Scribd
Upload
56 views36 pages

Lecture2GoodTheory and Simplifications

scnc1111

Uploaded by

yip90
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
56 views36 pages

Lecture2GoodTheory and Simplifications

scnc1111

Uploaded by

yip90
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 36

SCNC1111

Scientific Method and Reasoning


Part I: The Nature and Methodology of Science

Lecture 2
What Are Good Theories?
and
Two Simplifications of the Idealized Scientific Method
2014 09 12
Dr. William M.Y. Cheung

Reminders!
Tutorial sessions on Tuesday (1B, 1C and 1D) have no
tutorial this week.
Next week students in these sessions will go through the
same materials covered in other tutorial sessions this
week. (You wont miss anything!)

In the tutorial next week, we will initiate our work on


the Group Project.
Again students belonging to the Tuesday sessions will have
to wait until 23 September, 2014.
Stay tuned!

Assignment 1 due 16:55, 25 September, 2014


Check our main Moodle course website!
2

Summary of the Idealized Scientific Method


Observation
(Generalization
via
induction)
(Deduction)

Hypothesis

Prediction
Experimental
Test
Confirmation
or Falsification

This rough sketch of scientific method should not be taken too


literally!

(Dis)Proving Theories
So what has Feynman told us this time?
1. Compare Predictions from your Theory with
Observations as much as possible
2. Theories can only be falsified
when its predictions disagree with observations

3. We are never sure if a theory is 100% correct


maybe we just have not seen its discrepancies yet

Beyond the Scientific Method


Scientific investigation requires guidance beyond the
Scientific Method
How should we compare theories devised to explain the
same phenomena?
What qualifies as a good theory?

A good theory cannot be ambiguous!


Predictions from our theory should be as concrete and
precise as possible.
Mathematics help us to be concrete and precise!

A Reflection about Economics


vs

utility = 70 units

utility = 90 units

"utility =
the amount of "satisfaction" I get via
consumption of the goods under
concern

economist
6

Utility
What is wrong with this?
Can you predict how many customers will prefer noodles
over rice this afternoon at the CYM canteen?
Such utility function is different for different person.
i.e. we all have different preferences

Even for the same person, such utility function changes


over time.
i.e. I may prefer different cuisines on different days

What can we predict?


7

Another Criterion
http://www.ted.com/talks/david_deutsch_a_new_w
ay_to_explain_explanation.html
(9:14 16:39)

Being testable/falsifiable is not enough!


Good explanations: hard to vary
but still explain the phenomena
every detail of the explanations is needed for the
explanations

Beware of explanationless theories


8

Unknown Parameters
Theories built on assumptions, e.g.
masses attract each other via gravity
electrons and the nucleus attract because they carry
opposite charges

Theories contain unknown parameters that the


theories themselves cannot explain, e.g.
Universal Gravitational Constant G (Physics)
Electric charge of an electron (Chemistry)

What should we do?


My theory cannot tell me the values of these parameters
How can I make quantitative predictions?
9

Predicting with Parameters


unknown parameters

Measure these parameters via experiments


Use these experimentally obtained values to make
MORE quantitative predictions
Compare these predictions with OTHER experiments
to confirm/falsify your theories
Have as few parameters (assumptions) as possible,
and make as many predictions as possible!

10

Polynomial Fitting
Y

= +

X
11

Polynomial Fitting
Y
= + +

X
12

Polynomial Fitting
Y

= + +
+
X
13

Polynomial Fitting
Whats wrong with this?

= + + +
unknown parameters to be determined
from our (experimental) data points
We are using 4 data points to determine 4 unknown
parameters
We are not predicting anything!
We can always pass through n data points using a
polynomial with n coefficients!
14

A Fallacy
Imagine a new experimental result does not agree with an
existing theory
Falsification! This theory need to be modified, if not thrown away
We can add a new term to
the theory to explain the
new experimental result!
This new term carries an
unknown parameter. How
can we determine its value?
The value of this
new parameter
must be one that
reproduces the new
experimental result.
15

A Fallacy
Imagine a new experimental result does not agree with an
existing theory
Falsification! This theory need to be modified, if not thrown away

Where is the
prediction of
your new
theory?

You are using the new


experimental result as an
input to your new theory. You
are not explaining it!

The value of this


new parameter
must be one that
reproduces the new
experimental result.
16

Occams Razor
What should we do if
Two theories both succeed in
explaining the same phenomena
No available experiments can
falsify one of them
Which one should we prefer?

Occams Razor
http://www.youtube.com/watc
h?v=oAp3jT8n6Qs

17

Occams Razor
All things being equal, the simplest explanation
tends to be the right one.
E.g. I used my staff card this morning, but now I
cannot find it in my office.
Explanation 1: I misplaced my staff card somewhere else.
Explanation 2: Someone (one of you, a fairy, etc.) broke
into my office, stole my staff card but leaving no trace.

Which one would you prefer?


Recall
Feynman discussed flying saucers in the video
Have as few assumptions as possible!
18

Caution!
Occams Razor is only a philosophical guiding
principle.
Used when currently available evidences do not
favour one theory over the other
No reason why simpler theories always have to be
correct
Later experiments may favour the more complicated
theory and falsify the simpler one.

