all those constraints

[Boud Roukema]

Cześć

On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Michal Frackowiak wrote:

> Boud Roukema wrote:
>
> >
> >BTW, Michał just used the word "predict" in the way many people do,
> >to "predict" a value we already have measured. A more careful word that
> >some people now use is "postdict". Or you can simply say "imply",
> >which is a purely logical word, without any connotations on philosophy
> >of science.
> >
> >Think of "I predict that the ZSRR will collapse around 1989-1991" or
> >"I predict that there will be a major political revolution in France
> >in 1789." Those are not predictions.
> >
> >
>
> In the sense that all the "constants" and "parameters" directly follow
> from the theory without any need for experiment. independently. the
> theory of everything should e.g. give the values of plank's constant,
> cosmo constant, grav constant etc... and should not contain any
> adjustable parameters.


philosophy of science:

OK, so now you're using
 "directly follow"
and
 "give"
That's fine by me, it's more careful than "predict".  :)


theory of everything:

- cosmo constant or quintessence parameter(s) - agree that this(these)
should be implied, not axiomatic

- grav constant - disagree - as i see it, it's just a question of
units, like converting seconds to metres, or miles to kilometres,
or euros to f.francs (1 euro = 6.55957 f.francs exactly)

- Planck's constant - no opinion...


na jutro
boud