From: Greg Schmitz (gws1@columbia.edu)
Date: 09/30/03-01:59:13 AM Z
Hi Bob: I enjoyed your thoughtful reply.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003, Robert W. Schramm wrote:
==== some deleted: snip%<
> Yes, scientists must be objective. It is very hard to do. Also real
> scientists sometimes rely on hunches or maybe they could be called
> intelligent guesses to get them moving in the right direction.
In other words, luck favors the prepared.
> Scientific discoveries come about as a result of understanding all the
> variables involved in a phenominon and controlling them in such a way that
> all variables are kept constant while one is changed so that the result of
> this change can be observed. Any discovery must be reproducable by other
> scientists.
What about multi-variate analysis (testing multiple variables)? If
you're looking for relationships between variables don't you have to
test while changing more than one variable at a time. At least with
modern industrial processes and so called "complex systems" the
interactions between variables become as important, if not more so, as
the variables themselves.
> In my opinion gum printing, like most alternative processes, is far from
> being a science. There are simply too many variables which are both known
> and unknown at the present time.
Agreed. It would probably be possible to create a set of standards
for gum printing (can you imagine the havoc at the standards meeting -
or on this list :*), but why bother? The only reason to do this, that
I can think of, would be for testing (as is in sensitometry) or if the
process where commercially viable and the profits would justify the
costs. In the end the standardized method might not have much
relationship to "working methods;" as is often the case with
sensitometry.
> Also let me point out that it is important to know who is putting forth the
> scientific statements. Does the individual making the statements have any
> credentials and what are they? Remember "cold fusion?"
> As soon as it was announced, I had many serious doubts about it (my degree
> is in nuclear physics). Then I found out that the discoverers were chemists.
> Now this rule works for many fields other than science.
> So if you want answers that are valid, its a good idea to consult the
> experts.
I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on CO2 and global warming -
given that you're a physicist (place a grin here), off list of course.
I put the grin in because a good friend is a climatologist and he's
been pretty glum lately.
> I have seen Judy's gum prints. Consequently, when it comes to gum printing,
> I would be inclined to
> accept her opinions.
ME TOO, she's filled in the blanks for me more than once!
-greg schmitz <gws1@columbia.edu>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/03-03:09:00 PM Z CST