Vaniver comments on Configurations and Amplitude - Less Wrong

26 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 10 April 2008 07:41AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (375)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Vaniver 14 April 2012 01:39:33AM *  2 points [-]

That's the problem. Theories predict, but do not explain? What good is that?

... prediction?

I could care less that you tell me an apple falls at whatever ft per second per second.

The artillery captain cares strongly, not just the precise rate at which gravity occurs, but also the precise rate at which the world turns. And a nation whose shells land on target will conquer a nation whose shells miss their targets.

That is, you should care strongly about predictive success in any field personally relevant to you.

I want to know why.

Turn things around: what good is that? Suppose you knew why, but so broadly that it wouldn't help you differentiate likely futures from unlikely futures (i.e. prediction). What could you do with that?

Something that is indistinguishable from zero just means that it is very small and approaching zero.

What's the electrical charge of a neutron? How do you know?

If there is no L, W, or H then it has no dimensions. How can that exist except as a concept in some abstract mathematical model?

Edit: I misread what you wrote. To respond to what you actually said: are you doubting the existence of electrons?

I'll wait and see what EY has to say about it, but honestly, I'm not very confident that he can make sense of arrows that point nowhere.

EY comments infrequently, so I would not hold out too much hope that he'll address your concerns.