Science: limited

[goku]

the usefullness of science is limited to two realms:

mechanics and chemistry

usefull as in things that actually help mankind, or produce tangible results.

i'm i or i'm i not right yes or no?

[rockytriton]

so you don't consider things like ecology to be science? or biology? how about anatomy?

[GAHD]

Astronomy(the calendar)? Meteorology? Aeronautics?

[Boerseun]

Goku, it seems the answer to your question is a resounding "no, you're not right".

 

I think that kinda wraps it up, folks. Now move along, nothing to see here...

[sanctus]

Not so quick Borseun :shrug:

Eventually almost all gets down to mechanics (classical and QM), i.e: electricity= average of motion of charges, biology= movement of electrons and atoms in an organised body with efects (like moving an arm), etc...

[Turtle]

the usefullness of science is limited to two realms:

mechanics and chemistry

usefull as in things that actually help mankind, or produce tangible results.

i'm i or i'm i not right yes or no?

___Conditionally right of course. On the condition that everything is a chemical/mechanical manifestation & that we don't yet recognize all the implications for utility & that science is always ammendable. The only limit I see for us is time; all in good time. :shrug:

[goku]

so you don't consider things like ecology to be science? or biology? how about anatomy?

yes they're science, they each produce tangible results :shrug:

[goku]

if a science does not produce tangible results is it usefull?

is science only limited by our lack of knowledge, technology?

[Tarantism]

is there a limit to how far scientists can push their creativity? seeing as how a scientist gets an innovative idea and acts upon it...thus you get a theory right? so i suppose its more of a question of the limit of our own minds, time, and some sort of "ultimate answer to the universe". haha maybe thats a bit farfetched?

[Turtle]

if a science does not produce tangible results is it usefull?

is science only limited by our lack of knowledge, technology?

 

___The first question is contradictory as utility is time dependant.

___The second question is contradictory because technology is knowledge dependant.

___If you establish a limit, you'll surely reach it. Pluck the moment & don't trust tomorrow. :QuestionM

[Tarantism]

___If you establish a limit, you'll surely reach it. Pluck the moment & don't trust tomorrow. :QuestionM

 

so are you saying that if we establish no limit then there may not be one? :eek2:

[Turtle]

so are you saying that if we establish no limit then there may not be one? :eek2:

___More accurately if we establish no limit there is not one. 'May not be one' is far too passive a structure for me. See Elements of Style by Strunk & White for further clarification. :QuestionM

[pgrmdave]

If science learns something that doesn't help us at the moment, does that mean that it is useless? Is it not always useful to have more knowledge about the world around us?

[Tarantism]

If science learns something that doesn't help us at the moment, does that mean that it is useless? Is it not always useful to have more knowledge about the world around us?

 

didnt you just contradict yourself?

[kamil]

 

usefull as in things that actually help mankind

 

I think that the primary purpose of science is to satisfy our curiosity. If Science only existed to help technology then technology wouldnt go very far. Because if it wasnt for the curiosity of the scientists then we wouldnt be able to gain the knowledge we have today that is necesarry for technological advances.

WHen people were asking questions like 'what is light made up of' or 'is matter quantized' then there were probably lots of people that thought that this would hav no significance to technology. But it does, and the intention of the scietist was not too help technology but to investigate what he was curious about. :rolleyes:

[Tarantism]

i second that notion and remind you all that science is "the study of..."

[sergey500]

No, you are most certinatly not right. Science is greek for knowledge (I think at least...) without any other part of science we would not find other informations to help us with productions. Astronomy helped us know where we are building to fly to, or the calender, or how the world around us works...for the most part. Earth Science, earthquakes predictions are usuelss you say? Hm, well if the way you put is true, then every thing we built to save lives from nature is pointless right? Too bad, I thought they were nice inventions. I suppose you checked the weather recently? So....according to you, that is NOT scientific advancement??? Without science we would not find information to advance.