This is a review of "E=mc2: A biography of the world's most famous
equation" by David Bodanis, Walker & Company, NY, 2000, 337 p.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Reviews of Regressive Science |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
What is
"regressive science"? It is, of course, "science" that eschews one or more
of "The Ten Assumptions of Science," which
provide the philosophical foundation for "The Scientific Worldview."
Examples might use classical mechanism (the first scientific worldview),
which overemphasizes the environment and underemphasizes the system in
addition to claiming, erroneously, that there are a finite number of
material causes for any effect. Or they might use systems philosophy
(today's scientific worldview), which overemphasizes the system and
underemphasizes its environment (as in the Big Bang Theory). The underlying
philosophical purpose of regressive science is to moderate the struggle
between determinism and indeterminism in the interest of domestic accord.
Its allies tend to be culturally conservative, if not reactionary. They are
especially pleased with Einstein's work, which is mostly based unwittingly
on assumptions they favor as well. They see nothing wrong with settling
scientific disputes in favor of mathematical idealism rather than physical
realism. Regressive science is prominent in disciplines such as modern
physics and cosmology, where philosophical speculation tends to be more
plentiful than adequate, unequivocal data.
Review of Victor Stenger's Critique of Lerner's "The Big Bang Never Happened" Stenger's criticism of "plasma cosmology" back in 1992 remains relatively up to date with respect to the conventional view held by Big Bang theorists today. It demonstrates rather nicely that even best-selling atheists ("God: The Failed Hypothesis") can hold assumptions in common with theists. Matterless Motion Wins AgainCreationism and the Second Law of Thermodynamics (NEW)This is a review of Hank Hanegraaff's book The Face That Demonstrates The Farce of Evolution. It points out that the philosophical mistakes that the evangelist makes are only slightly worse than those of practiced neo-Darwinists.
|
||||||||||||||