Faith in science

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Do you have complete trust or confidence in the works of thousands of scientists over hundreds of years?

Yes or No?

I do have,
as regards issues that are conclusively settled up herenow, and as regards issues that are herenow proved in praxis.

Yet, my "complete trust or confidence" herenow ain't mean that my "complete trust or confidence" herenow will hold in the future😵

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Do you have complete trust or confidence in the works of thousands of scientists over hundreds of years?

Yes or No?

That word, 'complete' is missing the whole point of the science method. When some scientis says the boiling point of mercury is X degrees, he or she does not say 'it boils at 5034.000000000 degrees. They say it boils at 5034.0 degrees plus or minus some percent. That is not a complete statement. That is conditional, and allows for changes in air pressure, and humidity and such, vibrations. So Nobody in the sciences would say 'complete' confidence. For instance we know of genetic diseases that modern crispr methods can help but some do not get helped for unknown reasons so nobody says 'oh yes, we have complete confidence in our treatment, it is 100 % effective. If they DO say such, they are playing some marketing game and are out of the science game.

Originally posted by @sonhouse
That word, 'complete' is missing the whole point of the science method. When some scientis says the boiling point of mercury is X degrees, he or she does not say 'it boils at 5034.000000000 degrees. They say it boils at 5034.0 degrees plus or minus some percent. That is not a complete statement. That is conditional, and allows for changes in air pressure, ...[text shortened]... tive. If they DO say such, they are playing some marketing game and are out of the science game.

Well said, and I hope well heard.

Originally posted by @black-beetle
I do have,
as regards issues that are conclusively settled up herenow, and as regards issues that are herenow proved in praxis.

Yet, my "complete trust or confidence" herenow ain't mean that my "complete trust or confidence" herenow will hold in the future😵

‘Faith’ is complete trust or confidence in something. You have ‘faith’ in issues that are conclusively settled up herenow.

Originally posted by @sonhouse
That word, 'complete' is missing the whole point of the science method. When some scientis says the boiling point of mercury is X degrees, he or she does not say 'it boils at 5034.000000000 degrees. They say it boils at 5034.0 degrees plus or minus some percent. That is not a complete statement. That is conditional, and allows for changes in air pressure, ...[text shortened]... tive. If they DO say such, they are playing some marketing game and are out of the science game.

Science offers you no complete certainty about anything?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Science offers you no complete certainty about anything?

You are catching on. Science offers no complete certainty that it offers no complete certainty that it offers no complete certainty that it offers no complete certainty that lather rinse repeat is an adequate shampoo procedure.

As soon as someone offers you complete certainty, you should doubt him. You can be certain about this.🙂

Originally posted by @js357
You are catching on. Science offers no complete certainty that it offers no complete certainty that it offers no complete certainty that it offers no complete certainty that lather rinse repeat is an adequate shampoo procedure.

As soon as someone offers you complete certainty, you should doubt him. You can be certain about this.🙂

You do not have complete certainty that the moment you drop your pen it will fall to the ground?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You do not have complete certainty that the moment you drop your pen it will fall to the ground?

Or the ground may fall to it.
Or it could materialise on Mars.
Or god could catch it.

Originally posted by @wolfgang59
Or the ground may fall to it.
Or it could materialise on Mars.
Or god could catch it.

Or you are clueless...

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Or you are clueless...

Illogical.
My cluelessness has nothing to do with the pen hitting the ground (or not).

Originally posted by @wolfgang59
Illogical.
My cluelessness has nothing to do with the pen hitting the ground (or not).

Well since you probably doubt your own existence don’t bother trying to convince me of anything, since you’re probably not sure of anything yourself.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You do not have complete certainty that the moment you drop your pen it will fall to the ground?

There is a certain tiny probability all the air molecules in a room will congeal in one corner leaving vacuum everywhere else in the room. You never know.

There is the Casimir effect that states two flat plates, say a hunk of steel 10 mm thick and a meter on a side, two of those get pushed close together. Something strange happens.

The space between the plates shields the creation and annihilation of virtual particles, shielded by the plates themselves. This is a real effect.

The net result is because of the probabilistic nature of the creation and annihilation of these particles, there is a small force, not electric, not magnetic, not gravity, that pushes the plates together.

This was first proposed as a possibility by a scientist named Casimir in 1948 but was not actually measured till modern times.

https://aphyr.com/media/pwl-2014-casimir.pdf

This is an explanation of the effect. If you can follow it.

Just showing this effect to give you an idea of the statistical nature of matter, virtual particles come and go in an unpredictable but verified way and there is a real force pushing the plates together, tiny but measurable.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You do not have complete certainty that the moment you drop your pen it will fall to the ground?

As a state of mind, certainty is not a sign of knowledge.

Even in this example you give, certainty is only provisionally justified. Can you see why?

Originally posted by @sonhouse
There is a certain tiny probability all the air molecules in a room will congeal in one corner leaving vacuum everywhere else in the room. You never know.

There is the Casimir effect that states two flat plates, say a hunk of steel 10 mm thick and a meter on a side, two of those get pushed close together. Something strange happens.

The space between ...[text shortened]... ble but verified way and there is a real force pushing the plates together, tiny but measurable.

Gravity can still exist in a vacuum. What are you on about?

Originally posted by @js357
As a state of mind, certainty is not a sign of knowledge.

Even in this example you give, certainty is only provisionally justified. Can you see why?

Except for your certainty that you cannot be certain about anything of course. That you can be quite certain of?