Theory of Everything - View Single Post - "Scientists Hate Coincidences."

everymansmedium

Hello RP:
I agree totally. We only have 2 ways to achieve new knowledge. one is by (trial and error). This is the basis for experimentation, and all measurements. The other is the recognition of a pattern of behavior. This recognition always begins with what we call a coincidence. It is because of examination of these coincidences that we find a pattern.
Though I agree with the need to research these coincidences, I also understand why there is a negative feeling for this observation. This is very likely that the word for opportunity and danger is represented by one symbol in the Chinese language.

Though research into a coincidence may result with new knowledge it can also result with an endless search for something that does not exist. Something that does not exist leaves no marker that tells us when to stop looking.

All research should be done within the limits of logic.
If you keep finding coincidental data till you have a coherent line of data, yet there is still no known pattern that you can connect to. When can you tell when it is time to stop if you keep returning with more coincidences and a longer line of coherent thought, yet still no verification of a real solution? I may be caught in such a loop, then again the results are much too coherent and relevant to walk away from.
John.

	(#3 (permalink))
everymansmedium 2nd degree Black Belt Status: Offline Posts: 302 Thanks Given: 56 Thanked 48x in 37 Posts Join Date: Sep 2007 Rep Power: 7	Re: "Scientists Hate Coincidences." - An unscientific non sequitur. - 11-21-2007, 12:32 PM Hello RP: I agree totally. We only have 2 ways to achieve new knowledge. one is by (trial and error). This is the basis for experimentation, and all measurements. The other is the recognition of a pattern of behavior. This recognition always begins with what we call a coincidence. It is because of examination of these coincidences that we find a pattern. Though I agree with the need to research these coincidences, I also understand why there is a negative feeling for this observation. This is very likely that the word for opportunity and danger is represented by one symbol in the Chinese language. Though research into a coincidence may result with new knowledge it can also result with an endless search for something that does not exist. Something that does not exist leaves no marker that tells us when to stop looking. All research should be done within the limits of logic. If you keep finding coincidental data till you have a coherent line of data, yet there is still no known pattern that you can connect to. When can you tell when it is time to stop if you keep returning with more coincidences and a longer line of coherent thought, yet still no verification of a real solution? I may be caught in such a loop, then again the results are much too coherent and relevant to walk away from. John.