You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

TimS comments on Debugging the Quantum Physics Sequence - Less Wrong Discussion

32 Post author: Mitchell_Porter 05 September 2012 03:55PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (129)
Tags: meta quantum

Comments (129)

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

Comment author: TimS 06 September 2012 01:16:46PM 0 points [-]

To a naive observer, or even to a naked eye astronomer, all three give pretty decent predictions over the course of a few decades.

Ignoring for the moment my huge confusion between Copernicus and Kepler, I don't see why I care that naive observers can't tell the difference between Kepler and Ptolemy - just like I don't care that a naive observer can't tell the difference between Newton and Einstein.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 07 September 2012 03:26:43AM 0 points [-]

I don't see why I care that naive observers can't tell the difference between Kepler and Ptolemy - just like I don't care that a naive observer can't tell the difference between Newton and Einstein.

It is possible that I interpreted "Because my impression was that "Copernicus is better than Ptolemy" pays rent pretty much immediately" badly but I guess I didn't see months of observation using telescopes would be what I would normally call "pretty much immediately" then. But this may be just an issue of timespan and equipment that is called to mind for "immediate".

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit