The End Of The Scientific Method… Wha….? « Life as a Physicist
Popularity Report
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rank
URL Tag Cloud
Bookmark History
Saved by 1 people (0 private), first by anonymouse user on 2008-06-27
- Imrchen on 2008-06-27 - Tags data mining , thinking
Public Sticky notes
His basic thesis is that when you have so much data you can map out every connection, every correlation, then the data becomes the model. No need to derive or understand what is actually happening — you have so much data that you can already make all the predictions that a model would let you do in the first place. In short — you no longer need to develop a theory or hypothesis - just map the data!
Highlighted by imrchen
First, in order for this to work you need to have millions and millions and millions of data points. You need, basically, ever single outcome possible, with all possible other factors. Huge amounts of data. That does not apply to all branches of science.
Highlighted by imrchen
The second problem with this approach is you will never discover anything new. The problem with new things is there is no data on them!
Highlighted by imrchen
Anderson is right — we are entering a new age where the ability to mine these large amounts of data are going to open up whole new levels of understanding
Highlighted by imrchen
This is a new tool, and it will open up all sorts of doors for us. But the end of the scientific method? No — because that implies an end of discovery. And end of new things.
Highlighted by imrchen
Correlations are a way of catching a scientist’s attention, but the models and mechanisms that explain them are how we make the predictions that not only advance science, but generate practical applications. One only needs to look at a promising field that lacks a strong theoretical foundation—high-temperature superconductivity springs to mind—to see how badly the lack of a theory can impact progress
Highlighted by imrchen
Public Comment