my dad worked.
Nobody ever said that evolution is limited to biology. One very intriguing example is the concept of 'meme' introduced by, IIRC, Richard Dawkins. It is the 'survival of the fittest' equivalent for ideas and concepts. Although not without controversy.
Edit: Meme - Wikipedia
Jan
Edit: Meme - Wikipedia
Jan
You said it all by yourself 😁
With that kind of "adjustments" in science, we could live on a peer shaped planet...
You could belive what you want, but don't tell others what to think..
Actually, we do. Look it up. The earth is not an exact sphere; not really a pear, more like an apple. But scientist were able to find some factors that were unaccounted for, and by including them in the theory, the actual earth shape turned out to be exactly as predicted by the theory.
Such is the power of the scientific method and logical reasoning.
Jan
I do this myself and found what I think is the origine of the Dynaco ST70. It's an RCA design to promote the 7199 valve. This seems to be a TV type with audio sheilding. The interesting thing is no one seems to give this any thought. The Dynaco seems to have been the right product at the right price with a little more care taken than was typical. So sad RCA seem unimportant to many. From what I remember the RCA designs were of a slightly more interesting type including what some call anode to anode feedback. I doubt Hafler would have claimed different. History made him the one to remember.
As I said before, DNA seems to be cast iron correct. Sometimes it even proves things that look similar are not. Often they fit the same niche which has fashioned the look and needs.
Hilary Mantel " Facts are not truth ".
'Facts are not truth': Hilary Mantel goes on the record about historical fiction
It is more apple shaped. It is flatted at the poles, bulging at the equator. Not sure but I think it is because of the rotation and centrifugal force.
Jan
Maybe some more explanation about finetuning a theory until it fits reality, because it appears not to be well understood.
I was just reading a sort of biography of Copernicus (A more perfect heaven by Dava Sobel), which provides a nice example.
In the centuries before Copernicus people had developed a theory to explain the movement of the stars across the heavens. The first version postulated a huge glass globe with the earth at its center, turning around the earth. The stars were assumed to be lights attached to the glass globe so when that turned, the stars moved across the heavens.
But better observations uncovered a problem: not all stars were found to move at the same speed, which was impossible with the existing theory. So it was extended to postulate a second glass sphere, larger that the first one, and some stars were attached to the second sphere. The two glass spheres did turn at different velocities therefor some stars moved at different speeds to others.
You can see where this is going: more and more glass spheres were required to account for more and more small differences in star movement speed; some adventurous scientist went up to 12 spheres!
But if you do even better observations, you will find that some stars do not move in a straight path - they move say east to west, then move back a small distance east, then resoume the east to west movement. Its called iirc an epicycle; the path described by a point on a bicycle wheel rim in motion. This was especially apparent in planetary movements (as they are closer than stars). It was Ptolemy who modified the theory to assume that the planets described small circles on a larger sphere.
It was the insight of Copernicus that the observed problems could be completely explained if you go away from the idea that everything revolves around the earth.
So that is how it goes; a theory is modified to account for differences between what the theory predicts and what reality shows us. In the process we gain better and better insight in how reality 'works'. But sometimes you come at a point where no reasonable modification is possible to account for observed problems and a radical new theory is required.
Jan
In the good book we get a hint about people they call the Magi. Of the little I know of the story they were wise men who took the stars to tell great truth's. From reading more the old world mostly had a very good understanding of the truth of how the stars move. It was after the Romans left Britain that the daft ages came about. Some Brits tried to live as Romans for many centuries after. Saxons sometimes tried to learn the Roman ways. Mostly it was a disaster and writting wasn't to return to Britain until the later Saxon period. From what we know the Saxons were a sophisticated people with little interested in recording history except by story. After that is was a the mad made up world of the power mongers that passed as science.
Singing was always thought to preserve the story better. People are less willing to change a song. The age of the Troubadour.
Singing was always thought to preserve the story better. People are less willing to change a song. The age of the Troubadour.
You might like this. Our Flat Earth of hi fi.
BTW. It is very possible what the Saxon's wrote was destroyed. The more I think about it I am sure that happened.
BBC Archive - #OTD 1959: Monitor made a short film called...
BTW. It is very possible what the Saxon's wrote was destroyed. The more I think about it I am sure that happened.
BBC Archive - #OTD 1959: Monitor made a short film called...
Reality is not only stranger than you imagine, it is even stranger than you can imagine!
Jan
I just want to add, Copernicus risked his own life for his views and science.
Just as Galileo, or we can remember for Giordano Bruno who actually gave his life for science. Or Marie Curie, and so on...
And all of this, uninteresting?
I don't think so.
So please, don't be so negative!
Last edited:
All that history stories are true? If the earth is flat they will make documentary on Discovery and National Geographics 😂
Sorry, I'm not negative, just can't belive...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.