= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
magfrump comments on The Graviton as Aether - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (134)
I have to disagree with tommccabe - the fact is that model and theory are as different as technical manual and source code. There is only one perfect theory of reality - the theory that is reality - but innumerable models for different domains and purposes. Yes, many of our models began as theories, but that is because a good theory is by necessity a good model.
There can be many different parametrizations of the same surface, but they will each have the same topological and geometric properties.
So we could have several correct models--i.e. parametrizations which have the correct characteristics--and a single theory--i.e. set of characteristics with which to choose parametrizations. But each model will predict different yet-undiscovered characteristics. Using these new characteristics to make predictions would constitute different theories which are consistent-as-of-yet. Given the current state of quantum physics, different theories seem to be able to remain consistent for a while.
My use of model and theory have been prescriptive based on my interpretations of the thread below. I didn't intend this but all of the confusion and disagreement seems to have been in our minds.
We certainly seem to be arguing about words - you're probably right that the confusion is just in our minds.