BBO Discussion Forums: National Acadamy for the Sciences - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

National Acadamy for the Sciences Proof Positive

#1 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,283
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2007-May-16, 17:14

The National Academy for the Sciences today announced there was a 99.6725% probability that they knew absolutely nothing more today about anything than they did yesterday.

Spokesperson Geek Moran said, "This is exciting news. It's rare in science to get such percetanges. In the scientific world, this is a slam dunk."

In related news, no new breakthroughs were announced in health care or the war in Iraq.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
0

#2 User is offline   Rain 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,592
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Singapore

Posted 2007-May-16, 19:23

You intrigue me. I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
"More and more these days I find myself pondering how to reconcile my net income with my gross habits."

John Nelson.
0

#3 User is offline   han 

  • Under bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,797
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Posted 2007-May-16, 20:00

Well, I guess I don't have to feel so bad for not making any major progress yesterday, the odds for that happening was at most 0.3275.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.

- hrothgar
0

#4 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,198
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Interests:History, languages

Posted 2007-May-16, 23:33

Sounds strange. Today we know how the weather was this morning. We didn't know that yesterday, alas not with certainty. Somehow they must focus on more basic knowledge than just case stories.

Maybe it means that only about 1 new theory gets "established" every year. Not sure how to measure that. Suppose 100,000 new theories were published last year and 80% of them (I read that estimate somewhere, don't bother to look it up since any other estimate is as good) will eventually get trashed. Of course theories gradually get established after many failed attempts to reject them and I donno how much supportive evidence a theory needs to count as "established". Anyway, with 20,000 (just my figure but it must be something like that) good theories pumped into the pipeline each year, eventually 20,000 will get out. There is a time lag but even so there must be thousands of new established theories every year.

Presumably, they count only generally applicably knowledge and not all of those results about specific local epidemics, artifacts produced by specific, short-lived measurement technology etc.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
0

#5 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,283
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2007-May-17, 04:30

Quote

Anyway, with 20,000 (just my figure


And a fine figure it is.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users