[MD] Alternatives to the scientific method

[Laycock, Jos (OSPT)]

Ian --
> 
> > I was not referring to the hypothesis, but the four step 
> process itself;
> > that is presumed common sense too, but unfounded and untestable
> > in itself. (A meta-problem)

Ham

What grounds do you have for this claim?  And what would Ian Glendinning 
propose as a more efficacious alternative to the scientific method?

Me:

Ham, I think that by asking that question you miss your own opportunity to even try and come up with something, would you like to join Ian out on his limb and see if anything springs to mind?

To re-state it:

1)Propose an explanatory hypothesis to describe the operation of a given system, 
2)Invent experiments that are potentially confounding of that hypothesis and test it to destruction. 
3)Repeat steps 1 & 2 iteratively until satisfied that no further potentially confounding experiments can be conceived of. 
4)Write down your conclusions and show them to some other scientists.

Seems reasonable enough, but the issues are:
Why look at that particular system?
Why test these particular hypotheses?
What defines the operational parameters of the system? - and further, 
When science by its nature makes a requirement of impartiality, how do you ensure that you pursue hypothesis formulation with equal zeal as experimental investigation? Its like asking a lawyer to be defence and prosecution at the same time.

So, enough negativity then, lets have some suggestions,
Mine is as follows:


"Test everything"
Random/Chaotic hypothesis formulations are made by a supercomputer SC1 based on a dataset of all available data. These are constantly "tested" by an adversarial supercomputer SC2, and the results of SC2 are fed back to SC1 as further information on which to base new hypotheses. 
Communications between computers 1 & 2 is monitored by 3rd independent supercomputer which maps the iterations and extrapolates from the developing patterns to predict end points. These are also fed back to SC1, and the communications between SC3 and SC1 are monitored and mapped by you guessed it SC4 etc.....

The logical operations of SC2, 3 and 4 etc... need to be defined and I suggest using a further independent supercomputer to use genetic algorithms to define the logic of the other computers pragmatically from the results of their own early experiments, constantly refreshing them with "new best logics" as it refines them.

So the whole thing would create layers of patterns of information, and define sets of pragmatic rules to operate at each level, generating no answers at all, but instead setting out the available data in one large ordered pattern allowing an observer to......

oh.









This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet Anti-Virus service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.