What does science mean to you ?

[Thunderbird]

This question is not meant in the sense of mankind, But you personally.

[goku]

truth, fact, mathmatical

[Essay]

On weighty advice of someone with a scientific world-view, I'm trying to be more humble, and sound less self-righteous, about the ability of science to address all aspects of my, and other's, life (or at least present myself that way to those who feel uneasy about science, or those with a religious world-view).

 

That being said....

 

Science is the most wonderful tool ever invented. It allows me to see clearly, far into the past and peer somewhat into the future; as well as, so much more fully understand the present.

It's like my own personal scale/time machine; riding the Planck to the horizons of space and the origins of time!

 

Science is however limited to the material universe, that spacetime illusion where we find ourselves stuck.

...but at least science tells us there is more, informing this spatio-temporal universe (IMHO).

[Thunderbird]

On weighty advice of someone with a scientific world-view, I'm trying to be more humble, and sound less self-righteous, about the ability of science to address all aspects of my, and other's, life (or at least present myself that way to those who feel uneasy about science, or those with a religious world-view).

 

That being said....

 

Science is the most wonderful tool ever invented. It allows me to see clearly, far into the past and peer somewhat into the future; as well as, so much more fully understand the present.

It's like my own personal scale/time machine; riding the Planck to the horizons of space and the origins of time!

 

Science is however limited to the material universe, that spacetime illusion where we find ourselves stuck.

...but at least science tells us there is more, informing this spatio-temporal universe (IMHO).

 

Great answer. :eek:

[Rade]

To me, science means "uncertain knowledge" of reality derived from use of facts and laws of nature. It is the antithesis of belief, which to me means "certain knowledge" of reality derived from Divine revelation.

[CraigD]

To me, science means removing the determination of truth – provisional, working truth, not absolute truth – from my intuitive judgment to an external, objective “program”. Even if this program is know to be imperfect, even relative to other know programs, it’s use in adjudicating truth remains scientific. In many or most circumstances, I favor less perfect programs requiring less time and effort to more perfect ones requiring much more, if the outcome of it’s judgement is adequate to my use. For example, classical mechanics is adequate for rocket science, even though relativistic mechanics are slightly more accurate, and classical gas laws for heat engines, though quantum mechanics are slightly more accurate.

 

The sense that doing science is building something outside of myself is, to me, very pleasant, like writing, drawing, sculpting, or, especially, writing computer programs. The sense that things I’ve created are part of a larger, shared world that exists independent of me gives me the most profound pleasure, and a feeling of immortality.

[HydrogenBond]

There are three types of science. There is applied science, pure science and theoretical science. Applied science is the most reliable since the theory has to work to be able to produce real and tangible affects with reliability. Sending men to the moon was applied science that covered a very wide range of science. If the science was wrong, it would not be possible.

 

Pure science goes deeper into the nature of things, but tends to remain true to the science foundation that makes applied science possible. For example, the scientists working on the next generation of semi-conductor memory may be able to make it happen in the lab. But all the bugs are not yet worked out to where it would be useful, at this time, for applied science to manufacture from that state of science. It will eventually get the bump-up to where it is solid enough to be used by applied science.

 

Theoretical science is a step or two below pure science. There may not even be a prototype in the lab, but only the theory of what may be. In this case, it doesn't really have to work, with any reliability, just a hint. For example, there is a theory of proton decay. All one have to do to prove this theory is find one out of a zillion. The pure scientists can't work with this as the foundation of thought, while the applied scientists will look to the pure scientists for a wink that it might work some day in the future.

 

The first type of science everyone can bank on because it employ principles that are consistent and that work. The second level requires deeper insight since it is pushing the frontiers of what works, but stays grounded. The last level starts to enter the realm of philosophy. This is reflected in the divergence into a wider range of educated opinions for any theoretical thing. But unlike philosophy that requires reason, some areas of this philosophy science use irrational math, that isn't based on cause and affect, making this type of science theory much closer to esoteric philosophy. "If one moves faster than the speed of light they would disappear before they would exist". Sort of eastern mysticism, but with irrational mathematical support. With this level of science one never really knows. It can work out like relativity, but this used rational math. Or it can become majority philosophy, with opposing philosophies seen as being out of touch with reality. It not until the pure scientists interface that one gets a reliable reality prototype.