Re:Scientists find upper limit for the speed of sound
by whatshisface on Saturday October 10, 2020 @10:32PM
(#24743386)
Pure logic can also invalidate hypotheses sometimes, but pure logic isn't experimental.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Scientists find upper limit for the speed of sound
by Retric on Sunday October 11, 2020 @12:09AM
(#24743655)
Pure thought experiments are useful because they make predictions which can then be validated. It’s part of the basic foundations of science, otherwise you’re just curve fitting across all exponential data.
Re:Scientists find upper limit for the speed of sound
by zaroth on Sunday October 11, 2020 @10:51AM
(#24746174)
Absolutely agree. Fun fact;
> Gedankenexperiment, (German: “thought experiment”) term used by German-born physicist Albert Einstein to describe his unique approach of using conceptual rather than actual experiments in creating the theory of relativity.
It would be ridiculous to say that experiments can only be done physically. Thought experiments are responsible for developing one of the most famous theories known to man.
Re:Scientists find upper limit for the speed of sound
by whatshisface on Sunday October 11, 2020 @01:09AM
(#24743864)
Sure but thought experiments are not actual experiments. In fact thought experiments are... exactly the same as simulations.
Re:Scientists find upper limit for the speed of sound
by Retric on Sunday October 11, 2020 @08:53AM
(#24745445)
To be more clear a pure thought experiment doesn’t invalidate a theory on it’s own. It’s the conflict between the results and either past or future observations/experiments that invalidates the theory. Plenty of theories that gave what seemed like insane results happened to work out.