19

Some Criteria on Good Theory


A good theory cannot be ambiguous!
Predictions from our theory should be as concrete
and precise as possible.
Mathematics help us to be concrete and precise!
Should not be easily varied
Be able to make many predictions with as few
parameters as possible
Occams Razor

20

A Quote

21

The Nature of Scientific Practice


We are now going to discuss two key simplifications
made by our scientific method:
The theoretical basis of observation.
The complexity of hypothesis testing.
These examples teach us that there is no clear
separation or straightforward relationship between
theory, observation, and experiment.

Experiment
&
Observation

http://mirror-uk-rb1.gallery.hd.org/

Theory

http://organizationalpsychologies.com/

Effective Observation needs Theory


Recall the requirement that observations should be
made under a wide variety of circumstances before
making a generalization:
What factors are significant in determining
the boiling point of water?
A. Air pressure
B. Purity of the water

C. Method of heating
D. Material of the container
E. Geographical location

Adam Hart-Davis

Effective Observation needs Theory


Recall the requirement that observations should be
made under a wide variety of circumstances before
making a generalization:
What factors are significant in determining
the boiling point of water?
How do you know
A. Air pressure

what factors are


significant?

B. Purity of the water

C. Method of heating
D. Material of the container
E. Geographical location

What if you are the


first scientist to
study
this?Hart-Davis
Adam

Example: Hertz and the Detection of Radio


Waves

http://okinawa.nict.go.jp

Example: Hertz and the Detection of Radio


Waves
If Hertz were totally unguided by theory in the
observations that he made, he would have had to
record:
the appearance of sparks at the critical locations in
his electrical circuit
dimensions of his circuit
colour of the meters
dimensions of the laboratory
the state of the weather
size of his shoes, etc.

Hertz never, in fact, arrived at the correct speed of


radio waves because their reflection from the walls of
his laboratory interfered with his results.
The dimensions of Hertzs laboratory were in fact
highly relevant!

Heinrich Hertz (1857-94)


http://es.wikipedia.org
27

Effective Observation needs Theory


Significant factors can only be distinguished from
irrelevant ones by bringing in our theoretical
knowledge of the situation.
Unless we can eliminate some irrelevant factors,
well never be able to generalize.
Since we dont know in advance what factors are
relevant, we need some theory to guide us.

Observations are Always Made Using


Theoretical Language
Compare the following observation statements:

A. The electron beam was repelled by the North Pole of


the magnet.
B. The gas in the cooker wouldnt light.
C. The heart is pumping blood around the body.
As science progresses, new theoretical terms are
invented and become part of our observational
language.
The theoretical basis of observation!

The Complexity of Hypothesis Testing


FAULT

CAUSE

REMEDY

Strong vibrations
during spin

Washing machine not perfectly level

Adjust special feet

Transport bracket not removed

Remove transport bracket

Washing load not evenly distributed

Distribute washing evenly

Mains plug not plugged in

Insert plug

Mains switch not on

Turn on mains switch

No power

Check

Electric circuit fuse failure

Check

Load door open

Close load door

Does not
function on any
programme

When something is not working properly (i.e. a mismatch between


theory and experiment), there are many possible explanations.
A hypothesis may not (and need not) be completely discarded right
away.

Example: Testing an Astronomical Theory


To derive a prediction of the position of a planet
observed through a telescope, we will need:

A prediction derived from the theory under test.


Previous positions of the planet and the Sun and
possibly other planets (initial conditions).
Corrections to the path of the light through the Earths
atmosphere (optical theory).

If the planet is not seen at the predicted position, any


one of these factors may be at fault!
31

Example: Testing an Astronomical Theory

This is why theories are not


abandoned immediately following
an unfavourable experimental
outcome!
32

Example: Observations of the Size of Venus


Before the invention of the
telescope, it was universally
accepted that the size of Venus did
not vary throughout the year.
This was in direct contradiction with
the Copernican (sun-centered)
theory of the universe!
But it assumed that the size of
small light sources can be
estimated accurately with the
naked eye.

Source: wikipedia

Example: Observations of the Size of Venus


Before the invention of the
telescope, it was universally
accepted that the size of Venus did
not vary throughout the year.

Observation statements are


never absolutely
certain!
This was in direct
contradiction with

the Copernican (sun-centered)


theory of the universe!
But it assumed that the size of
small light sources can be
estimated accurately with the
naked eye.

Source: wikipedia

Example: Testing an Astronomical Theory


and Discovery!
Nineteenth-century observations of the planet
Uranus diverged considerably from predictions
based on Newtons theory.
This was because they failed to take into
account the existence of a new planet, later
named Neptune.
An apparent falsification was turned into a
triumphant confirmation!
Source: NASA

Summary
There is no clear separation or straightforward
relationship between theory, observation, and
experiment:
The theoretical basis of observation:
We make theoretical assumptions about relevant factors.
Theory is built into even our most basic observation
statements.

The complexity of hypothesis testing:


We need additional data, assumptions, and auxiliary
theories to test a hypothesis.
Observation statements and experiments are never totally
beyond doubt.

You might also like